Katie Nicholl reporting for Entertainment Tonight in the US
Mail writer Katie Nicholl has described the phone-hacking claims levelled against her by Prince Harry and others as “nonsense” and damaging for her career.
Sadie Frost, Liz Hurley, Elton John, David Furnish and Prince Harry are all currently suing Mail publisher Associated Newspapers for breach of privacy and have highlighted a number of articles published in the 2000s and early 2010s which they believe were obtained illegally by Nicholl.
The illegal newsgathering claims are largely based on now recanted evidence from private investigator Gavin Burrows.
The Mail says it has no records relating to Burrows and Nicholl said she had never heard of Burrows let alone worked with him.
Nicholl was diary editor of the Mail on Sunday from 2004 to 2012 and also worked as royal editor of the paper. She continues to write for the Mail titles , as well as Vanity Fair, on a freelance basis as well as other publications and TV outlets.
In written testimony she said: “I understand that the claimants infer that I hacked phones because articles that I have written contain references to the use of the telephone or messages exchanged by the subjects of the articles, with the example given by Prince Harry and Sadie Frost of a story published in The Mail on Sunday on 18 February 2007 under the headline ‘Hugh, Drew and the jealousy of Jemima’.
“The suggestion that a reference to a telephone call or message indicates I have tapped that person’s landline or hacked their voicemail is nonsense.
“When I refer to calls/text messages in a story it is because I have been told about such calls and text messages by a well-placed source. On occasions I actually had sources who had overheard these phone calls or had been shown text messages –with the subject’s consent (this happened quite often in the case of Prince Harry).
“Referencing calls and texts in my articles was very typical of the style of diary writing. I would include details about late night calls for example to illustrate a certain intimacy between two people.
“For example, if I was told that two people were texting often or calling each other late at night – it lends weight to the story that they are in a romantic relationship.”
She added: “The claimants’ allegation that I used phrases such as ‘close friends of’ or a ‘royal insider’ to conceal or mislead the claimants as to the true source of the information is wrong. When I reference a close friend or an insider they are a real person.”
Nicholl, who wrote the story in question, said Grant’s allegations (made with benefit of legal privilege because they were at aa public inquiry) “had an immediate impact on my professional reputation”.
She said she was temporarily suspended from working as a correspondent for the ABC Network in the US and later confronted Grant at a party in 2013.
She said: “I told him that I had never hacked his phone or anyone else’s for that matter and that he had made groundless and damaging accusations about me.”
She said the allegations have continued to be aired by the website run by Prince Harry legal researcher Graham Johnston, Byline Investigates, adding: “It is very unfair and potentially damaging for my career that such serious allegations have been made against me based on absolutely no evidence.”
The story was based, Nicholl said, on a confidential source who had spoken to Jemima Khan about the phone calls in question which Khan had overheard. The story came to Nicholl via freelance journalist Sharon Feinstein.
Nicholl said Feinstein “had great contacts and trusted sources who knew Jemima Khan well”.
Nicholl added: “I also had good contacts of my own for this story including someone incredibly close to the story – and well informed – who spoke to me off the record.
“In this case, although I did not know the identity of Sharon Feinstein’s source, I understood that the information came from someone who had spoken to Jemima Khan directly. Along with some of my own off the record conversations with very reliable sources close to the story, I accepted the tip as true and we ran the piece.”
Nicholl said: “I have worked very hard over the course of my career to get to where I am today. I didn’t always get every story right: there were plenty of stories where I was misinformed or told something that was wrong and/or inaccurate.
“That’s because I was dependent on real sources. I have always been professional in my work and tried to uphold the highest of journalistic standards. I end this statement by repeating what I said at the start: I have never knowingly used illegally obtained information, hacked a phone, intercepted voicemails or asked anyone to do so on my behalf.”
Email [email protected] to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our “Letters Page” blog