Did Prince William Take 'Hush Money' From Rupert Murdoch's Empire?

Prince Harry revealed that his brother Prince William settled a phone hacking claim against Rupert Murdoch's empire out of court, prompting some on social media to accuse him of taking "hush money."

However, the court also heard about the role the future king played in exposing phone hacking in the first place after being told about the illegal practice by his friend, journalist Tom Bradby.

There were therefore two very different depictions of the role both brothers have played in efforts to take on one of the world's most powerful media companies.

Prince Harry Says Prince William Settled Phone Hacking Claim

Prince Harry is suing News Group Newspapers (NGN), publisher of The Sun and the now-defunct News of the World, on historic allegations of phone hacking and illegal practices.

In a 17,000-word witness statement, filed at the High Court in London, he revealed that his brother had received a substantial payout from the company, which The Daily Telegraph reported was around £1 million (around $1.25 million).

Harry said "NGN still settled his claim for a huge sum of money in 2020" and "seemingly with some favourable deal in return for him going 'quietly' so to speak."

However, it is unclear what he feels William was keeping quiet in a context where News of the World journalist Clive Goodman was jailed for four months for phone hacking in relation to stories about William as far back as 2007, with the details divulged in open court and reported on extensively.

Harry's case accuses the News of the World's sister title The Sun of phone hacking, an allegation the publisher has always denied.

Harry does not say whether William also believes The Sun hacked phones nor whether William's settled claim included any references to alleged phone hacking at The Sun that would be kept secret via the payout.

This makes it harder to assess whether there were new allegations that remained private as a result of the payment.

Social Media Accusations of 'Hush Money'

Some on Twitter took Prince Harry's account of William going "quietly" a step further by suggesting the settlement amounted to "hush money."

A tweet from account @brokenbottleboy was viewed more than 200,000 times and liked more than 2,000 times: "Prince William took hush money. There's so much more to this. He and Kate are also complicit with the Mail; that's why they are so easy with those papers publishing calendars full of pictures of their children."

Another post, viewed more than 34,000 times, read: "The more I think about it, the more I realize #PrinceWilliam is not very bright. Like if I took hush money I wouldn't antagonize my brother let alone throw him to the wolves. Because he literally opened the door for this lawsuit."

And the Artist Taxi Driver account, which has almost 130,000 followers, wrote: "Tampon King Charles Prince William took hush money from Uncle Rupert, and now Harry is his mum princess Diana who has come back from the grave seeking vengeance."

Again, it is slightly unclear what this narrative is suggesting was covered up by William, whose discovery of phone hacking in 2005 led ultimately to the first convictions at the News of the World.

A spokesperson for NGN, now News UK, said in a statement: "In 2012, an unreserved apology was made to all of those who had brought cases against the News of the World for voicemail interception. Since then, NGN has been paying financial damages to those with claims.

"There are a number of disputed claims still going through the civil courts some of which seek to involve The Sun. The Sun does not accept liability or make any admissions to the allegations."

News UK and Kensington Palace, where the Prince of Wales has his private office, both declined comment on the alleged settlement with William.

Prince William and the First Phone Hacking Trial

Phone hacking at the Sunday tabloid first became public knowledge after the newspaper's royal correspondent Clive Goodman and private investigator Glenn Mulcaire were arrested and pleaded guilty to intercepting voicemails in 2006.

The origins of the criminal case against them are described in a witness statement from Maxine Mossman, an attorney for the publisher, that is among the evidence in Harry's current lawsuit.

It all began with a story about journalist Tom Bradby lending Prince William some camera equipment which the News of the World obtained through phone hacking and published in Goodman's "Blackadder" column.

The court filing seen by Newsweek reads: "Tom Bradby shortly thereafter suggested to the Duke of Cambridge [William] that the Blackadder article published on 13.11.05 in the News of the World may have been the result of VMI [voicemail interception], following which the Duke of Cambridge, Tom Bradby and Jamie Lowther Pinkerton (Private Secretary to the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex) agreed that further action had to be taken."

It became apparent multiple palace staff were experiencing problems with their voicemail messages and a decision was taken to go to the police.

Lowther-Pinkerton reported an allegation of phone hacking to the Metropolitan Police in mid-December 2005 and it was referred to the head of counter terrorism, who "agreed that his Anti-Terrorist Branch officers would investigate the matter because of the security implications and sensitivities surrounding members of the Royal Family."

Harry points to the fact that the criminal charges that resulted focused on the voicemails of staff working for him and Prince William, rather than on the princes themselves, to avoid a situation where embarrassing private information came out in court.

Needless to say, in August 2006, nine months after Bradby's warning to William, Goodman and Mulcaire were charged with phone hacking in relation to stories about the princes.

That November, the pair pleaded guilty and issued apologies to the two royal brothers and their father, now King Charles III.

At the time, it remained a fairly simple story but would go on send shockwaves through the newspaper industry after the practice was further investigated by The Guardian, starting in 2009, and ultimately leading to the closure of the News of the World.

Expert Analysis

Professor Tim Luckhurst, principal of South College at Durham University, told Newsweek: "I wouldn't describe it as hush money. I would describe it as a sensible and pragmatic means of resolving a dispute and one which is in the mutual interests of the press and the royal family."

Luckhurst, whose background is in the study of journalism, added: "What we're actually seeing is that current and serving members of the royal family understand that they have a very important and very nuanced relationship with the British press. They need the British press and the British press needs them.

"So if you are the heir to the throne or an active member of the Windsor family then you recognise that open and public disputes with the press are damaging to both sides and they should in all circumstances be managed in such a way as to minimize the damage done to both the royal family and the press.

"The difference between Prince William and his brother Harry is that Harry no longer recognizes that valuable relationship and is essentially freelancing and seeking to make his point in the most emphatic way possible.

"I would be astonished if his family is not very keen to persuade him that this is a bad idea. Equally, I recognize that Harry does not tend to listen to good advice."

Jack Royston is chief royal correspondent for Newsweek, based in London. You can find him on Twitter at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek's The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@newsweek.com. We'd love to hear from you.