Prince Harry lawsuit: Piers Morgan to respond after judge rules he knew of phone hacking at The Daily Mirror

Piers Morgan has said he will “shortly” make a statement after a High Court judge accepted evidence that he knew journalists were involved in phone hacking while he was editor of The Daily Mirror. Morgan, now a broadcaster for TalkTV, was named in Mr Justice Fancourt’s judgement in the Duke of Sussex’s phone hacking claim against Mirror Group Newspapers.

Posting on X, he said: “UPDATE: I’ll be making a statement responding to the Prince Harry v Mirror Group judgement shortly. (So all you guys camped outside my house in the cold won’t have to have to wait much longer…)”

The Duke of Sussex won £140,600 in damages today (December 15) after bringing a phone hacking claim against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) at the High Court. The 39-year-old sued MGN for damages, claiming journalists at its titles – the Daily and 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.

During the trial, Omid Scobie, told the High Court that Morgan was told about the use of phone hacking. The court heard Mr Scobie did work experience at the Daily Mirror in spring 2002 and overheard Mr Morgan being told that information relating to Kylie Minogue and her then-boyfriend James Gooding had come from voicemails.

Mr Justice Fancourt ruled that he accepted the evidence of biographer. In his judgement he said: “Mr Scobie was pressed hard about the likely veracity of these accounts … I found Mr Scobie to be a straightforward and reliable witness, and I accept what he said about Mr Morgan’s involvement in the Minogue/Gooding story. No evidence was called by MGN to contradict it.”

In a statement on behalf of the Duke of Sussex read outside the court, his lawyer David Sherborne said: “The court had found that the Mirror Group’s principle board directors, their legal department, senior executives, and editors such as Piers Morgan, clearly knew about or were involved in these illegal activities.

“Between them they even went as far as lying under oath to Parliament during the Leveson Inquiry, to the stock exchange, and to us all ever since.

“The journey to justice can be a slow and painful one, and since bringing my claim almost five years ago, defamatory stories and intimidating tactics have been deployed against  me at my family’s expense.

“And so, as I too have learned through this process, patience is in fact a virtue especially in the face of vendetta journalism.

“I hope that the court findings serve as a reminder to all media organisations who have employed these practises and then similarly lied about it.

“Mirror Group’s actions were so calculated and misleading that their pattern of destroying evidence and concealing their unlawful behaviour continued into the mitigation itself, and, as a judge has ruled, even to this day.

“I am happy to have won the case, especially given this trial only looked at a quarter of my entire claim, even on just that it is clear Mirror Group’s persistent attempt to suggest that my claim was, to quote their counsel, ‘fantastical’ ‘in the realms of total speculation,’ and ‘there was simply no evidence at all to suggest I was hacked – zilch, zero, nil, nada, niente – absolutely nothing’.

“All of that was total nonsense, and was used maliciously to attack my character and credibility.

“However, as Mirror Group intended, those hollow sound bites were blasted across front pages and across online platforms and into the next day’s morning television.”