Prince Harry misses trial due to reduced security

LONDON — Prince Harry lost a long legal battle over his security downgrade in Britain, when a High Court judge ruled Wednesday that the British government he had the right change the level of police protection for a member of the royal family who was no longer performing official duties.

In a 51-page ruling, Judge Peter Lane he refused the challenge Harry’s decision that the British Home Office, through its Executive Committee for the Protection of Royals and Public Figures, had not been unfair or irrational from a procedural point of view when changing its level. safety.

It was a major setback for Harry, who has fought a series of legal battles for both his safety and his privacy.

Earlier this month, he won at least £400,000 ($506,000) in damages from the publisher of The Mirror newspapera London tabloid, for having “widespread and routine” hacked into his mobile phone’s answering machine.

Harry lost his automatic protection from the taxpayer-funded Metropolitan Police when he and his wife Meghan stepped back from royal duties in 2020 and eventually moved to Southern California.

The prince said he would not be able to safely visit Britain with his family without it higher level of protection.

Last May, in a parallel court case, he lost an attempt to pay for police protection out of his own pocket.

In the United States, Harry and Meghan are protected by bodyguards with gun licenses.

But travel in Britain poses a particular challenge because its private security guards are not allowed to carry weapons.

The couple’s safety came into the spotlight last year when Harry and Meghan, along with Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, were surrounded by photographers after leaving an awards ceremony in New York City.

A spokesperson for the couple described “a car chase almost catastrophic at the hands of a group of very aggressive paparazzi,” although a taxi driver carrying the three said there had been no car chase and there was no reason to scare his passengers, even though they were clearly alarmed.

At the time, a spokesperson for the New York Police Department said that the photographers had posed a challenge, but that the three had arrived at their destination on the Upper East Side without “no reported collisions, complaints, injuries or arrests.”

Trial

However, it emerged on Wednesday that Harry’s lawyers had submitted to the Superior Court a copy of a letter from the New York Police Department’s intelligence chief, John B. Hart, stating that, following an investigation Next time, the police concluded that the paparazzi They had behaved imprudently that night.

There was sufficient evidence, Mr. Hart wrote, in a letter dated December 6, 2023, to arrest two people for reckless imprudence.

“They had been using vehicles, scooters and bicycles in a way that forced the security team, which included the NYPD lead car, to take evasive actions on several occasions and a tortuous route to avoid being hit by pursuing vehicles or trapped in side blocks.” the judge wrote, citing the letter Hart sent to Richard Smith, the Metropolitan Police’s in-laws specialist and protection commander.

Hart said the incident led the NYPD to… modify security procedures for the couple on subsequent visits to New York, although details were omitted from the ruling, as were details of their protection in Britain.

The ruling on Harry’s safety came amid a new round of speculation about the well-being of senior members of the royal family.

Tuesday, Prince William suddenly retired of a memorial ceremony for King Constantine of Greece, his godfather, citing a “personal matter.”

William’s wife Catherine is recovering from abdominal surgery in January.

An official at Kensington Palace, where the couple have offices, said Tuesday that Catherine was well, but provided no further details.

King Charles III, who is being treated for an unknown form of cancer, also missed the service at St George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle.

Queen Camilla replaced her husband.

Buckingham Palace officials said William’s cancellation was not related to his father’s health.

c.2024 The New York Times Company