Even by the colourful standards of the case so far, it is one of the more memorable phrases.

According to Prince Harry‘s witness statement in his High Court battle with Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), the prince took view that his mother’s former butler, Paul Burrell, was an attention-seeking, self-interested ‘two-faced sh**’.

This was in 2003, shortly after Burrell had been on trial for allegedly selling Diana’s possessions – a case which collapsed.

Time passes and perspectives change. But the fury of the young prince (still a teenager at that point) as recorded in the court documents makes it clear how divisive a figure Burrell had become so soon after the death of Diana in 1997.

+8

Paul Burrell worked for Diana for 10 years until her death in 1997. Pictured: Diana, Princess of Wales with Burrell in 1994

+8

Prince Harry and Prince William on a walkabout ahead of the royal wedding of Harry and Meghan on May 18, 2018

+8

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle  announcing their engagement in Kensington Palace, London, in  November 2017

+8

Paul Burrell giving a thumb-up to the media as he leaves the Central Criminal Court on November 1, 2002

Paul Burrell, 64, served as a footman for the Queen before working for Diana for 10 years until her death in 1997.

It was previously believed that the Prince of Wales, 40, and the Duke of Sussex, 38, last met with the former butler in 1997 following their mother’s funeral.

But according to The Sun newspaper, the brothers held a secret meeting with Paul at Kensington Palace in 2017, ahead of Harry announcing his engagement to Meghan Markle, 41.

The source told the outlet that it was a ‘very low-key meeting’ that the royals held as they wanted to speak with ‘someone who had been close to their mother’, and felt there were aspects of the princess’ life they believed Paul could clarify for them.

‘They asked to keep it all under wraps and he respected that,’ the source added.

‘Paul was happy to tell them everything he knew and shed some light on their memories.’

The brothers previously accused Paul of a ‘cold and overt betrayal’ after he published his 2001 book A Royal Duty – which contained a raft of private revelations.

This year was turbulent, indeed, for the butler, who in January 2001, was awoken by Detective Chief Inspector Maxine de Brunner and three other police officers.

‘Do you have any items from Kensington Palace in this house?’ Burrell was asked.

‘No,’ he lied. He was then placed under arrest and a pre-dawn raid on his home near Runcorn in Cheshire began.

+8

Diana, Princess of Wales, and her butler, Paul Burrell, photographed in August 1997

+8

Prince William and Prince Harry riding ‘Nemesis’ at Alton Towers with Paul Burrell in 1994

It was revealed that rooms were filled with paintings, drawings, china and photographs that clearly belonged to Diana, who’d died three-and-a-half years before, and her children William and Harry.

Other items included signed photographs of Diana, the princess’s daily personal notes to William at school, and clothes belonging to her – including a blue-ribboned hat she’d worn during her visit with Prince Charles to South Korea in 1992.

That year, Mr Burrell was charged with theft of a total of 310 items, reportedly worth £5m, which were said to have been stolen from Kensington Palace, the Princess’ former London home.

He denied any impropriety and maintained the items were given to him by Diana.

The case against him had proceeded on the basis that he had not told anyone that he had kept items belonging to the princess.

The prosecution barrister, William Boyce QC, said that it had emerged that Mr Burrell had met with the Queen privately in December 1997 where he mentioned that he had taken some of the Princess’s papers for safekeeping.

Although after the raid on Mr Burrell’s house in January, The Prince of Wales’s private secretary informed The Queen’s private secretary that none of The Queen’s personal possessions had been found – providing no basis for any involvement in the police investigation.

In April of that year, the police outlined the possible charges and said that they were investigating whether Mr Burrell had been selling some of the items.

Later in September, a letter from Paul Burrell’s solicitor requested a meeting to discuss Paul Burrell’s life and service with the Royal Family, but this was declined as The Queen was not actively involved with the case.

In the autumn of 2001, The Queen’s private secretary was told informally by The Prince of Wales’s private secretary that the police had told Charles that they had evidence that Paul Burrell had been selling items from the Princess’s estate.

However, in the following year this was made clear during the trial that, contrary to their earlier advice, the police had no evidence that Mr Burrell had been selling the items in question.

On October 25, 2002, The Queen, Charles and Prince Philip had driven together to St Paul’s for a memorial service for the victims of the Bali bombing.

Driving past the Old Bailey, she asked why a crowd was standing outside. Charles answered that Paul Burrell was on trial. The Queen was apparently unaware that he was being prosecuted.

Then she mentioned that, some years before, Burrell had sought an audience with her to explain that he was caring for some of Diana’s papers, and she had agreed that he should do so.

Given the importance to the prosecution case of the question of whether or not Mr Burrell had told anyone that he had taken items from Kensington Palace, the relevance of this information was realised and quickly drawn to the attention of the police.

The prosecution barrister, William Boyce QC later told the Old Bailey: ‘In all the circumstances, the prosecution has concluded that the current trial is no longer viable because it has proceeded on a false premise that Mr Burrell had never told anyone that he was holding anything for safekeeping.

‘The prosecution consider that if the defence were to apply for the jury to be discharged, although it would be a matter for My Lady, the prosecution could not oppose that application’.

After hearing submissions from the prosecution and defence, the judge, Mrs Justice Rafferty, dismissed the jury and told Mr Burrell he was free to go on November 1, 2002.

If the trial had continued, the former butler would have been called to give evidence and may have faced questioning about his time in the Queen’s employment as well as Princess Diana’s.

+8

The front page of the Evening Standard on Friday, November 1, 2002

+8

Paul Burrell outside the Old Bailey after all charges against him were dropped

Outside the court, Mr Burrell said: ‘The Queen has come through for me. I’m thrilled, I’m so thrilled.’

Prince Harry is part of a group action against MGN alleging that the newspaper group stole or hacked private information which it then published. MGN deny the claim.

Speaking yesterday on GB news, Mr Burrell said Prince Harry’s description of him as defamatory and demanded an apology:

‘I’m finding this deeply upsetting and hurtful. I need to process what has been said. I think it is careless and callous, what Harry has said in court.

‘He seems to be living in an alternate world, a world which is deluded. He seems to be able to say whatever he can and whatever he wants to.’