A dramatic turn unfolded in London’s High Court as a central witness in the high-profile lawsuit involving Prince Harry dismissed crucial evidence attributed to him, claiming it was fabricated.

The case, brought by the Duke of Sussex alongside several prominent figures—including singer Elton John—targets the publisher Associated Newspapers, accusing its tabloids of engaging in widespread illegal information gathering over the past three decades. Allegations include phone hacking, surveillance, and deception.

However, on Monday, private investigator Gavin Burrows—a witness whose testimony could heavily influence the case—shocked the court by rejecting a statement previously submitted under his name. He insisted the document, which accused the publisher of extensive unlawful activities, was not his and bore a forged signature.

“This statement has nothing to do with me,” Burrows testified via video link from an undisclosed overseas location, citing safety concerns after receiving threats. He went further, telling the claimants’ legal team they had been “conned” and describing the case as “a pack of lies.”

The disputed statement, allegedly signed in 2021, forms a significant part of the claimants’ case. It claimed Burrows had conducted illegal operations—such as phone tapping and deception—on behalf of the publisher. But Burrows now says he only became aware of the document after reading about it in the media.

The courtroom exchanges grew tense as the claimants’ lawyer, David Sherborne, challenged Burrows’ credibility. Sherborne suggested the investigator changed his account after a fallout with journalist Graham Johnson, who had been assisting the claimants’ case.

Johnson previously told the court that Burrows had been paid £75,000 for involvement in potential book and documentary projects, and that their professional relationship broke down in early 2022. Burrows did not deny the fallout but maintained he had no knowledge his name would be used in the lawsuit until early 2023.

“I was absolutely furious,” he said, adding that he approached the publisher because he feared one of the claimants—campaigner Doreen Lawrence—was being misled.

The defense has consistently argued that the case is a coordinated attempt to undermine the press, even suggesting involvement from late privacy activist Max Mosley.

As the final witness in a trial that began in January, Burrows’ testimony could prove pivotal. Closing arguments are expected later this month. Photo by Bjørn Erik Pedersen, Wikimedia commons.