A paparazzi agency has apologized to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle for its 'intrusive and illegal' photos of baby Archie
- Photo agency X17 has apologized to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle for its images of their son Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, The New York Times reports.
- The agency agreed to destroy the photos it took of Archie playing in the family's backyard, according to legal documents.
- Harry and Markle's lawyer Michael Kump called the photos "intrusive and illegal" in a statement.
- The agency agreed to a settlement that bans using drones and telephoto lenses to capture images of the family, according to the same documents.
Los Angeles paparazzi agency X17 has apologized to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after taking what the couple's lawyer has called "intrusive and illegal" photos of their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, The New York Times' Brooks Barnes reports.
The photos in question were taken while the toddler was playing with his grandmother Doria Ragland in the backyard of Harry and Markle's Beverly Hills home, according to legal documents reviewed by Insider.
"We apologize to The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their son for the distress we have caused," the agency, X17, said in a statement that a representative for Harry and Markle provided to Insider. "We were wrong to offer these photographs and commit to not doing so again."
According to legal documents the couple's representative shared with Insider, Harry and Markle found out about the existence of the photos this summer when they were being shopped to media outlets in the US and Europe. They then filed a civil case with the Los Angeles County Superior Court on July 23 for invasion of privacy.
"Paparazzi and media outlets have flown drones a mere 20 feet above Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan's home in Los Angeles to obtain photographs of the couple and their young son in their private residence, some of which have been sold and published," the legal complaint, viewed by Insider, read. "Others have flown helicopters at all hours of the day and night, waking neighbors and their son. Others have cut holes in the security fence to peer through it. All of this is in violation of the California civil code that protects individuals from photos being taken in their private homes, causing damages to the family."
The complaint argued that the couple is open to discussing their work in the media as they consider it newsworthy, but that these pictures are not.
"They are not in the public interest. They are harassment. The sole point to taking and/or selling such invasive photos is to profit from a child," the complaint said of the images taken of Archie. "Such sales, in turn, stoke the paparazzi market and lead to ever more harassment. The fact that the images at issue remain in the possession of an unknown adult, having already been shown and shared to hundreds if not thousands of potential buyers, is disgusting and wrong."
At the time Harry and Markle's case was filed, the listed defendants' exact identities were unclear and, as a result, were named as "John Does." The Times reported that Michael Kump, Harry and Markle's attorney, subpoenaed paparazzi photo agencies X17, Splash News, and Backgrid, to find out who took the pictures. The legal chase led them to X17, according to The Times.
On Thursday, X17 agreed to a permanent injunction that would bar them from taking any private photos of the family in the future. The terms of the settlement, per legal documents reviewed by Insider, explicitly ban all future use of any "zoom or telephoto lens, or drones" and requires that X17 gives the family the photos currently in their possession and that the agency destroys all copies of the photos in their library and archives. It also requires the agency to pay a portion of Harry and Markle's legal fees for the case, according to the documents reviewed by Insider.
"This is a successful outcome," Kump told Insider in a statement. "All families have a right, protected by law, to feel safe and secure at home."
Harry and Markle's relationship with the tabloids, particularly in the UK, has been frosty.
In April, the couple informed four prominent British tabloids — The Sun, the Mirror, the Express, and the Daily Mail — that they would no longer engage with them.
Markle also sued the Mail on Sunday, a sister publication of the Daily Mail, in October 2019 after it published parts of a handwritten letter she'd purportedly sent her father, Thomas Markle, in 2018. Markle lost the first stage of that court battle in May and paid the paper over $87,000 for legal fees. In September, a judge ruled that the paper could claim, as part of their defense, that Markle "collaborated" with authors of a book about her and Prince Harry's life.
Insider's royals reporter Mikhaila Friel published a staggering analysis in November 2019 that documented tabloids' differential treatment of Markle and the Duchess of Cambridge for similar things.
"Markle was criticized after her bodyguard asked fans not to take pictures of her at Wimbledon earlier this year, but Middleton was recently called 'down to earth' when she didn't allow pictures," Friel noted in one instance.