Duncan Larcombe has claimed that the Sun does not publish “more than fifty percent” of paparazzi photographs showing the royal family.The evidence submitted by Larcombe, who has been royal editor at the Sun since 2011, included several examples of refusing pictures of the royals for publication.He described a member of the public calling the Sun newdesk in 2009, claiming to have “explosive” pictures of Prince William and Kate Middleton. After asking for £25,000 the individual was arrested with the paper's cooperation after it was discovered that the pictures were obtained from a camera stolen from Pippa Middleton.Larcombe also said he checks exclusive stories about the royals “every time” with the palace or Clarence House press office to make sure they are “100 percent” right.He added: “If we get royal stories wrong then readers may well be on the prince’s side rather than ours.”The discussion over paparazzi pictures was continued in the evidence of John Edwards, the Sun’s picture editor, who told the inquiry that pictures of a heavily-pregnant Lily Allen shopping in London were not run in the paper after a discussion with the singer’s agent.Edwards also mentioned the harassment of Hugh Grant and Tinglan Hong following the birth of their child last year, but claimed photographers working on behalf of the Sun moved on from Hong's house before a PCC letter was issued to the press.Edwards went on to defend photographers, saying: "I do think paparazzi is not a great name – we all think of it as a nasty word – but they are effectively freelance photographers.”