E-Paper
Prince Harry ‘careless and callous’, Princess Diana's butler thinks so because…
The trustees of the princess' estate took Paul Burrell to court in a lawsuit.
Princess Diana's former butler hit out at Prince Harry over his claims that he sold items belonging to the late princess during a High Court appearance in London. Paul Burrell worked for Princess Diana from 1987 up until her death in 1997, after which he gained public notoriety culminating in a legal scandal in which he was accused of stealing hundreds of items belonging to Diana, Prince William and King Charles III.
"I'm finding deeply upsetting and hurtful and I need to process what's been said because I think it's careless and callous," he said following Prince Harry's testimony. The trustees of the princess' estate took Paul Burrell to court in a lawsuit which ultimately collapsed at trial following an intervention from Queen Elizabeth II, it was then reported.
Read more: Prince William wore heels? Royal's response to man's strange height query
Paul Burrell became a focus of Prince Harry's witness testimony as he argued information in a British tabloid story in 2003 which stated that he had a disagreement with Prince William over whether or not to meet the butler, was obtained illegally.
Prince Harry is suing Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) publishers of the Daily Mirror and Sunday People over allegations of phone hacking and other illegal acts between 1996 and 2011.
In his witness statement Prince Harry said that the article "accurately sets out the position that my brother was open to fixing a meeting with Paul to discuss his ongoing exposés about our mother, however I had made up my mind about the kind of person I thought Paul was and was firmly against meeting him at this point in my life. To the best of my recollection, I do not believe a meeting went ahead in 2003."
“Both my brother and I had very strong feelings about how indiscrete Paul had proven to be with the way he had sold our mother's possessions and how he had given numerous interviews about her. We firmly believed that she would have expected some privacy in death, especially from someone she had trusted, and we were so upset at the way he was behaving—I didn't want to hear his reasons for it. Therefore, our disagreement over to how to handle the situation going forward was not something I wanted splashed across the Defendant's newspapers,” he added.
