This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19364261#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Naked Prince Harry Vegas photos published by the Sun Naked Prince Harry Vegas photos published by the Sun
(40 minutes later)
The Sun has published the naked pictures of Prince Harry, making it the first British newspaper to do so. The Sun has become the first British newspaper to publish the photos of a naked Prince Harry taken in Las Vegas.
Owner News International said it was making the move despite warnings from the Royal Family's lawyers that it would be an invasion of his privacy.Owner News International said it was making the move despite warnings from the Royal Family's lawyers that it would be an invasion of his privacy.
The Sun said the images were widely available around the world and its readers had a right to see them. The Sun said the images were already widely available around the world and its readers had a right to see them.
The pictures emerged from a private weekend the prince spent in Las Vegas and first appeared on US website TMZ.The pictures emerged from a private weekend the prince spent in Las Vegas and first appeared on US website TMZ.
The two photos of the prince and a naked woman in a hotel room are believed to have been taken on a camera phone last Friday while he was on a private weekend break with friends. The two photos of the prince and a naked woman in a hotel room are believed to have been taken on a camera phone last Friday while he was on a break with friends.
David Dinsmore, managing editor of the Sun, said the paper had thought "long and hard" about publication. In Friday's Sun, under the headline "Heir it is", the paper describes says "Pic of naked Harry you've already seen on the internet".
He said: "For us this is about the freedom of the press. David Dinsmore, managing editor of the Sun, said the paper had thought "long and hard" about publication and added: "For us this is about the freedom of the press.
"This is about the ludicrous situation where a picture can be seen by hundreds of millions of people around the world on the internet but can't be seen in the nation's favourite paper read by eight million people every day."This is about the ludicrous situation where a picture can be seen by hundreds of millions of people around the world on the internet but can't be seen in the nation's favourite paper read by eight million people every day.
"This is about our readers getting involved in the discussion with the man who is third in line to the throne - it's as simple as that.""This is about our readers getting involved in the discussion with the man who is third in line to the throne - it's as simple as that."
St James's Palace had contacted the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) on Wednesday because it had concerns about the prince's privacy being intruded upon, in breach of the editors' code of practice. In an editorial, the newspaper said the pictures were a crucial test of Britain's free press.
St James's Palace had contacted the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) on Wednesday because it had concerns about the 27-year-old prince's privacy being intruded upon, in breach of the editors' code of practice.
The palace said it had heard a number of UK newspapers were considering using the pictures.The palace said it had heard a number of UK newspapers were considering using the pictures.
In reaction to the Sun's decision, a palace spokesman said: "We have made our views on Prince Harry's privacy known. Newspapers regulate themselves, so the publication of the photographs is ultimately a decision for editors to make."In reaction to the Sun's decision, a palace spokesman said: "We have made our views on Prince Harry's privacy known. Newspapers regulate themselves, so the publication of the photographs is ultimately a decision for editors to make."
The Sun said in a statement: "The Sun is publishing the naked Prince Harry party pictures our readers have been prevented from seeing in print." The Sun said in a statement that in publishing the photos it was not making any moral judgement about the prince's activities.
The newspaper said it was not making any moral judgement about the prince's activities.
The statement continued: "He often sails close to the wind for a royal - but he's 27, single and a soldier.The statement continued: "He often sails close to the wind for a royal - but he's 27, single and a soldier.
"We like him. We are publishing the photos because we think Sun readers have a right to see them. The reasons for that go beyond this one story.""We like him. We are publishing the photos because we think Sun readers have a right to see them. The reasons for that go beyond this one story."
Commons culture, media and sport select committee chairman John Whittingdale said of the Sun's decision: "I'm not sure where the public interest lies in publishing them. The fact that they happened is well known. How the public interest is served by doing this is not clear."
Labour MP Gerry Sutcliffe, who also sits on the committee, said the Sun had made a grave mistake in printing pictures and questioned the public interest case.
Ex-Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott tweeted: "Tonight's decision by @rupertmurdoch to allow The Sun to print the private Harry photos shows his contempt for the PCC, Leveson & the law."
Former Sun editor Kelvin Mackenzie said in his opinion the decision to publish the pictures could not have been made without News International boss Rupert Murdoch's consent.