A private investigator has told the High Court that the signature on a witness statement allegedly given by him, which features extensive admissions of phone-hacking for the Mail on Sunday, was faked.
The signature on the 2021 statement allegedly given to Prince Harry’s legal team looks nothing like the signature Burrows gave in 2025 in a fresh statement made in support of Associated Newspapers’ defence (see picture above).
Seven people, including the Duke of Sussex, Sir Elton John and actress Sadie Frost, are suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over claims of unlawful information gathering, which the publisher denies.
The 2021 Burrows statement appears to have been a key reason for claimants taking the decision to sue ANL.
It quotes Burrows as saying he was commissioned by Mail on Sunday investigations editor Paul Henderson hundreds of times between 2000 and 2005.
The statement says: “I did Hugh Grant’s voicemails, and landline tapped and bugged him constantly for Hendo…
“I did a lot on Liz Hurley for Hendo. Lots of landline taps on her home phone and voicemail hacking. Also lots of financial checks, travel blagging and medicals when she was having her baby.
“On Liz I remember Hendo ringing me up to put a window mic on her home window in London…
“I hard-wired tapped Elton and David’s place in Windsor as well especially the landlines of their people on the grounds (like the gardener) or at their own homes…
“I remember putting hardwire taps on and voicemail hacking his friend Guy Pelly and doing loads on Chelsy Davy when he was with her….
“I also did a lot of work on Sadie Frost – landline taps, voicemail hacks, travel and credit card checks on her, Jude Law and their celeb pals….
“I targeted hundreds, possibly thousands of people during my time working for Hendo at the Mail on Sunday. There pretty much wasn’t a week that went by during that time when I didn’t have a hardwire tap on somebody, on instruction from Hendo.”
Henderson told the court last month that the disputed 2021 statement was a “litany of lies” and that it was “absolutely incorrect” that he had commissioned Burrows to carry out unlawful activities.
Burrows gave evidence voluntarily via a video link from an undisclosed location abroad on Monday, telling the court that he was there “working for British interests” and that “by no means am I avoiding anything. I am here to help”.
Discussing the 2021 statement, he said: “I did not write the statement, I don’t recognise anything in the statement.
“You can tell that that is not even a proper signature. I can tell that it was faked and traced.”
“I only read about my statement a year-and-a-half later in the newspaper,” he added, later telling the court: “There has been this whole kind of theatre built around me that I can easily prove wrong.”
Burrows continued that he worked for several organisations between 2000 and 2003, but that the News of the World and the Sunday People were “the only two newspapers I ever worked for”.
Burrows also said that the proposition that he was involved in “computer hacking” was “quite laughable”, and that the situation was “a bit not real”.
The purported 2021 statement said he offered a “price menu” for services and that tapping landlines was his “USP”.
In a written statement in September 2025, Burrows said he “did not recognise” the 2021 statement and that its contents were “substantially untrue”, adding that its signature was forged and that he believed it was “prepared by others without my knowledge”.
He continued: “I never carried out any work for the Mail on Sunday or the Daily Mail between 2000 and 2005 or at any other stage, save for one informal job relating to Richard Branson in 2000, which did not involve any illegal activity.”
Burrows told the High Court on Monday that he thought the claimants had “been seriously misled” during the proceedings, adding that Baroness Doreen Lawrence “had been conned”.
Barrister David Sherborne, acting for the claimants, previously said in written submissions that it was “impossible” for the signature on the 2021 statement to have been forged, and that the allegation was “wild and unsubstantiated”.
He continued that the statement was Burrows’ “true evidence”, and that it contained “consistent, detailed, candid statements which it is submitted are plainly in Mr Burrows’ own words”.
Sherborne said Burrows had admitted that “he unlawfully obtained information for several of the unlawful articles published” by ANL.
The trial before Mr Justice Nicklin is due to conclude this month.
The post Signature on crucial Prince Harry privacy case statement ‘forged’, says key witness appeared first on Press Gazette.
