Elton John tells UK privacy trial he was ‘incensed’ by Daily Mail hacking allegations

Singer Elton John told London’s High Court on Friday he was incensed to learn of allegations his landline phones had been bugged on behalf of the Daily Mail, saying the papers’ actions were “outside even the most basic standards of human decency”.

The veteran singer, known for hits such as “Rocket Man” and “Your Song”, is suing Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail, for alleged widespread privacy intrusions along with his husband David Furnish, Prince Harry and four others.

Associated denies allegations of phone hacking and other unlawful acts, saying its newspapers’ stories were based on information which was already in the public domain or obtained from legitimate sources, such as celebrities’ “leaky” social circles.

It has called the claims “preposterous smears”.

JOHN SAYS HE WAS ‘OUTRAGED’

John, who appeared by videolink wearing a blue shirt and green jacket, said he had only learned of the Mail’s alleged wrongdoing when he was told by his close friend, actor Elizabeth Hurley, who is another of the claimants.

Hurley had been informed by a private investigator that John’s landline phones had been bugged when she was staying with him shortly after the birth of her son.

The evidence from the private investigator is one of the main issues of contention in the case as, having originally given a statement in support of the claimants, he has now retracted it and cast doubt on its authenticity.

“When we realised the seriousness of what had happened .. We were outraged,” said John, who has sold more than 300 million records over a six-decade career.

John, who said he did not own a mobile phone, said that while Hurley was staying with him his three landline phones were “hacked”.

“I was incensed,” said the singer, who apologised for having to appear by videolink because “the inconvenience of my eyesight” meant he was not able to attend in person.

“I’ve never been afraid of fighting my corner … with the British press when I think I’ve been treated badly or there’s been an injustice.”

Associated’s lawyer Catrin Evans questioned John about some of the 10 articles published between 2002 and 2015, putting to him that information might have come from his own spokesperson or other lawful sources, such as his circle of friends.

“My friends do not talk to the press and that is why they are still my friends to put it bluntly,” John said, later saying Evans was “clutching at straws” and asked why she was not focusing on the “horrendous things” Associated had done.

One of the articles he and Furnish complain about relates to a 2010 article about the couple having had a child through surrogacy, saying the Mail obtained a copy of their son’s birth certificate before they did.

“It has been truly sickening for David and me to see the disclosure in our case, with Zachary as a target when he was just born, with David and me as targets, with me as a target when I was sick and unwell,” John wrote in his witness statement.

“I have found The Mail’s deliberate invasion into my medical health and medical details surrounding the birth of our son Zachary abhorrent and outside even the most basic standards of human decency.”

John is the last of the seven claimants to give evidence, with the nine-week trial due to conclude next month.