Prince Harry has admitted evidence he has given in the ongoing phone-hacking trial at the High Court contradicts a claim he made in his memoir Spare.
The Duke of Sussex was challenged over discrepancies between his autobiography Spare and his hacking trial witness statement over whether he wanted to meet ex-royal butler Paul Burrell, a former confidant of Diana, Princess of Wales.
Harry said in his witness statement that he was “firmly against” a meeting - but Andrew Green KC, for MGN, highlighted that Harry wrote in Spare that he wanted to fly back to confront Mr Burrell, who released a tell-all book about Harry’s late mother in 2003 after being cleared of stealing from her estate.
Harry agreed he would have described Mr Burrell as a “two-faced sh*t”, with the words appearing in a 2003 article in The People newspaper. The duke said, from the witness box at the London court: “That is how I have always seen him.”
The duke claims his remarks about Mr Burrell were obtained illegally by Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) from a voicemail he left for his brother, now the Prince of Wales, while MGN denies the allegations.
Harry said in his witness statement that the report in The People “accurately” set out his “disagreement” with William, with his brother wanting to meet Mr Burrell and Harry “firmly against” doing so.
Harry told the court: “This kind of article seeds distrust between brothers.” He added: “Those are words that I used and I certainly left voicemails on my brother’s phone.”
But Mr Green KC pointed to the duke writing in his controversial memoir that he wanted to fly back to confront Mr Burrell, rather than being against a meeting.
Reading out excerpts from the book, he quoted Harry as writing: “It made my blood boil. I wanted to fly home to confront him.”
The extract, written from Harry’s perspective, told how he phoned his father, now the King, to say he was getting on a plane to return to the UK from a trip to the Australian outback but that Charles and William talked him out of it.
A statement issued by the brothers from Clarence House at the time condemned Mr Burrell, with the former royal servant saying he wanted to meet William and Harry and the prince’s spokesperson saying they were prepared to do so.
Mr Green said, reading from Spare, that Harry wrote he “waited anxiously” for the meeting and counted the days but it did not happen at that time which was a “shame”.
Quizzing Harry about the discrepancy, the barrister said Harry made it “absolutely clear” in Spare that he wanted a meeting with Mr Burrell.
Harry told the court: “The time gap between the original article and when I wrote this book was rather a large gap between the two.”
Mr Green said: “There is no suggestion in Spare that you were firmly against a meeting.”
Harry responded: “No, because I wrote it when I was 38 years old and in this story I was 18. I assume I would have wanted a meeting…I’d love to give him a piece of my mind.”
Mr Green added: “Your position is that at the time you didn’t want a meeting, or you did want a meeting, what is the true position?”
Harry replied: “I honestly can’t remember whether I wanted a meeting or not.”
Mr Green added: “Is it your position that you do actually remember leaving a voicemail on William’s phone saying that?”
The duke responded: “I was leaving voicemails for my brother and that is the terminology I used for Burrell.”
However, he said he did not specifically recall leaving William a voice message saying that.
In an interview with GB News following Harry’s first day of evidence, Burrell said he was finding the whole court process “deeply upsetting and hurtful”.
“I think it’s careless and callous what Harry has said in court,” he told presenter Dan Wootton. “He seems to be living in an alternative world, his own reality TV show, a world in which he is deluded – he’s become petulant. He seems to be able to say whatever he can or whatever he wants.”
Burrell added he believed the duke’s witness statement was “defamatory” and wanted him to “apologise and say sorry”.
Harry is suing MGN for damages, claiming journalists at its titles, which also include the Sunday Mirror and Sunday People, were linked to methods including phone hacking, so-called “blagging” or gaining information by deception, and use of private investigators for unlawful activities.
MGN is contesting the claims and has either denied or not admitted each of them.
