
Private messages described as flirtatious between Prince Harry and British journalist Charlotte Griffiths have been made public as part of a legal battle against Associated Newspapers Limited , which owns the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday .
The release of these communications is intended to contradict Harry's statement in court, in which he claimed to have met the journalist only once and cut off all contact once he learned of her profession. However, the new evidence presents a different version of events.
According to Griffiths' testimony, their relationship began in 2011, when the prince added her as a friend on Facebook and sent her his personal number. That same year, they met at a party that lasted all night, and the following morning they exchanged flirtatious messages.
“ Hello, Mr. Naughty… What a crazy and fun weekend ,” she wrote, while Harry replied that it was “ without a doubt one of the best weekends ” he had ever had. In another message, he invited her to another party, telling her that she had missed out on a nice evening.
Their communication appears to have continued into 2012. In one of the messages, Griffiths wrote that she missed him, while Harry responded by mentioning his commitments and adding that he would have liked to be present at some events. The messages, according to reports, also included intimate notes and ended with kisses.
View this post on Instagram
Prince Harry, on the other hand, has stated that their meeting took place at the home of producer Arthur Landon and that at the time he was unaware that Griffiths was a journalist. He has insisted that contact was cut off as soon as he learned this fact.
The legal case is part of a wider lawsuit in which the Duke of Sussex and several other plaintiffs accuse Associated Newspapers Limited of unlawfully collecting information since the 1990s, including wiretapping and intercepting private communications. The company has denied the allegations, calling them defamation.
The case continues to attract international media attention, shedding light not only on the personal relationships of public figures, but also on the limits of privacy in the digital age.


