Royal News and Views

Royal News and Views
[ Royal News and Views ]

January 19 - Sussex Thread

Posted by Susan T on January 19, 2021, 8:22 am

n/t

This message is locked.

Re: January 19 - Sussex Thread

Posted by Roy on January 19, 2021, 9:12 am, in reply to "January 19 - Sussex Thread"

But Mr White said in ANL’s written case that Meghan’s “status as a member of the royal family whose familial and personal relationships are in the public eye” was relevant.

He added that the “admitted falsity” of an article about Meghan in People magazine, which ANL says brought the letter to her father into the public domain, meant Mr Markle “was not only entitled to correct public information about the letter and the reply, it was in the public interest that (he) did so”.

Mr White argued: “Mr Markle has a right to tell his story of his relationship and communications with his daughter … no US court would stop him from doing so, and he could have and could still, whatever the outcome of this case, speak to the US media on this topic at any time.”

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/meghans-letter-to-her-father-to-defend-charges-of-being-unloving-daughter-39985213.html

Link: Meghan’s letter to her father ‘to defend charges of being unloving dau

This message is locked.

Thomas Markle entire written statement to courts

Posted by Roy on January 19, 2021, 3:54 pm, in reply to "Re: January 19 - Sussex Thread"

Thomas Markle witness statement in full

Link: Thomas Markle witness statement in full

This message is locked.

Re: January 19 - Sussex Thread

Posted by Martha on January 19, 2021, 6:38 pm, in reply to "Re: January 19 - Sussex Thread"

I'm not a lawyer but it seems to be that Meghan's position is that no one can talk about her unless she approves the content. It's very King of Thailand of her.

This obsession with "privacy" is looking more like a frenzied effort to keep something secret than to keep her private life away from prying eyes. Really, is anyone that interested in her? Her fan base, maybe, but no one else.

===

This message is locked.

Re: January 19 - Sussex Thread

Posted by karenl on January 19, 2021, 7:26 pm, in reply to "Re: January 19 - Sussex Thread"

You've got it nailed. Meghan has a thin skin for legitimate criticism and while she can hurl insults and false stories about others, notably the Cambridges, anyone calling her out for her actions is ghosted or now called a racist/hater. It's the behavior of an spoiled, immature individual that has been doted on and catered to starting from childhood.
Harry has become just as bad. Hence, they're calls for "policing the Internet and social media", it's not so much about others being bullied, as we know, it's about others critical of their behavior and actions.
As an aside, I think Meghan is rattled and nervous as all get out over Samantha's book...she doesn't know what her sister has written and what possibly will be revealed. It's been written in either the Express or Mirror that Tom Sr. has approved of Samantha's book.

This message is locked.

Re: January 19 - Sussex Thread

Posted by Hollie24 on January 19, 2021, 8:17 pm, in reply to "Re: January 19 - Sussex Thread"

Meghan has fallen victim to the same belief Diana had--she thinks she can control and manipulate the media. It backfired on Diana and it's backfired on Meghan. You can't leak, leak, leak without the truth coming out. Meghan arranged for her five friends to babble to People about her letter, knowing full well her father would respond and give her the ammunition to play the victim. I don't think she anticipated what the courts would do and how the rulings have not played all in her favor. She's no victim, but she's persisting in playing that narrative.

This message is locked.

Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter

Posted by Martha on January 20, 2021, 1:08 pm, in reply to "January 19 - Sussex Thread"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9168095/Palace-Four-evidence-Meghan-Markles-letter-court-hears.html

===

This message is locked.

Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter

Posted by karenl on January 20, 2021, 7:31 pm, in reply to "Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter"

Another article. Interesting development.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55740365

This message is locked.

Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter

Posted by Martha on January 21, 2021, 12:07 pm, in reply to "Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter"

It's interesting that Meghan doesn't want the people who were working for her to say anything in court, under oath. If they've nothing illuminating to offer then let the defense call them and annoy the judge by calling four witnesses who have nothing to offer.

The four lawyered up because they don't want to be in the position of testifying, as their careers require them to be under the radar and somewhat invisible. They are being put in the position of either betraying confidences or possibly perjuring themselves. I get the feeling that to testify in court, they would have to shiv someone in the kidneys and that's a bad professional look for them.

