
How Prince Harry was the victim of an elaborate HOAX phone call with 'Greta Thunberg'
It can be easy to fall for a prank phone call and say things you shouldn't.
But for Prince Harry, who has been trained for the public eye his entire life, his foolishness when it came to pranksters made the national press.
His candid views came during two revealing conversations with hoax callers on New Year's Eve and January 22 in 2020 in which he gave an extraordinary insight into his state of mind during Megxit.
Picking up the phone in his Canada home, Harry believed he was speaking to Swedish activist Greta Thunberg and her father Svante.
But in reality - he was duped by Russians Vladimir Kuznetsov and Alexey Stolyarov, who posted the footage online.
Historian and biographer Robert Lacey, who was a historical advisor to the Netflix series The Crown, wrote about the fateful phone call in his book Battle of the Brothers.
Harry had been 'coaxed into some embarrassingly frank disclosures that he knew were on their way into the public realm,' Lacey claimed.
The bogus phone call came from the same Russian tricksters who had previously convinced Elton John he was on the phone to Putin about how to promote gay rights in Russia.
But for Harry, the Russian pranksters had enlisted a female accomplice to impersonate climate activist Greta Thunberg - the same ruse that would also fool Bernie Sanders.
Vladimir 'Vovan' Kuznetsov and Alexei 'Lexus' Stolyarov, called Prince Harry twice on a landline at his home on Vancouver Island. The pair then allegedly animated the conversation and posted it on YouTube
The young climate change fighter had been one of the faces on the cover of Meghan's 'Forces for CHANGE' issue of Vogue, meaning a call from Thunberg was not off the cards for Harry.
While Harry dodged questions about the scandal surrounding Prince Andrew, he embarrassingly revealed he did not know where penguins lived.
'Greta' had asked for help rescuing 50 penguins from customs in Belarus and return them to their native home, the South Pole.
'I do have a man who deals with the North Pole,' Harry helpfully replied.
But the Russian hoaxers didn't stop at asking Harry about the environment - they managed to get him to condemn Donald Trump as a man who had 'blood on his hands' and to condemn his fossil fuel policy.
Harry said: 'I think the mere fact that Donald Trump is pushing the coal industry is so big in America, he has blood on his hands.
'Because the effect that has on the climate and the island nations far, far away, again out of sight out of mind.
The Russian pranksters claimed to be Greta and her father Svante, pictured
Harry had been 'coaxed him into some embarrassingly frank disclosures that he knew were on their way into the public realm,' Lacey claimed
'But we've visited those places and I'm sure you have as well. People's lives have been completely destroyed.
'People are dying every single month by some form of natural disaster created from this huge change in our climate.'
When asked about Prince Andrew's relationship with Jeffery Epstein, Harry was quite circumspect.
He said: 'I have very little to say on that.
'But whatever he has done or hasn't done, is completely separate from me and my wife. We operate in a way of inclusivity and we are focusing on community.
'And so we are completely separate from the majority of my family.'
The pranksters told Harry that Donald Trump had run away from 'Greta'.
Harry responded: 'What a surprise. But Trump will want to meet you to make him look better but he won't want to have a discussion about climate change with you because you will outsmart him.
Harry told the prankster, who he believed was Greta Thunberg (pictured in 2024), that he had little to say on Prince Andrew's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein
'Whether you have an option to meet President Trump or an option to meet Boris Johnson, I think I would always.
'It's far more important to have an open dialogue and have conversation with these people than not.'
He urged the fake 'Greta' to seek a meeting with Boris Johnson, claiming: 'I think he is a good man, so you are one of few people who can reach into his soul and get him to feel and believe in you.
'But you have to understand that because he has been around for so long like all of these other people, they are already set in their ways.
'They believe what they want to believe, they believe what they have been told.
'What you are now saying to them is not only inconvenient but is completely against everything they have ever believed.
'So that is what you're up against, up against changing habits, as you know.'
Shockingly Harry did not catch on to the pranksters or appear concerned when the fake 'Greta' spoke about an arranged marriage to the then six-year-old Prince George.
Harry is not the only royal to have fallen for bogus calls with the Queen once being convinced she was talking to the then-Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien.
The two spoke for 17-minute over the phone at Buckingham Palace in which she agreed to deliver a television address calling for national unity.
When asked about Meghan, Harry admitted candidly that 'marrying a prince or princess isn't all it's made up to be' and that their new life in Canada is 'much better' than serving as senior royals.
Harry also insisted that his military service had made him 'more normal than my family would like to believe'.
