Most of what this statement claims has not been proven or admitted to. This is Harry's version but not what the settlement itself says. Both parties have now released statements that interpret their final agreement/settlement completely differently.
From the person who now wants to address misinformation on SM.
Harry did not walk away. Once NGN admitted wrong doing, it is not legally possible for the civil lawsuit to continue.
As an actual lawyer, sorry to say that you're wrong. A settlement means that the facts are never adjudicated. In the eyes of the law, NGN has not admitted to any wrongdoing. NGN is not "the loser" and Harry is not "the winner." Unless a settlement includes some form of injunctive relief (I.e., a legal directive requiring one or both of the parties to either perform or refrain from performing some specific action), the settlement is nothing more than the parties' joint agreement to stop litigating the case.
I am not getting into a long drawn out back and forward with you. He wanted the top bodies , he didn’t get them. He could have refused to settle, he didn’t.
Thank you, for presenting that so clearly.
Thanks for explaining Kenya.
He’s annoying to some commentators yes, but there are plenty on SM who wish him and his wife and children ill, and their comments are and have been threatening and lying and contemptuous on most occasions since 2016. The comments there in the last 24 hours have verged on hysteria. Wonder why!!
Everybody in the public eye receives a mixture of comments both good, bad and in some cases downright horrible. Harry is not alone in this, it is easy to say do not read them. Not so easy to ignore them.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge in this matter.
Without knowing the details of the settlement, it's difficult to guess. In an ideal settlement, both parties should walk away simultaneously happy (to resolve the matter without the burden and expense of trial) and disappointed (not getting the full extent of the relief or vindication sought and having had to "back down" from positions taken throughout the duration of the litigation).
True; strange though it is, the anonymous nature (of SM) makes it possible for trolls to indulge themselves by saying things they'd never admit to otherwise. But they tend to simply move on to the next target.
Very true
Yes the apology is very much the same. Yes it is about the phone hacking from 1996-2007.
www.prospectmagazine.co.uk
The apology admitted illegal activities at "The Sun" which is a different newspaper than the one that shuttered years ago. This is the first time that this entity has admitted unlawful activities. Rebekah Brooks, then editor of "The Sun", once claimed she ran a "clean ship"; but now they admit that she has lied.
Where did it say Rebekah Brooke’s lied, I must have missed that part.
Heres, a link to an article discussing the law. It seems NGN blinked
How Harry and Watson forced NGN to admit wrongdoing
Why the circumstances show it was NGN wanting to avoid a public trial—and not the costs risk on the claimants—that brought this case to its end
Guy who edits it used to edit the Guardian, another left leaning paper.
In the NPR news report, which is linked in my post, it has a heading that says "News UK's statement contradicts CEO's earlier claim".
I have no idea whether she lied or not but to be honest that paragraph does not convince me.
Exactly. It's just spin.
The bit about Diana is what confuses me most. It points to the old case making a come back since why else would she be mentioned.
www.bbc.co.uk