So now not only have the five friends had to hire lawyers, so have the four former employees. That's a lot of money for non-millionaires to come up with. This is what Meghan put in play because her grandstanding and dishonesty.

===

This message is locked.

Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter

Posted by Hollie24 on January 21, 2021, 12:19 pm, in reply to "Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter"

Meghan is a narcissist. She's on a hiding to nothing with this stupid lawsuit, but won't give it up, regardless of how much it costs--and not just financially--her friends, family, and ex employees.

This message is locked.

Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter

Posted by Martha on January 21, 2021, 1:38 pm, in reply to "Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter"

Meghan is a narcissist. She's on a hiding to nothing with this stupid lawsuit, but won't give it up, regardless of how much it costs--and not just financially--her friends, family, and ex employees.

Just throw other people on the pyre and let them burn while she glows in the light of their misery, as long as she looks good nothing else matters.

===

This message is locked.

Cambridge strategy?

Posted by Martha on January 21, 2021, 1:45 pm, in reply to "Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter"

It occurred to me that one reason Meghan hates Catherine is because Catherine cannot be manipulated. Did William and Catherine clue in to the narcissism right away and get some professional advice on how to handle her? They don't engage with her, which is what she really wants. Without some give and take she has no ammunition or leverage. Their exchanges mostly been with others present so no actions, inactions or words can be misconstrued to cast Meghan as a victim. Other than polite conversation that doesn't reveal or confirm private information, they had no contact.

===

This message is locked.

Re: Cambridge strategy?

Posted by Hollie24 on January 21, 2021, 2:43 pm, in reply to "Cambridge strategy?"

Catherine seems to be a good judge of character.Her friends don't blab. I think she and William are acting to protect themselves and their family. Meghan's nasty attacks on Catherine have all backfired, but again, she'll keep trying.

This message is locked.

Re: Cambridge strategy?

Posted by Martha on January 21, 2021, 4:16 pm, in reply to "Re: Cambridge strategy?"

Catherine is not only a good judge of character, she knows how to keep her friends close and loyal. Remember the nonsense about Catherine not giving Meghan a lift to the shops even though she KNEW Meghan was about to go out? This was proof of the rejection Meghan was suffering from that racist duchess. Not one word was uttered from the Cambridge in defense, no one said anything or batted an eye and the story blew up as yet more whining from someone determined to be offended. At the time it struck me as a calculated non-response. Everyone kept their chins up, eyes forward and did not acknowledge the allegation. That was some time ago and I think the Cambridges had her number way back and followed a game plan. It was more than "don't complain, don't explain" it was also "don't play into it and give it oxygen".

Another one from early on: the Sussexes were guests of the Cambridges over Christmas at Anmar Hall in 2017, but decided to spend Christmas at Sandringham in 2018. Why stay somewhere with people outside of your age group in a more cramped setting when it could have been just two couples and three small children at Anmar? I think moods are catered to at one location and not acknowledged at another. The rift between brothers was already being whispered about and I think we know who fanned the flames and burned that bridge.

===

This message is locked.

Re: Cambridge strategy?

Posted by JohnW on January 21, 2021, 7:36 pm, in reply to "Cambridge strategy?"

I think you are on to something, Martha.

This message is locked.

Re: Cambridge strategy?

Posted by karenl on January 21, 2021, 7:53 pm, in reply to "Re: Cambridge strategy?"

I agree with all. To me, the "not giving Meghan a ride" story was so petty and minor. The media blew it out of proportion, of course, with encouragement from one side.
There is the "keep calm and carry on" stance from not only the Cambridges, but the rest of the Royal Family which has worked for years even through the worst, the divorces and the death of Diana.

This message is locked.

Re: Cambridge strategy?

Posted by Nellie on January 21, 2021, 8:07 pm, in reply to "Re: Cambridge strategy?"

I like the "Never complain; never explain" mantra best.
It has worked for royals for yonks.
Not easy to stick to, of course. The urge to speak out, our blurt out, can be strong.
The mantra works in other areas of life too, not just for royals.