Lacey wrote: 'Harry and his new royal minders had been appallingly lax. There had been phone calls from the practical jokers to the Sussexes' landline in Vancouver.
'The hoaxers would never have been able to get through the Buckingham Palace switchboard.'
The Queen's former press secretary Dickie Arbiter said: 'If you're outside the system, you're open to anything.
'For all of its faults, the system does, and is there to, protect.'
The entire conversation went online and was splashed across the papers.
But Lacey wrote: 'The paradox of all this relentless trickery was that Prince Harry would eventually emerge from his poisonous encounter with a certain amount of credit.
'The Russian pranksters had succeeded in coaxing him to speak from the heart.'
'Being in a different position now gives us the ability to say things and do things that we might not have been able to do,' said Harry at the time.
The prince emerged from the 'Greta' ordeal with an even stronger hatred for the press, one of the reasons for his leaving the UK, according to Lacey.
In his call to 'Greta' he said: 'The best advice I can give on that is to be able to see through the fear.
'For most, all of my life, I've always been part of a family and part of a country that is scared of the tabloid media because they have so much power and influence and no morals (chuckles).
'From the moment that I found a wife that was strong enough to be able to stand up for what we believe in together, has basically scared them so much that they've now come out incredibly angry, they've come out fighting, and all they will try and do now is try and destroy our reputation and try and, you know, sink us.
'But what they don't understand is the battle we are fighting against them is far more than just us.
'So I think one of the, what I've always believed, one of the strongest ways to change mindset and be able to raise consciousness and be able to create self-awareness among people, is to challenge the media and say you have a responsibility and you are accountable for everything you are feeding people because you are brainwashing people, so this is far bigger than just us.
'Even though they want to make it personal they are scared because we are some of the first two people willing to stand up to their bullying and my wife, we can't stand back.'
But for the Sussexes, their news was quickly overshadowed by the news of Covid which took the attention away from Harry's blunder.
As Lacey wrote, the pandemic was 'a threat to civilised existence that was even greater than Meghan and her rebellious prince'.
Since the notorious calls there have been well-publicised and lengthy legal battles for the Sussexes' security.
After stepping back from official duties, the duke and duchess were no longer given the security arrangements provided for senior royals.
Harry said it was too dangerous to bring his family back to the UK without adequate police protection and took the Government to court.
He was prompted to sue the Home Office but said he had been 'overwhelmed' by the legal action, which has lasted more than three years.
Harry's battle for more security continues - but it is likely this prank call has made him more diligent when it comes to screening phone calls and who he opens up to.
What Harry said to fake Greta Thunberg after her was duped into opening up on Megxit, the royals, Trump, Boris and climate change
On Megxit
'You can call me whatever you want — Harry is fine. [Asked about Megxit]. Um, it's, that's probably a conversation for another time, there's lots of layers to it and lots of pieces to the puzzle.
'But sometimes the right decision isn't always the easy one.
'I can assure you, marrying a Prince or Princess is not all it's made out to be!
'And this decision certainly wasn't the easy one but it was the right decision for our family, the right decision to be able to protect my son.
'And I think there's a hell of a lot of people around the world that can identify and respect us for putting our family first.
'But, yeah, it's a tricky one, but we will start a new life.'
On their new life in Canada
'Oh no, I think it's much better (than royal life). You forget, I was in the military for ten years so I'm more normal than my family would like to believe.
'But certainly being in a different position now gives us the ability to say things and do things that we might not have been able to do.
'And seeing as everyone under the age of 35 or 36, seems to be carrying out an activist's role, gives us the opportunity to try and make more of a difference without being criticised (chuckles)'.
On being stripped of titles and losing royal privileges
'No, no, again you mustn't believe what you read, no one has stripped us of our titles.
'Because of a technicality within the family, if we are earning money separately from within the family structure, then we obviously have been asked not to use our titles in order to make money, which we would never do.
'But the press managed to jump on that to make it look like we had been stripped.'
On charity work
'I think at the moment, my wife and I, we were being directed towards starting a foundation but we actually decided there is probably enough foundations out there doing amazing work.
'And there's a hell of a lot of money being passed around the world and there are so many problems but we thought we'd just take a moment and see if there was some form of other organisation or different entity we could create that could bring people together, rather than us just starting a foundation. We don't think the world needs necessarily another foundation from us.
'So we are just taking a little bit more time to think about how we can use our platform and how we can use our voice to try and encourage real change and real difference as opposed to, you know, small incremental changes.
'As we all know, the world's problems seem to be getting bigger and seem to be happening far quicker . . . I think the solutions are far quicker to enable as well, but there needs to be a real shift in mindset. We try and do our best.
