Ex-police officer tells Prince Harry trial he is not giving evidence out of 'vengeance'
A former corrupt police officer has denied giving evidence at Prince Harry's privacy trial out of "vengeance".
Listen to this article
Jerry Yanover, a former Metropolitan Police constable who was once jailed for corruption, denied he was lying as he was examined in the Duke of Sussex' privacy case against Associated Newspapers.
He appeared as a witness for the Prince and said he had heard private investigator Gavin Burrows boast about working for the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday.
Giving evidence at the High Court, Yanover denied he was lying and refuted suggestions he had been told to make the claim.
He also rejected the stance that he had been paid by Graham Johnson, the convicted phone hacker now working as a researcher for Harry’s legal team.
Prince Harry is one of seven high-profile claimants bringing legal action against Associated Newspapers over allegations of unlawful information gathering.
Read More: Netflix 'done' with Harry and Meghan after TV deal expires
Read More: Sussexes hit back at claim Camilla ‘told friend Harry was brainwashed by Meghan'
Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday, denies its journalists used private investigators to hack voicemails, intercept calls or blag private information.
Yanover, a former Met constable, had set up a private investigations firm while on sick leave and employed Burrows.
He was later sentenced to 27 months in prison for misconduct in public office, and has said he believes Burrows was the informant.
The 58-year-old told the court he had been approached by Johnson about the allegations involving Burrows, but denied he had been offered money to give evidence.
He said: “It's an opportunity to get my side of the story out. I have no grudge against Gavin Burrows. But people should be held to account.”
Burrows is due to give evidence next week.
The court has previously heard that his account sits at the centre of some of the most serious allegations in the case.
Associated Newspapers denies its journalists commissioned private detectives to hack voicemails or intercept calls.
The trial continues.