Prince Harry phone hacking witness: My confession was false

By Victoria Ward

The private investigator whose apparent "confession" prompted Prince Harry and others to sue the publisher of the Daily Mail has claimed that his pivotal witness statement was "completely false" and the signature "a forgery".

Gavin Burrows claimed that a witness statement dated August 2021, in which he appeared to admit targeting "a large number of private individuals" over a number of years by hacking phones and bugging cars, was "prepared by others without my knowledge".

Five of the seven claimants, including the Duke of Sussex, Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, have told the High Court they embarked on the high-profile legal action against Associated Newspapers Limited based on evidence apparently obtained by Mr Burrows.

Mr Burrows said he "felt very sorry" for Baroness Lawrence because she had been "duped into pursuing a claim on the basis of false information".

The private investigator has now drawn up a 30-page witness statement with the help of independent lawyers in which he says he "does not recognise" the "purported witness statement" issued in his name.

"I believe that my signature on that document is a forgery," he says, describing its various claims as "completely false", "complete rubbish" and "a complete fantasy".

In the statement dated September 25 2025, Mr Burrows describes how he was approached by Graham Johnson, a convicted phone hacker, who "would not leave me alone".

READ MORE: Meghan's unexpected mention of her and Harry's royal exit tour

READ MORE: Kate lays own Remembrance Day wreath for the first time in 14 years

READ MORE: Former prince Andrew's name to be changed again

Mr Johnson is said to have told Mr Burrows that he was working on phone hacking claims against newspapers and wanted some help with his research. He introduced him to a "paralegal" colleague called Dan Waddell, who paid him £600 every time he advised them.

On one occasion, according to Mr Burrows, Mr Johnson offered to pay him £3,000 to write a statement, later insisting it was just a joke.

"I remember they asked me on more than one occasion whether I had done any work for the Daily Mail," Mr Burrows says. "They told me that the Daily Mail was a major target. I told them repeatedly that I had not worked for the Mail."

Mr Burrows claims that Mr Johnson and Mr Waddell said newspapers "did not want the publicity or cost of a court case" so would pay to settle claims, a pattern Mr Waddell is said to have described as a "perfect scam" and "a gravy train".

Meanwhile, Mr Johnson is said to have spoken a lot about Max Mosley - the former president of the FIA, the Formula 1 motorsport body - and the money he was pumping into his business and the investigations, claiming that "there was plenty of money in the pool and there was always enough money for the right witness."

Mr Mosley, who won a privacy case against the News of the World after it exposed his sadomasochistic sex life, bankrolled a number of phone hacking cases against newspapers in the civil courts.

Mr Johnson introduced Mr Burrows to Anjlee Sangani, the solicitor who certified his disputed witness statement, and whom he says he met only twice.

Ms Sangani is instructed by Baroness Lawrence, Sir Elton, his husband David Furnish and Liz Hurley in the Associated claim.

When she visited Mr Burrows' house in early 2021, she brought "hundreds of pounds worth of flowers" for his house and a £200 bottle of whisky, he claims in his statement.

'They had the most money'

She allegedly told him to deal only with Mr Johnson, who would pay him cash, and promised a regular monthly retainer.

"I would get £5,000 a month for working a couple of days a week, and if I had any cash expenses, I only had to ask (Mr Johnson)," Mr Burrows writes. "She said that they were going after all the newspapers. She said that after the NOTW (News of the World), the main paper they were going after was the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday because they had the most money.

"She asked me if I had done any work for the Daily Mail or Mail on Sunday. I said no, I had not, but I had met with (journalist) Paul Henderson a couple of times."

Mr Henderson has denied commissioning Mr Burrows, the court has heard.

A few weeks later, Mr Burrows says he was summoned to a meeting with Ms Sangani and Mr Johnson in a London square, where they were joined by David Sherborne, the claimant's barrister.

According to Mr Burrows, Mr Sherborne asked him about his investigative techniques and how much he charged for surveillance before leaving.

In late 2021, Mr Johnson is said to have told Mr Burrows he had an idea for a Stephen Lawrence documentary and later asked him to go to Cyprus to track down one of the first CID officers on the scene, which he did.

In early 2023, he heard that Baroness Lawrence had brought a claim against Associated Newspapers based on evidence he had supposedly obtained from former police officers who had worked on the Lawrence murder investigation.

Mr Burrows contacted the Mail and wrote a statement dated March 2023, in which he categorically denied the claims made by Prince Harry and others, stating that he "was never instructed or commissioned by anyone at the Mail on Sunday or the Daily Mail to conduct unlawful information gathering on their behalf" and was never asked to target any of the claimants.

The claimants do not intend to call Mr Burrows because he has withdrawn his cooperation. They instead intend to rely on "hearsay evidence" in relation to his claims.

Antony White KC, for Associated, has applied to cross-examine the private investigator. He told the court on Tuesday that he wants to ask him if he had "recanted or disavowed his first statement".

The new witness statement was made public after an application to the judge. It was lodged with the court as an exhibit to a statement by a solicitor instructed by Associated seeking permission to cross-examine him.

View gallery

All the defining photos of the British royal family in 2025

Mr Sherborne did not oppose its release but asked for reporting to reflect his view "about the scurrilous nature of its contents". He described it as "a grotesque inclusion which is meant to be an attack on parts of the legal team", which "simply shouldn't be permitted".

The claimants, who also include Sadie Frost and Sir Simon Hughes, have accused Associated of carrying out or commissioning unlawful activities such as hiring private investigators to place listening devices inside cars, "blagging" private records and accessing and recording private phone conversations.

Associated has strongly refuted the allegations. A nine-week trial, projected to cost £38 million, is scheduled for January 2026.

© Telegraph Media Group Limited 2025

FOLLOW US ON WHATSAPP HERE: Stay across all the latest in celebrity, lifestyle and opinion via our WhatsApp channel. No comments, no algorithm and nobody can see your private details.