Prince Harry court case – latest: Coronation Street star claims hair ‘set on fire’ after ‘nasty girl’ narrative

The Mirror’s former royal editor and assistant news editor Jane Kerr is currently being questioned by Prince Harry’s lawyer David Sherborne.

In her witness statement, Ms Kerr has described calling various agencies who provided phone numbers the paper needed to cover breaking news.

Ms Kerr said she “knew what she was doing but it was a long time ago”, after Mr Sherborne claimed she seemed “to have no idea of what you were doing at the time”.

Pressing further, the barrister asked: “You called up people, you had no idea what they did – they magically produced phone numbers and you never asked any questions?”, to which Ms Kerr replied: “Yes.”

In her witness statement, Ms Kerr said: “I would like to reiterate in the strongest terms that I have never engaged in voicemail interception at MGN or elsewhere and I have never instructed private investigators or other third parties to engage in unlawful information gathering activities.

“I worked hard and honestly as a journalist, always believing I was doing the right thing, and I felt proud and privileged to be the Mirror’s royal reporter. To be accused of such a thing is extremely upsetting.”

Prior to the conclusion of his testimony, Prince Harry was asked by the judge when he first began to notice that his voicemails did not appear to be “new” when he listened to them – suggesting that someone else had already listened to them.

In his witness statement, Harry says he was first issued a mobile “by the institution” while at Eton, over which period he would hear voicemails that were no longer “new” – which at the time blamed on either a technical glitch or “having had too many drinks the night before”.

As he departed the witness box, the judge, Mr Justice Fancourt, zoned in on this aspect of his testimony, asking when the duke experienced “this strange activity”.

“From the moment I had a mobile phone,” replied Prince Harry, to which the judge asked: “Are you saying this continued throughout the period?”

“It never stopped,” the duke replied.

Prince Harry’s lawyer claims to have evidence that former Mirror journalist Jane Kerr commissioned a third-party company 900 times to obtain details about people, such as their dates of birth and addresses.

Barrister David Sherborne told the court that internal emails showed “concern” at the paper about the sums being spent on such firms given that a database there allowing its staff to do similar searches for free.

After Ms Kerr said she “just made the calls”, Mr Sherborne said: “You were the assistant news editor at the Daily Mirror. You’re telling the court you instructed a company 900 times to do something you could have done for free and you’ve no idea how they obtained this information?”

“It just didn’t occur to me to ask,” she replied, prompting Mr Sherborne to suggest that she “knew” journalists were using dates of birth to pass to private investigators to access people’s voicemails – which she denied.

In her witness statement, Ms Kerr said: “I have never engaged in voicemail interception at MGN or elsewhere and I have never engaged the services of private investigators or other third parties to engage in unlawful information gathering activities.”

In questioning by Prince Harry’s lawyer, former Mirror royal editor Jane Kerr has been asked why she did not mention her former role as the paper’s assistant news editor in her witness statement.

Pressed on the matter by barrister David Sherborne, who claimed she was trying to distance herself from the paper, Ms Kerr said that while she could have included it in her witness statement, she was focusing on the work she did as royal editor and royal reporter.

Earlier today, Prince Harry said he had launched his phone hacking case to stop his wife Meghan from suffering “intrusion and hate” from the press, the High Court has heard.

Andrew Green KC, acting on behalf of Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), asked when the Duke of Sussex initially discussed possible legal action.

Harry said he believed there was a discussion about him wanting to put a stop to the “absolute intrusion and hate that was coming towards me and my wife and see if there was any way to find a different course of action, rather than relying on the institution’s way”.

Mr Green asked if he had wanted to bring an action against News Group Newspapers (NGN) first and then decided to also sue MGN, to which Harry replied: “No, I believe I filed the claims at pretty much the same time.” Harry added that there was “industrial-scale destruction of evidence on all sides”.