Private investigator says Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday were his “best customers” after conviction, high court told

A private investigator convicted of obtaining secret information unlawfully told the high court that the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday remained his “best customers” for nearly two years after his 2005 conviction. Steve Whittamore said his work for the titles’ publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), ran from 1998 to 2007. He described supplying names and addresses linked to phone numbers, criminal record checks, “blagged” personal data obtained by deception, and itemised phone bills. “Blagging” is the practice of obtaining confidential data by impersonation or deceit.

Daily Mail private investigator claims under scrutiny

In a written statement, Whittamore said some outlets stopped using him after his 2005 conviction and conditional discharge. However, he claimed the Mail titles continued to instruct him until April 2007. He added that he kept providing ex-directory numbers, mobile phone conversions and itemised billing inquiries using the same methods and some of the same subcontractors as before March 2003.

Seven claimants, including Prince Harry, are suing ANL for alleged unlawful information gathering, which the publisher denies. The case forms part of a wider trial testing historic newsroom practices and whether they crossed legal lines. A 2025 High Court ruling set the parameters for the litigation before this trial.

What Whittamore says journalists knew

Whittamore told the court he was in “no doubt” that journalists who used him regularly “knew” the material was obtained illegally. He said editors who sanctioned the requests understood he was a practitioner of the “dark arts.” He cited a 2003 “blag” relating to actor Sadie Frost, one of the claimants. ANL, in written submissions, noted it had acknowledged at the Leveson inquiry that it used “inquiry agents,” and that some had engaged in blagging, including Whittamore.

ANL response and Paul Dacre’s evidence

Appearing in court, former editor Paul Dacre said he banned private investigators in 2007. ANL argues the claimants are trying to link investigator invoices to contested stories without proof, calling the approach “guesswork.” During cross-examination, lead claimants’ barrister David Sherborne put invoices to Dacre and suggested they related to criminal record checks and vehicle registrations. Dacre said he did not handle invoices and stood by his Leveson evidence. Reporting from court also records Dacre’s position that he denied unlawful newsgathering and found some accusations “preposterous,” while acknowledging a later “gradual realisation” that some inquiry agents may have used illegal methods.

The judge’s steer and the legal test at trial

Tensions have risen between Sherborne and the judge, Mr Justice Nicklin. The judge has warned counsel to keep evidence tied to the seven claimants, not to run a de facto public inquiry into ANL. The trial continues, with the court weighing whether the evidence meets the civil standard and whether unlawful newsgathering can be proved in relation to specific stories and claimants.

Why it matters for press standards

The claims address conduct said to have spanned years and to have involved data offences such as blagging and unlawful access to phone records. If proved, they would raise serious questions about newsroom oversight and the use of third-party agents. ANL contests the allegations in full. The court’s findings will shape accountability for historical practices across Fleet Street and guide how publishers document sourcing, commission external checks and manage legal risk going forward.