Prince Harry Faces ‘Terrible’ Tactic As Attorney Will ‘Try To Break Him’

Prince Harry’s experience of a marathon four days of witness testimony will be “terrible” as an attorney for Rupert Murdoch’s media empire tries to “rip him to shreds.”

The Duke of Sussex is suing the publisher of U.K newspapers The Sun and the now closed News of the World, accusing them of breaking the law to get his private information. Publisher News Group Newspapers (NGN) deny the allegations.

He has been under pressure to settle the case out of court as NGN offers huge sums to other high profile public figures, including Hugh Grant.

However, the prince is going ahead with the case, with a trial set to begin in January. The High Court, in London, this week heard he will endure four days of witness testimony, including a grilling by the publisher’s attorney, Anthony Hudson, a “King’s Counsel,” or senior U.K. courtroom lawyer, who will try to “break him.”

On his side, though, is the fact he is now a veteran of the witness box, having given evidence in a lawsuit he brought against Mirror Group Newspapers, tried in 2023.

Mark Stephens, a U.K. based attorney of Howard Kennedy, told Newsweek the experience will likely be tough for Harry but he survived the last time round: “It will be terrible but this is the same tactic they [newspaper lawyers] tried before which so terribly backfired.

“In his last trial he was in the box for two days. The idea is to try to break him in cross examination and that tactic didn’t work last time.

“They brought in a specialist KC [King’s Counsel] to destroy him in cross examination and it wasn’t really successful.

“They’ve obviously doubled down on that with double the time and an even bigger KC to try and rip him to shreds and it will be interesting to see whether he’s able to.”

Hudson told the court on Tuesday that Harry should expect “extensive cross-examination” while the prince’s lawyer, David Sherborne, suggested the royal would “relish” the opportunity, Reuters reported.

The trial is listed for eight full weeks beginning in January when Harry will be suing alongside Tom Watson, a former Labour Party deputy leader.

Harry initially accused The Sun of phone hacking but was told by the judge he had left those allegations too late so will push ahead with a reduced set of claims, including about a practise known as blagging, which involves using deception to obtain private information.

The publisher, though, argues these too were filed too late as they relate to allegations that go beyond the six year time limit in privacy cases.

Sherborne has countered that Harry could not reasonably be expected to have known he was a victim of tactics he suggests the publisher covered up.

New Group Newspapers will contest the allegations themselves, as well as the timing. Major names from recent tabloid history have been thrown around in court already, with the two camps trying to whittle down a long list of potential witnesses—though the prince has been told he cannot add in allegations naming Rupert Murdoch.

During two days of preliminary discussion this week, the judge appeared increasingly frustrated with how long the case is taking, missed deadlines and expansive nature of the lawsuit, in which Harry will try to pin responsibility for illegality on senior executives as well as front line journalists.

Harry’s evidence will likely be heard some way into the case, with the first ten days set aside for dealing with the overarching case against the company, rather than his specific experiences.

Stephens said it is possible that rather than an angry shouting match, Hudson will try to pick Harry apart slowly and carefully using gentle tones: “Sometimes if you go in as a tub thumper as a barrister you don’t get anywhere but if you go in and get them to agree with you, you can quite often lull them into a false sense of security.

“Some of the best cross examinations are not thumping cross examinations, angry. They try to lull the witness into a false sense of security where they make admissions that they did not mean to.”

Either way, the lawsuit is a high stakes gambit for the prince, who will have huge costs to settle if he loses.

On the other hand, if he wins it will be a major victory against a sworn enemy who he states has persecuted both him and Meghan Markle.

An earlier witness statement by the prince read: “Having experienced what I have during my lifetime, as outlined above, and also during the last six years in terms of the constant harassment (online and off), intimidation and abuse that my wife and I have suffered at the hands of the tabloids, this sort of appalling behaviour doesn’t really surprise me.

“Finding out about this level of cover up is what makes me want to see my NGN [News Group Newspapers] claim through to an end, so people can really understand what happened.

“The fact that it was not just the journalists who were carrying out the unlawful activity, but also those in power who were turning a blind eye to it so as to ensure that it would continue unabated, and who then tried to cover it up when the game was up, is appalling.”

During a visit to the East Coast, he also discussed his motives at the New York Times Dealbook summit: “The goal is accountability it’s really that simple. That means that unfortunately the scale of the cover up is so large that people need to see it for themselves.”

“There is a a system which is set up,” he continued, “where if you are offered more money as a settlement than you would ever get in court then you’re forced to have to settle so actually there’s no justice for any of these claimants of which now stands at about 1300 claimants.”

Harry has ploughed on anyway, knowing the damages will likely never match the settlement he was offered, which he told Dealbook means “even if or when we win I’m still liable for the legal costs of both sides.”

And that could stretch into the millions of dollars.

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

Do you have a question about Charles and Queen Camilla, William and Kate, Meghan Markle 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.