'I've spent many, many years being criticised by the media for doing all sorts of things and trying to change the way we think, um, and I can sympathise but at the same time applaud the work that all of you are doing because it's not an easy time and the world is a troubled place and can be very easy to give up and I think what you guys are doing absolutely remarkable'.
On Donald Trump
'The mere fact that Donald Trump is pushing the coal industry is so big in America, he has blood on his hands.
'But Trump will want to meet you to make him look better but he won't want to have a discussion about climate change with you because you will outsmart him.
'Whether you have an option to meet President Trump or an option to meet Boris Johnson, I think I would always.
'It's far more important to have an open dialogue and have conversation with these people than not'
On Prince Andrew
'I have very little to say on that.
'But whatever he has done or hasn't done, is completely separate from me and my wife. We operate in a way of inclusivity and we are focusing on community. And so we are completely separate from the majority of my family.'
On Boris Johnson
'I think he is a good man, so you are one of few people who can reach into his soul and get him to feel and believe in you.
'But you have to understand that because he has been around for so long like all of these other people, they are already set in their ways.
'They believe what they want to believe, they believe what they have been told.
'What you are now saying to them is not only inconvenient but is completely against everything they have ever believed.
'So that is what you're up against, up against changing habits, as you know'.
On the climate
'Unfortunately, the world is being led by some very sick people, so people like yourselves and (the) younger generation are the ones that are going to make all the difference.
'People need to be woken up and the only way to wake people up from what effectively is a consciousness crisis is, I think, you need to be doing extreme things.
'What you need to do is make real big changes that actually shock people, and it's that shock factor that wakes people up.'
On the Election
'The fact that our choice was between those two individuals in my mind, I think, probably creates more of an observation that the system itself might be broken.
'There's a lot that the leaders of today can learn and can listen to people like yourself.'
On using private jets
'Unfortunately there is very few alternatives. We have to fly on commercial planes all over the world. Nowhere near as much as most people who do it for a night or weekends.
'Certainly for my family, to protect my family, from these people, as you can well understand.
'I have to put protections and safety of my family first and these people are never-ending.'
On the media
'The best advice I can give on that is to be able to see through the fear.
'What they don't understand is the battle we are fighting against them is far more than just us.
'So I think one of the, what I've always believed, one of the strongest ways to change mindset and be able to raise consciousness and be able to create self-awareness among people, is to challenge the media and say you have a responsibility and you are accountable for everything you are feeding people because you are brainwashing people, so this is far bigger than just us.'
Bizarre exchange on Greta marrying Prince George
Fake Greta says she a distant member of the Swedish royal family
Harry replies with a chuckle: 'Oh wow, so we are related?'
Greta says: 'Yeah its true, and if it will help me in fighting for climate change, should I arrange a dynastic marriage, do you think? I think it'll help.'
The prince is heard responding: 'I am certain it'll help'
The giggling 'Greta' - aged 17 - then says: 'I found some candidates that suits me - James Windsor and Prince George. Their ages I think are very suitable for my marriage. It will help..'
Harry then replies laughing: 'I am sure I can help.'
On moving penguins to the North Pole
A Russian translation of the words shows her asking: 'Now we are dealing with an issue of moving penguins from Belarus to their native land, the North Pole.
'About 50 penguins were stuck at customs in Belarus.
'That's terrible. And we are searching for some ship maybe to transport these poor penguins to their native land.'
Greta's fake father then said: 'North Pole...perhaps you have some contacts for people who can help us?'
Harry replies: 'I do have a man who deals with the North Pole.
