Prince Harry privacy trial: Court hears researcher Dr Evan Harris accused of giving ‘untruthful’ evidence over memo edits
A researcher working with Prince Harry and other high-profile claimants in a High Court privacy case has been accused in court of being “untruthful” in his evidence about a key document linked to an investigation into alleged wrongdoing at the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday.
The Telegraph reported that Dr Evan Harris, a former Liberal Democrat MP, had told the court he had never seen a 2016 memo about “Operation Bluebird”, before evidence was shown that he had made significant edits and rewrites to that same document.
Dr Harris, who previously led the media reform group Hacked Off, is part of the “legal research team” supporting claims brought against Associated Newspapers Limited by the Duke of Sussex and others including Baroness Lawrence and Sir Elton John. In court, Antony White KC, for Associated, said Dr Harris had been “caught out” and suggested his evidence the previous day was untrue, pointing to passages that were said to have been rewritten.
In response, Dr Harris said the issue was a mistake rather than an intentional falsehood, telling the court: “That was an error, it was not a falsehood,” and adding: “I would not say something that was untrue.” The memo was described as outlining an exercise labelled Operation Bluebird, with references to potential claimants, and was prepared for Geoff Stunt, who helped fund the investigation.
The proceedings form part of a wider dispute over allegations of unlawful information-gathering and the timing of when claimants could reasonably have known they had a potential claim. The trial continues, with the court expected to hear further evidence on the conduct and sharing of material gathered during the investigation.
