Prince Harry made headlines yesterday as he took the stand at the High Court for his phone hacking trial against the publisher of the Daily Mirror.
This historic moment marked the first time a royal has testified in open court since 1891.
Dressed in a navy suit and dark purple tie, Harry entered the witness box and solemnly swore to tell the truth, with the Bible resting beneath his father’s coat of arms.
Arriving from California on Monday, the Duke of Sussex appeared relaxed as he entered the High Court’s modern annex, known as the Royals’ building.
Despite being met with boos from some members of the public, Harry even managed to smile and greet the waiting press with a cheerful “good morning.”
However, his presence did not go unnoticed by a political satirist named Kaya Marr, who had targeted him outside the court.
Marr, known for his political cartoons featuring figures like Boris Johnson and Theresa May, created artwork depicting Harry as a primitive hunter who had brought back a wife.
The cartoonist arrived with a painting showing Meghan riding a donkey led by Prince Harry, complete with a spear and leafy loincloth.
Marr described Harry as a nuisance to the royal family, stating, “The trouble with him and his wife is that they crave publicity, so they can’t have it both ways.
Yesterday I couldn’t come because my donkey had jet lag,” he told The Telegraph.
During the trial, Harry was challenged to explain why he believed the newspaper articles he complained about were the result of illegal activity.
In response, he repeatedly stated that he had been unaware that the information published in the articles had already been released by other newspapers and even the BBC.
He also mentioned that some of the stories had come from palace aides, and in one instance, he had given an official interview.
As he began giving evidence, a 55-page statement was released, in which Harry referred to his father as HRH King Charles III.
However, it is worth noting that the correct title is His Majesty King Charles III.
Given his position within the royal family, this mistake came as a surprise.
Harry’s statement, a staggering 26,789 words long, is about twice the length of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby.”
Despite its length, the statement packs a powerful punch.
In it, Harry denounces what he perceives as a cozy relationship between the press and politicians, stating that our country is judged globally by the state of our press and government, both of which, in his opinion, have hit rock bottom.
He argues that democracy fails when the press fails to scrutinize and hold the government accountable, instead choosing to align themselves with those in power to maintain the status quo.
These strong words did not go unanswered, as MGM, represented by Andrew Green KC, fought back robustly in court.
Rishi Sunak’s spokesman declined to comment on Harry’s statement, citing ongoing legal proceedings.
During the trial, Green questioned the emotional remarks made by Harry in his witness statements, particularly regarding his determination to hold people accountable for their actions.
The barrister, known for his courtroom prowess, skillfully dismantled the idea that every single article mentioned by Harry had caused the hurt and outrage that the Duke seemed to suggest or that they were obtained using unlawful methods.
This led to a tense exchange, with Harry curtly responding, “This is 20 years ago; I can’t speculate whether I saw these articles at the time.”
Green countered by questioning how Harry could be considered paranoid in his personal relationships if he couldn’t remember the content of the articles that had allegedly caused such distress.
Irritated by the line of questioning, Harry retorted, “That’s a question for my legal team.”