Prince Harry has accused The Sun newspaper of publishing stories on him motivated by ‘revenge’, including one that linked him to Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs sex-trafficking trial. In new court documents published by The Guardian, Harry says ‘a large number of false and highly derogatory articles’ were published by Rupert Murdoch’s News Group Newspapers (NGN) after he accused them of phone hacking.

NGN denies that it was motivated by revenge in publishing stories about Harry, saying that ‘the Sun publishes stories about the Duke of Sussex which are justified because of the role he holds and the actions he has taken.’

The Duke of Sussex’s claims were found in newly disclosed court documents which came his court case against The Sun in January. The case never made it to court and was settled with a payout to Prince Harry and his joint claimant, former deputy Labour leader Tom Watson, for legal costs and damages in excess of £10million.

Skeleton arguments now made public show that Harry intended to allege in court that The Sun published articles ‘in retaliation’ of his accusation about phone hacking and unlawful information gathering. ‘Since issuing his claim on 27 September 2019, NGN has published in the Sun or Sun on Sunday a large number of false and highly derogatory articles about the [Duke of Sussex],’ the court document reads. ‘Plainly in retaliation, including articles that suggested he has somehow “betrayed” his family, has “lied” about them to garner sympathy, is a “traitor” to his country and, perhaps most damaging of all, has been named in a high-profile sex-trafficking case.’

The article in question was a front-page story in The Sun on March 27th, 2024, in which it claimed that Harry had been named in the sex-trafficking case against Diddy. The headline read ‘Harry named in P Diddy sex traffic case’ and alleged that ‘Diddy used Harry’s name to give “legitimacy” to wild parties where “serious illegal activity” took place.’

It came from a legal claim by music producer Rodney Jones, who alleged that ‘affiliation with, and or sponsorship of Mr Combs’ parties ensured ‘access to celebrities such as famous athletes, political figures, artists, musicians, and international dignitaries like British Royal, Prince Harry.’ The article did not explain until he fourth paragraph of the piece that Harry was not accused of any wrongdoing.

Diddy is currently on trial for sex-trafficking, racketeering conspiracy and transportation to engage in prostitution. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges and denied any allegations of sexual abuse. Harry has not been named in the trial, and has never been to any of Diddy’s parties, according to The Guardian. He is thought to have only met Diddy on one occasion, at the memorial concert for his mother, Princess Diana, in 2007.

In Harry’s argument, he says that the articles published by the Sun and the Sun on Sunday had ‘a hugely negative impact on his mental health and that of his wife and children’, adding that it put such a ‘strain on his relationship with the royal family that he was forced to leave the institution and relocate to North America, leaving behind all that he knew and held dear.’

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex stepped down as senior royals in 2020, moving to Montecito, California where they now reside with their two children, Archie, six, and Lilibet, three. Since relinquishing their titles, the couple have only returned to the UK for brief work trips.

A spokesperson for NGN said in response: ‘We always take the greatest care to ensure what we report is accurate and the Sun reflects public opinion and debate. The Duke of Sussex and his wife have been interviewed, and he has published a book. These have been contentious and the subject of legitimate scrutiny and opinion. The reference to the Duke of Sussex in the Sean Coombs case was because his name appeared in court documents in a case of huge international interest.

‘It was made quite clear that there was no allegation of wrongdoing in respect of the Duke of Sussex and the article explained why he had been cited,’ the representative continued. ‘The same information was published in multiple other titles.’