The Duke of Sussex told the court today that “whatever advantage people claimed I had by walking into a room as ‘Prince Harry’ was immediately flipped on its head”.

In his witness statement, the duke said this was “because I was facing judgments and opinions based on what had been reported about me, true or not”, adding: “I expected people to be thinking ‘he’s obviously going to fail this test, because he’s a thicko’.

“It meant that I felt that I never went in at the same level as everybody else because the spotlight was always on me.”

The duke added: “Having seen me grow up from a baby, being born into this ‘contractual relationship’ without any choice, and scrutinised my every move, the tabloids have known the challenges and mental health struggles that I have had to deal with throughout my childhood and adult life, and for them to then play on that and use it to their own advantage, I think is, well, criminal.”

Harry later said: “There also seems to be a real blurring of the lines in terms of what is in the public interest and what is of interest to the public. The tabloids concentrated on salacious stories about my relationships and so on to satisfy the latter while appearing to completely ignore the former, as a means of justifying their intrusion.”

Following Prince Harry’s appearance today, Sky News has hired an actor to portray a re-enactment of the Duke of Sussex in court.

The court finished for the day shortly after 4.30pm, with Mr Justice Fancourt telling Harry he must not discuss his evidence with anyone overnight.

Barrister Andrew Green KC concluded his cross-examination for the day by asking the duke about a 2005 article in the Sunday People about his then-girlfriend Chelsy Davy being on her gap year.

The duke appeared emotional as he responded to a question from Mr Green about when he first saw the article.

Harry’s voice seemed to crack as he replied: “I can’t remember when I first saw this article, but having to look at it now and see the level of detail ... is extra distressing.”

Prince Harry has admitted he and his brother William disagreed about their mother’s former butler Paul Burrell as he was asked about an article of the type he said caused “distrust”, as he was asked about supposed discrepancies in his autobiography and witness statement.

In cross-examination, barrister Andrew Green KC, for MGN, asked Harry about an article published in December 2003 about a possible meeting between himself, William and Mr Burrell.

In the article Harry was said to be firmly against meeting Mr Burrell and described him as a “two-faced s***”, and the duke said: “Those are words that I used and I certainly left voicemails on my brother’s phone.”

Mr Green asked: “Using that phrase?”, to which Harry replied: “Yes.”

The barrister then asked about a discrepancy between the duke’s witness statement, in which he says he “didn’t want to hear” Mr Burrell’s reasons for selling some of Diana’s possessions and giving interviews about her, and his memoir Spare, in which he says he wanted to fly home from his gap year job in the Australian outback to meet the former butler.

Harry said there was a “rather large [time] gap” between the article and writing his book.

Asked by Mr Green whether his “true” position was that, at the time, he did or did not want a meeting with Mr Burrell, the duke replied: “I honestly can’t remember whether I wanted a meeting or not.”

The barrister asked: “Is it your position that you do actually remember leaving a voicemail on William’s phone saying that?”, to which the duke responded: “I was leaving voicemails for my brother and that is the terminology I used for Burrell.”

However, he said he did not specifically recall leaving William a voice message saying that.

Prince Harry has said the thought of Piers Morgan and reporters at the Daily Mirror “earwigging into my mother’s private and sensitive messages” made him “physically sick”.

The High Court phone hacking trial heard on Monday that letters between Princess Diana and former television entertainer Michael Barrymore about their “highly sensitive meetings” show her private exchanges had been intercepted.

In his written witness statement in court on Tuesday, the Duke of Sussex said he was “shocked, disgusted and appalled” when he was shown the letters and said it was “safe to assume” his mother and Mr Barrymore would have been exchanging voicemails about their private meetings.

Harry said: “The thought of Piers Morgan and his band of journalists earwigging into my mother’s private and sensitive messages, in the same way as they have me, and then having given her a ‘nightmare time’ three months prior to her death in Paris, makes me feel physically sick and even more determined to hold those responsible, including Mr Morgan, accountable for their vile and entirely unjustified behaviour.”

My colleague Joe Middleton reports:

Prince Harry has been questioned about a three-line Mirror article in 2003 about him leading cadets at an Eton parade, which the barrister for Mirror Group Newspapers said stemmed from a St James Palace press release.

The MGN barrister said the Press Association news agency had reported about Harry leading the tattoo on the same day as the press release and had quoted an Eton spokesperson.

The court heard from Harry that he also complained about a Mirror article published on the same day about the same story.

He said he had brought a claim for damages over the articles “based on the legal advice that I have been given”.

In his written witness statement, he said of the journalist who wrote the second cadet parade story “that at least one of his bylined articles has previously been admitted by MGN to have been the product of unlawful information-gathering”.

Our video team has this live footage from outside the court where Prince Harry has been giving evidence in his case against Mirror Group Newspapers – becoming the first royal to undergo cross-examination in court in 130 years.

A barrister has suggested Prince Harry must “maintain focus” as she speaks of how “tough” cross-examination is but also of how significant it is to a case.

Samantha Woodham, Barrister at 4PB, explained: “It will be crucial in Prince Harry’s case for him to succeed in respect of the particular allegations he is making, so maintain focus on those.”

She described cross-examination as “tough” and said: “Barristers often say that the height of their case is the moment immediately before their client takes the stand, because if weaknesses in a case are going to be exposed, it will be during cross-examination.”

The Duke of Sussex claimed that “a lot of false information” was put into articles “to put people like myself off the scent”.

He told the court this was done to “cover up the true unlawful means” and that while some elements were true, this was “clouded, shrouded” by the false information.