Prince Harry on Friday obtained an order from the publisher of the British tabloid Daily Mirror to pay him 140,600 pounds sterling ($240,000) in damages for articles resulting from the hacking of telephone messages.
• Read also: Prince Harry ordered to compensate tabloid
The judge estimated that 15 of the 33 disputed articles retained in the procedure were the result of hacking into the messaging system of King Charles’s youngest son or his entourage as well as other illicit processes.
He estimated that Prince Harry’s cell phone messaging had been hacked “to a modest extent.”
The magistrate further highlighted Prince Harry’s “tendency” to think that “everything published was the product of voicemail interceptions” because this practice “prevailed within the Mirror Group at the time”. But this practice was “not the only journalistic tool at the time and claims in relation to the 18 other articles do not stand up to careful analysis.”
The magistrate also highlighted “the distress” that Harry suffered “due to the illegal activity directed against him and his loved ones”.
During the trial, the youngest son of King Charles, at odds with the royal family, testified for eight hours spread over two days of hearing last June.
It was the first appearance of a member of the royal family at the bar since that of the future Edward VII in 1891 for a libel trial.
The 39-year-old prince feels a tenacious resentment towards the tabloid press, which he holds responsible for the death of his mother Diana, chased by paparazzi in Paris in 1997.
He also accuses him of what he describes as harassment against Meghan and of having responsibility for the bad relations he has with his family.
Harry accused the publisher of the Daily Mirror, and its Sunday and celebrity editions, of hacking and illegal collection of information, in particular by using private detectives.
The group rejected the vast majority of the accusations, notably contesting any hacking of voicemail boxes. But he had recognized some illicit procedures – for five of the 33 articles published between 1996 and 2009 retained in the procedure – notably the use of a private detective regarding a nightclub outing in 2004, and apologized.