'He is in Norway, he can help as maybe he knows all the right people. I'll give you the contacts on email.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
What to know about Harvey Weinstein's conviction on a top sex crimes charge at his #MeToo retrial
Harvey Weinstein has been found guilty again, convicted Wednesday of a top sex crimes charge at his #MeToo retrial in New York City. The mixed and partial verdict came more than five years after his first conviction, which an appeals court overturned last year. The jury returned a verdict on two of three charges against Weinstein, acquitting him of one. Jurors indicated that they had yet to achieve unanimity on the final count. That could mean more deliberations on Thursday. The verdict capped an extraordinary fifth day of deliberations. The jury foreperson complained that he was being bullied by other jurors. Weinstein's lawyer then asked for a mistrial, and Weinstein himself addressed the judge without jurors in the courtroom, imploring him to end the case without a verdict. Minutes later, the jury of seven women and five men declared the ailing 73-year-old guilty of one count of criminal sex act, which carries a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. Weinstein denies raping or sexually assaulting anyone. Once he's sentenced, he can appeal. Here's what you need to know about the verdict: What was Weinstein convicted of? Jurors convicted Weinstein of one count of criminal sex act, finding that he forcibly performed oral sex on a TV and movie producer and production assistant, Miriam Haley, nearly two decades ago. Haley, who had a short stint working on the Weinstein-produced 'Project Runway,' testified that he assaulted her in July 2006 after inviting her to stop by his SoHo apartment before a flight his company booked her on the next day to Los Angeles to attend a movie premiere. Haley testified that Weinstein backed her into a bedroom, pushed her onto a bed and forced oral sex on her, undeterred by her kicks and pleas of, 'No, no — it's not going to happen.' Weinstein was convicted of the same charge at his first trial. Haley, who has also gone by the name Mimi Haleyi, told jurors that she was never interested in any sexual or romantic relationship with Weinstein but still wanted his help professionally. She acknowledged she kept in touch and exchanged warm messages with him and accepted an invitation to his hotel room two weeks after the alleged assault, when she said he pulled her into bed for sex. What was Weinstein acquitted of? Weinstein acquitted of a charge of criminal sex act relating to a previously uncharged allegation that he forced oral sex on Kaja (KEYE'-ah) Sokola, a psychologist and former Polish model and actor, at a Manhattan hotel in 2006 just before her 20th birthday. Sokola, who wasn't a part of Weinstein's first trial, testified that Weinstein assaulted her after luring her to his hotel room by telling her had a script to show her. As he pushed her onto a bed, stripped off her boots, her stockings and her underwear, 'my soul was removed from me," she said. Now 39, Sokola said he held her down while ignoring her pleas of 'please don't, please stop, I don't want this.' She said she tried to push him away but was no match against the much larger Weinstein. Sokola also testified that Weinstein sexually assaulted her when she was 16 years old, but that allegation was beyond legal time limits for a potential criminal charge. Sokola said she stayed in touch with Weinstein because she had dreams of an acting career. She went to authorities in January 2020, a few days into Weinstein's first trial. Prosecutors halted their investigation after Weinstein was convicted, but revived it when the verdict was thrown out last year. What charge hasn't been decided yet? The jury hasn't reached a verdict on a third-degree rape charge involving Jessica Mann's allegation that Weinstein assaulted her in March 2013. Mann, a cosmetologist and hairstylist, said she met Weinstein at a party in late 2012 or early 2013, when she was 27 and trying to launch an acting career. She alleges Weinstein trapped her in a Manhattan hotel room, demanded that she undress as he loomed over her, grabbed her arms and raped her after, she believes, he injected himself with an erection-promoting drug that she later found in the bathroom trash. Mann said she had a consensual, on-and-off relationship with the then-married Weinstein, but that he was volatile and violated her if she refused him. She said she kept in touch with Weinstein after the alleged rape, telling jurors she 'compartmentalized the part of Harvey that was hurting me,' and that flattery and friendliness 'kept the peace.' The Associated Press generally does not name sexual assault accusers without their permission, which Haley, Mann and Sokola have given. Why was there a new trial? New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, threw out Weinstein's conviction in April 2024. In a 4-3 decision, the court said the judge in the first trial, James Burke, denied Weinstein a fair trial by letting three women testify about allegations that didn't result in charges and by deciding that prosecutors could confront Weinstein, if he testified, about stories of him behaving brutishly. The court labeled the allegations against Weinstein 'appalling, shameful, repulsive conduct' but warned that 'destroying a defendant's character under the guise of prosecutorial need' did not justify some trial evidence and testimony. Burke's term expired at the end of 2022, and he is no longer a judge. Prosecutors were not allowed to retry Weinstein on charges that he was acquitted of during his first trial, including predatory sexual assault and one count of first-degree rape. What about Weinstein's other criminal case? Weinstein is appealing his conviction in Los Angeles in a similar case in 2022. Jurors there found him guilty of three of seven charges, including rape, and he was sentenced to 16 years in prison. Weinstein's lawyers argued he did not get a fair trial. They contend that the judge in the California case wrongly allowed jurors to know about Weinstein's 2020 New York conviction, and that the jury was unfairly prejudiced by testimony from women about alleged assaults Weinstein was not charged with. __ Associated Press journalists Ruth Brown and Philip Marcelo contributed to this report.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Ncuti Gatwa spoke at pro-Palestine rally outside Parliament just days after sudden on-screen exit as Doctor Who
