Hacking claims towards Mail are ‘preposterous’, says Dacre

Phone hacking claims brought against the Daily Mail by Prince Harry and six other public figures are ‘preposterous’, the newspaper’s former editor told the High Court yesterday.

Paul Dacre said he was ‘astonished and appalled’ by the allegations levelled at the Daily Mail and The Mail On Sunday (TMOS), adding: ‘I utterly refute those.’

The editor-in-chief of DMG Media launched a staunch defence of the Daily Mail and its ‘honest, dedicated journalists’, and said he wanted to clear their names as he began his evidence at the trial.

Mr Dacre, 77, who was editor of the Daily Mail for 26 years, was the first witness called on behalf of Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Daily Mail and TMOS.

He told the court: ‘Clearly I wish to clear my name, but I’m much more concerned about the name of the Daily Mail and more pertinently the honest and dedicated staff who work for it.’

Mr Dacre said allegations of voicemail hacking, landline phone interception and ‘blagging’ of private information had cast an ‘insidious dark shadow’ since the legal action was launched in 2022 and had sometimes ‘in the small hours of the night – reduced me to rage’.

The Duke of Sussex, Baroness [Doreen] Lawrence, the mother of murdered Stephen Lawrence, Sir Elton John and four other public figures claim they were targeted by private investigators, allegedly commissioned by journalists.

Associated Newspapers denies the allegations and has told the court its journalists relied on legitimate sources for information.

The first witness called on behalf of Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday, was former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre, pictured arriving at The Royal Courts of Justice

In his witness statement, submitted to the court as his evidence in chief, Mr Dacre said he was ‘immensely proud’ of the newspaper he had edited, praising its ‘remarkable journalism’ and ‘high professional standards’.

He was most proud of the paper’s campaign for justice for Stephen Lawrence, the black London teenager killed by racist thugs, he said, and spoke of his personal shock that Baroness Lawrence was among those who accused the Daily Mail of misconduct.

Asked about the impact of the allegations on the claimants in the case, Mr Dacre told the court: ‘My heart bleeds for Baroness Doreen Lawrence, but these are allegations at the moment.’

He added that he had been profoundly angered by all the claims brought against the Daily Mail but had found the allegations made on behalf of Baroness Lawrence ‘especially bewildering and bitterly wounding to me personally’.

‘Throughout my 26-year editorship, this, of all my countless campaigns, many of which made a significant contribution to the public weal, is the campaign of which I am most proud and to which I devoted the most space,’ Mr Dacre said.

He also said it ‘simply defies reason’ for the Daily Mail to use illegal methods to see if other newspapers were getting involved in the Lawrence campaign, later adding: ‘The suggestion that we ran the campaign to generate exclusive headlines, sell newspapers and profit is sickeningly misplaced and bleakly cynical.’

During cross-examination by David Sherborne, for the claimants, Mr Dacre faced questions over the use of ‘inquiry agents’ by journalists on the Daily Mail and TMOS.

When it was put to him that the newspapers had spent more than £3million on private investigators, Mr Dacre replied that Associated Newspapers had accepted that some information obtained by its journalists from such an agent, Steve Whittamore, might have breached data protection law. 

He said journalists had used Mr Whittamore and other agents as a fast way to get addresses and phone numbers, and said it had been a time when many had a ‘hazy’ understanding of emerging data protection and privacy law.

Banks, councils and insurance companies also used the same agents, along with other newspapers and the BBC, he pointed out.

Mr Dacre said he had not known about the extent of newspapers’ use of inquiry agencies until an Information Commissioner’s Office report in 2006. He added: ‘When I was aware of the extent of it, I brought the shutters down, I banned them in 2007.

‘No other newspaper did that, they carried on using those inquiry agencies. The BBC were using them until 2011.’

In his witness statement, he denied he had lied to the Leveson Inquiry into Press standards in 2011 about the use of inquiry agents, phone hacking, computer hacking and payments to police.

The trial continues.