50 million pounds in legal fees … my god harry what were you thinking ? Always felt this was the reason Meghan didn’t come to the UK, the media is about to go crazy over this.

    Posted by VampiresRUs

    Share.

    15 Comments

    1. ODFoxtrotOscar on

      Do the claimants get told the outcome before it’s given in court?

    2. Holy shit I’m surprised on this one. Kinda disappointed because fuck the Daily Mail. I genuinely hate them, Harry’s just annoying, that’s no crime, but the DM is evil.

    3. leilafornone on

      I don’t think it was that surprising. Harry didn’t seem to do well in cross examination if I’m not wrong.

      The Katie Nicholl thing for example. She was in his circles.

    4. Rare-Fall4169 on

      Oh man… I had a bad feeling it wouldn’t be good news for him given the coverage of the trial.

    5. SuspiciousBicycle438 on

      Pitty. They need the money to heñp pay for the Montecito mansion they can’t afford.

    6. 50M in legal fees? Jesus they need to film another reality show quickly 😬

    7. SteamboatMcGee on

      Correct me if I’m reading these reports wrong, but it seems like the court basically found that information was gathered by targeting/inserting people on the fringes of famous peoples crowds to gather gossip and be present at events, plus hiring ‘private investigators’ who used illegal means to gather information. But because it’s not illegal to be a creep and there’s a level of separation between the actual news media and the investigators (not employees, how could they know those people were commiting crimes, etc) they were found to not be liable.

      The illegal means of gathering information mostly seemed to be people accessing information databases they should not have had access to or which contained protected info, and then passing that info on to reporters.

    8. BroodingSonata on

      Not just him but Elton John and several others too. It sounds like they simply didn’t have enough evidence to convincingly prove the case in court, which is a shame as they undoubtedly had genuine grievances and the Mail are scum.

    9. matcha_tart on

      Not surprised. DM were the only ones not caught up in the hacking scandals back in the 2010s. There’s a line in where News International crossed it but they didn’t

    10. MessSince99 on

      I think it was said in the court case that this was being backed by some fund to fight for press reform.

    11. LetTheFlamingo on

      I mean, obviously the Daily Mails sucks ass and I’m sure they’ve come about information in very shady ways. That sucks for Harry. On the other hand, he was also friends with one of their editors, right? You can’t have your cake and eat it too, if you don’t want them to have any info, don’t liaise with them. It becomes exceedingly difficult to prove someone did something illegal to gain information about you, if you let them get close to you in other instances.

    12. bridgeport4 on

      How long until the next round of media interviews drop? What ever will they monetise next? Maybe Meghan’s tell-all?

      I do feel bad for him. He consistently overplays his hand and comes out looking foolish. He needs better staff and advisors, because clearly whatever he and Meghan are doing is not working out in his favour.

    13. I just saw on BBC that the judgment is over 400 pages. As a former (US) federal law clerk, I’m twitching at the amount of work it took to prepare that.

      I’m a bit surprised that all the claims were dismissed. I thought at least some of the plaintiffs would survive dismissal on one or two claims. To lose on all of them is a really comprehensive loss.

      Good luck to them paying those attorneys fees. Wasn’t this the case where the judge kept warning Harry about that? It’s hard to keep all the cases straight.