pa media
Sadie Frost told a court that journalists had “violated” her privacy by allegedly hacking her voicemail for information.
The actress became emotional while giving evidence in her case against the newspaper publisher, which includes claims that a reporter found out about her aborted pregnancy through a private investigator.
She told the High Court that she knew “100%” that the other stories were obtained through hacking because they matched her voicemail “word for word”. In a written statement, she said that the alleged activity had made her believe that she “couldn’t trust anyone”.
Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) has denied all wrongdoing in relation to Frost and six other claimants, including Prince Harry.
Frost accused Mail journalists of calling her then-husband,
In court, Frost accused Mail journalists of calling her then-husband, actor Jude Law, in 2002 after discovering that their two-year-old daughter had swallowed part of an Ecstasy tablet at a children’s party. When Frost received press attention, she began to cry.
She said in her statement that she was “pained” when she learnt that her landline was allegedly being listened to, adding that it had caused her and her children “pain.”
Frost and other claimants have accused Associated Newspapers of “serious violations of privacy” over a 20-year period.
Her claim relates to 11 articles and two “episodes” of alleged unlawful information gathering for articles that were not published, including one about her pregnancy.
David Sherborne, representing Frost, said she discovered she was pregnant in 2003, which was unplanned and later aborted. She said she only told her father, Jackson Scott, and “maybe” a close friend about the termination.
The barrister claimed that Katie Nicholl, who was showbiz editor of the Mail on Sunday at the time, would “must have” known about the situation through unlawful information gathering. He said that his notes mentioned a private investigator who had charged him £400.
Antony White Casey, on behalf of the publisher, said that the payment was not linked to the pregnancy and that a freelance journalist with sources close to Frost had told Nicholl about the pregnancy.
During the cross-examination, Frost stated to the court, “It was evident that there was a hidden agenda against me.” The Daily Mail had said they were interested in Sadie Frost.”
When White suggested that Frost’s family members had provided information to the press and that this “might” have encouraged her friends to do the same, Frost said she did not agree.
Concluding her evidence, she said it was “difficult and very painful to relive something I didn’t want to relive”.
She said, “It hurts me for my kids to see what I’ve been through, but I’ve done it for them.”
Frost said in her written statement that the publisher was so angry that she thought it was okay to profit from someone going through so much pain without thinking about me or my children.
He said he was not aware he had a potential claim against the publisher until 2019 and that ANL “must be held accountable”.
White argued that Frost’s claims were “without any basis in the evidence before the court”. He said the stories were sourced “completely legitimately” and that his social circle was considered “leaked”, with family members regularly passing on information to the press.
He said claimants were “grasping at straws” and claims were brought too late.
Privacy cases must generally be brought within six years of the alleged violation, unless victims can show that they cannot bring a case within that time.
The other claimants in the case against ANL are:
- Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish
- actress liz hurley
- Sir Simon Hughes, former Liberal Democrat MP
- Baroness Doreen Lawrence, a campaigner whose son Stephen Lawrence was murdered in a racist attack in south London in 1993
They accused ANL of “blatant, systematic and continued use of unlawful information gathering” for stories between 1993 and “after that” in 2018, including through private investigators and blogging.
ANL has denied allegations of illegal information collection.
The case continues and is expected to last nine weeks.