As the BBC 's Doctor Who, Ncuti Gatwa came under fire when he mysteriously pulled out of his Eurovision hosting duties moments after Israel qualified last month. Now it can be revealed that three days after the actor departed Doctor Who, he spoke at a pro-Palestine demonstration outside parliament. On 3 June, the actor, 32, stood in front of a banner reading ' Gaza: Actions Not Words' and delivered a speech to hundreds of people at the Westminster event, organised by Choose Love – a charity that this week supported Greta Thunberg 's 'selfie yacht' trip to Gaza. Gatwa had withdrawn from his role as a Eurovision Grand Final spokesman just 18 days before his speech at the rally. It has prompted renewed speculation as to his motivation for pulling out of the role and whether the BBC was aware that he would do so if Israel qualified. He had been due to announce the UK jury's points during the live broadcast but was replaced at short notice by singer Sophie Ellis-Bextor, 46. The BBC made the change public only two minutes after Israel qualified for the final – prompting speculation that his withdrawal was a protest. The broadcaster cited 'unforeseen circumstances' as the reason. The timing raised eyebrows, as Israel's contestant, Yuval Raphael – a survivor of the October 7 Nova music festival attack – secured her place in the final that same evening. Gatwa has previously expressed support for the Palestinian cause on social media, sharing images of 'Free Palestine' graffiti and promoting fundraising campaigns. The Rwanda-born, Scotland-raised actor made history as the first Black actor to lead Doctor Who, taking on the role of the Fifteenth Doctor in 2023. However, his tenure ended after just two series, making him the second shortest-serving Doctor in the show's history – only Christopher Eccleston's single-series run was shorter. Gatwa's departure was announced in May 2025, when his character regenerated into Rose Tyler played by Billie Piper, 42, ending his 18-month stint in the Tardis. One attendee at the Westminster rally told the Mail: 'He actually read out the names of deceased Palestinian children from his mobile. 'Ncuti appears unaware that, despite his support for Palestine, he could face serious risks in parts of the Middle East. Given the timing – coming so soon after the Eurovision controversy and his abrupt departure from Doctor Who – his appearance may reflect a belief that his position at the BBC had become untenable.' He was joined at the rally by comedian Alexei Sayle and his former Doctor Who co-star Varada Sethu. Sethu, 33, who played companion Belinda Chandra in Doctor Who, who left the sci-fi show at the time as Gatwa, also spoke at the rally.


BreakingNews.ie
an hour ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Ex-girlfriend made to read out loving texts she sent to accused rapper Combs
A defence lawyer for hip-hop entrepreneur Sean 'Diddy' Combs had his ex-girlfriend read aloud a series of loving text messages she sent him over the past few years until she broke down in tears on Wednesday. The second day of cross-examination by lawyer Teny Geragos seemed aimed at supporting the defence position that the woman, who testified under the pseudonym 'Jane', was a willing participant in the sometimes-weekly sex with male sex workers that Combs directed and watched for hours. Advertisement Ms Geragos and Jane read aloud dozens of text messages exchanged during a relationship that stretched from 2021 until Combs was arrested last September. At one point, Jane read a text saying she had 'never had a man take care of me like you do' and professing her unending love for the entertainment icon – before Jane stopped reading and began sniffling, then dabbed tears from her eyes with a tissue. Sean Combs denies the charges (Mark Von Holden/Invision/AP) After prosecutors objected and requested a sidebar conversation with the judge away from the jury, Jane sat slumped in the witness chair, hair hanging over one side of her face. At the defence table, Combs was quietly reading from one of the TV monitors in front of him. Advertisement It was the fifth day of testimony for Jane, who has said she still loves Combs. She previously discussed gaining insight into her relationship with Combs after three months of therapy. Jane also said she never wanted to have sex with any man except Combs but did so to please him. At other points on Wednesday, Ms Geragos elicited from Jane that she frequently became angry at Combs and wanted to end their relationship because she got upset that he was treating other girlfriends better. In one instance, Jane acknowledged, the Bad Boy Records founder even bought another girlfriend jewellery that was a matching set to jewellery he had given her. Advertisement Prosecutors say they charged Combs with sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy because he used threats, drugs and violence to force women into unwelcome sexual experiences and used his employees and associates to help him get what he wanted. Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty. If convicted, he faces 15 years to life in prison. The testimony on Wednesday came during a shortened day in the courtroom that began in the afternoon. Ms Geragos said she expected to finish her cross-examination Thursday morning. Assistant US Attorney Maurene Comey, who is leading the prosecution, said the government expects to rest its case as early as next Wednesday. Advertisement Defence lawyer Marc Agnifilo would not outline what will occur when the defence gets its turn to call witnesses, saying that will depend on which witnesses the government still calls to the stand, but he said he was confident the trial will end by July 4.