THIS COULD BLOW UP IN HIS FACE: Prince Harry’s Legal Battle Hit by Major Setback Just Weeks Before Trial, Sparking Fresh Fears His High-Stakes Case Could Now Crumble at the Worst Possible Moment

Prince Harry’s phone hacking case against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), publishers of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday, has suffered a significant setback after a private investigator raised serious doubts about Baroness Lawrence’s claim that the newspapers bugged her.

The Duke of Sussex and Baroness Lawrence are two of seven people suing the ANL over alleged unlawful information gathering, including phone hacking and bugging.

The group of seven has been dealt a blow after private investigator Jonathan Rees cast doubt over the trial, denying admitting to Ms Lawrence that he was involved in bugging her after the racially motivated murder of her 18-year-old son, Stephen, in 1993.

Speaking to Channel 4’s investigation programme Dispatches, Mr Rees discussed the legal case being brought by Ms Lawrence, saying: “They’re going to have to rethink that.”

Prince Harry’s phone hacking case has been dealt a setback

| PA

The group of seven are set to go to court in a matter of weeks, suing ANL, which has denied the allegations, describing them as “lurid” and “simply preposterous”.

Another private investigator, Gavin Burrows, said a witness statement lodged by the prince’s legal team was false.

They claimed Mr Burrows had been involved in bugging and hacking on behalf of ANL, something the private investigator denies, saying his signature was “forged”.

Mr Burrow’s claims, now retracted, were reportedly key to Harry encouraging Ms Lawrence to join him in the legal action.

Baroness Doreen Lawrence is one of seven people suing the ANL

|GETTY

In her witness statement, lodged with the court in 2023, she said: “Jonathan Rees confirmed that he had done more things for the Daily Mail… aimed at secretly stealing information about me and the investigations into Stephen’s murder.”

She claimed that her landline had been interfered with and her voicemails hacked, suggesting she had been subject to “covert electronic surveillance”.

Questioned by Dispatches if he had ever been involved with the Daily Mail, Mr Reed said: “Yes, that is exactly what I’d heard and what I knew was on offer.

“I’d been offered by other agents to assist in this surveillance. But I didn’t get involved.”

Harry’s case is set to get underway in January

| GETTY 

When it was noted that Ms Lawrence’s witness statement was “based on your confirmation that you had done the bugging operation”, Mr Rees responded: “Right, well they’re going to have to rethink that, and their legal team is going to have to re-think that.”

Mr Rees, who was convicted in 2000 for conspiring to pervert the course of justice along with a corrupt police officer in an unconnected case, insisted his denial of involvement did not damage Baroness Lawrence’s claim against the Mail.

However, although he continued to insist he was aware of surveillance teams employed to spy on the baroness, he continued: “I can’t provide any documentary evidence for that.”

Dispatches also questioned the role of former News of the World journalist, Graham Johnson, in the legal claim.

A private investigator suggested that Prince Harry’s team are ‘going to have to rethink’ their claims

| GETTY 

Mr Johnson was convicted of phone hacking and admitted to making up stories in his former career, now being paid £160 an hour as a researcher to Prince Harry’s legal team.

Dispatches said it had spoken to private detectives who alleged Mr Johnson approached them to provide details about their dealings with the Mail.

Mr Rees told Dispatches that Mr Johnson offered him “high rewards” for information, claiming he was offered £2,500-a-month for life.

While he had no proof of the offer, Mr Rees has not provided any witness statement ahead of the trial, it is understood.