|
Post by Admin on Sept 3, 2023 5:30:31 GMT
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, were spotted at American singer Beyonce's Renaissance world tour concert at the SoFi Stadium in California on September 1, as per a report in Independent. The pictures of their appearance were widely shared by the couple's fans on social media.
In one of the photos shared on X, formerly Twitter, Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland and a close friend Abigail Spencer were spotted sitting in a private box along with the royal couple. Both Ms Markle and Ms Ragland wore silver outfits in observance of Beyonce's birthday request that her fans and supporters wear silver to the performance. Prince Harry also matched the colour scheme and wore a light grey blazer.
The couple had first met the 32 Grammy Awards-winning singer along with her husband Jay Z at the London premiere of 'The Lion King' in 2019. Following the interaction, both couples appeared to become closer.
In last year's Netflix docu-series 'Harry & Meghan', it was revealed that Beyonce had texted Ms Markle to show her support after their 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey. In the final episode of the series, the Duchess of Sussex informed Prince Harry that "Beyoncé just texted," to which he comically gasped. He then asked her to call the artist but Ms Markle decided to simply read the message in part which said, "She said she wants me to feel safe and protected. She admires and respects my bravery and vulnerability and thinks I was selected to break generational curses that need to be healed." To this, Prince Harry replied, "That's well said."
Listen to the latest songs, only on JioSaavn.com
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 6, 2023 14:44:25 GMT
The problem is security within the UK. When the prince left the royal family, the Home Office decided that he would no longer have police protection when he returned home. The prince was granted permission to challenge this last year. On Tuesday, December 5, local time, the prince filed a complaint with the High Court in London, calling this decision "unlawful, unfair and unfair."
The prince did not appear, but his lawyer appeared in court. "Princes have consistently believed that, given the threats and risks they face, they should be afforded the security of the state, and that remains the case." They have also been treated unfavorably."
In response, a government lawyer argued, ``The decision not to provide security was due to the fact that the prince is no longer a royal carrying out official duties.'' ``We did not decide that ``Prince Harry should not receive security protection,'' but rather that because his position had changed, he should not receive security protection based on the same standards as before.'' In other words, the prince was not being treated unfairly personally.
The prince had previously applied for police protection at his own expense. However, in May of this year, the High Court rejected this idea. A lawyer for the government argued, ``If we allow police protection at private expense, wealthy people will be able to hire police officers as their personal bodyguards. That is wrong.'' It will be recognized.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 8, 2023 21:00:13 GMT
The hearing was held over three days this week. The prince was not seen here either, but his lawyer released his statement. This has been reported by multiple media outlets, including the newspaper ``Daily Mail.'' The Prince said: "It was with great sadness for both of us that my wife and I felt forced to step back from our royal roles and leave this country in 2020. Britain is my home. "I want it to be the heart of my children's heritage and a place where they feel as at home as I do in America now. We can't do that if we don't feel safe in the UK." He claimed he "feels forced" to leave the UK.
His lawyer said, ``The prince does not accept that leaving the royal family is his choice.'' In other words, since he was forced to leave, the prince's theory is that he should be given the same protection as before.
The prince is also concerned about Meghan's safety. "I can't put my wife in danger. Considering my life experience, I don't want to put myself in unnecessary danger either."
By the way, in response to the prince's claim that he was being treated unfairly and unjustly, a government lawyer argued, ``The decision not to provide security was because the prince has become a royal who does not perform official duties.'' ``Since his position has changed, he should not be protected under the same standards as before,'' he explained.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 15, 2023 19:58:34 GMT
Prince Harry won a stunning victory Friday in his legal battle against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), after a judge found the newspaper group engaged in “extensive” phone hacking, and conducted a board-level cover-up of its unlawful information gathering.
In a withering verdict, the judge said senior executives and even in-house lawyers knew about the activity. The judge added that, astonishingly, phone hacking and “blagging” was going on even while a huge national inquiry into phone hacking, known as the Leveson inquiry, was being conducted.
Harry alleged that journalists and private detectives working for MGN used deceptive information retrieval techniques to publish 147 stories between 1996 and 2010.
Of these, a sample of 33 were selected to be adjudicated as part of his claim.
The judge found that 15 of the 33 articles were sourced via illegal information gathering.
Harry was awarded modest damages of about $178,000, but he has repeatedly stated the trial is not about the money but holding the newspapers to account. Harry’s costs are likely to be in the region of $2 million, and he may not get these all back.
The verdict handed down Friday will be sweet vindication for Harry, and the latest victory in his bitter war on the British tabloid press, which he accuses of ruining significant periods of his life.
Harry is likely to have received the judgment earlier this week.
Piers Morgan, who has become one of Harry and his wife Meghan Markle’s chief antagonists, was the editor of the Mirror at the time but did not give evidence in the case. Harry named him in his statement after the verdict was delivered, recommending U.K. authorities, including the police, continue their inquiries.
Prince Harry’s representative David Sherborne, speaking outside the court, reading a statement from the duke, said “board directors, 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.”
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 16, 2023 5:41:35 GMT
In a civil case in which Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, of the British Royal Family, was suing the publisher of the tabloid newspaper ``Daily Mirror,'' alleging that his answering machine had been tapped, the High Court ruled on the 15th that the newspaper's reporter had committed illegal telephone wiretapping. The court has admitted 15 lawsuits alleging that the Prince's privacy was violated by writing the article in an unethical manner, and ordered the publisher, Mirror Group Newspaper (MGN), to pay 140,600 pounds (approximately 25.4 million yen) in damages.
High Court Chief Justice Timothy Fancourt accepted the Prince's argument regarding 15 of the 33 articles he presented as evidence, including voicemail taps left on his phone, and said that 15 of them had been published in the Daily Mirror and elsewhere. It was determined that information gathering through telephone wiretapping was carried out ``widespread and on a regular basis.''
Following the verdict, Prince Harry said it was a "great day for truth and accountability".
|
|