This message is locked.

Re: Cambridge strategy?

Posted by Martha on January 21, 2021, 11:30 pm, in reply to "Re: Cambridge strategy?"

How long before the friends decide her melodrama isn't worth the attorneys' fees? There's a very heavy cost in being her friend, both financially and in sacrificing their integrity.

===

This message is locked.

Re: Cambridge strategy?

Posted by karenl on January 22, 2021, 12:39 am, in reply to "Re: Cambridge strategy?"

Very heavy cost and no loyalty. The 5F's (I love this), were thrown under the bus, the 4 aides will find themselves thrown under the bus.

This message is locked.

Re: Cambridge strategy?

Posted by Martha on January 22, 2021, 11:38 am, in reply to "Re: Cambridge strategy?"

If the 5F and 4A (four aides) decide to drive the bus instead allowing it to run over them, then Meghan will be in trouble. The 4A will only go so far to cover Meghan. It's one thing to be neutral and avoid making public statements, it's another to fall on your sword for a foolish and stubborn principal.

My guess is that the attorneys representing the 5F and the 4A have let Meghan's legal team know that they are unhappy paying fees and being put in a precarious position just to cover her behind. That might be why Meghan wants a summary judgement with no one testifying. Get them off the hot seat and get it over with before the mutiny begins.

===

This message is locked.

Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter

Posted by karenl on January 21, 2021, 8:18 pm, in reply to "Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter"

Meghan was arrogant plus naive, if that sounds plausible, in filing this lawsuit. I think she thought ANL would react, "Oh, we're being sued by the Duchess of Sussex, a member of the Royal Family. We can't have that!" Meghan may have been under the impression, ANL would roll over and fork over a huge settlement, no questions asked. Um no, she has a formidable opponent with an excellent legal team that didn't graduate form law school last or just pass their bar exams last spring and this is their first case. ANL, win or lose is going to fight all the way and Meghan is paying all the way.
If she would have come to me if I was an attorney, I would have advised her, your case isn't going to be worth the money, ignore the story, well......if she wanted to pay me the money, I suppose I could bluff some arguments through.

So Meghan has shelled out more than 2 million pounds so far on a big gamble. In addition to ruining a lot of relationships, personal and professional, I'm sure. It's all for her and a way to get money.

This message is locked.

Murky Meg weighs in

Posted by Hollie24 on January 22, 2021, 2:54 pm, in reply to "Re: Former Sussex aides may be able to shed some light on the letter"

This message is locked.

Re: Murky Meg weighs in

Posted by Martha on January 22, 2021, 5:00 pm, in reply to "Murky Meg weighs in"

So the crown may hold a partial copyright on the letter, too? My, that list is growing.

===

This message is locked.

Another Harry Hypocritical Whine Session For The New Year

Posted by karenl on January 22, 2021, 7:25 pm, in reply to "Re: Murky Meg weighs in"

Taking on the tech giants,(like they're going to be shivering in their shoes at your whining hypocrisy) and again sticking his nose in US business. I should say reading notes his wife has written for him, he doesn't have the smarts to come up with nearly all he spoke about.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9177599/Prince-Harry-complains-Meghan-subjected-mothership-harassment.html

This message is locked.

Re: Another Harry Hypocritical Whine Session For The New Year

Posted by Arlene on January 22, 2021, 8:11 pm, in reply to "Another Harry Hypocritical Whine Session For The New Year"

"telling tech titans they should be motivated by 'well-being' and not just 'financial incentive'" Perhaps Harry should share this idea with his wife!

This message is locked.

Re: Murky Meg weighs in

Posted by karenl on January 22, 2021, 7:26 pm, in reply to "Re: Murky Meg weighs in"

Meghan's actions have opened the Pandora's box.

This message is locked.

More Murky Meg

Posted by Hollie24 on January 23, 2021, 4:57 pm, in reply to "Murky Meg weighs in"

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by karenl on January 24, 2021, 1:01 am, in reply to "More Murky Meg"

Well, well, this new info doesn't really surprise me, except for Sara Latham's alleged role, I would have thought she was smarter than that.
I remember earlier this year when the DM published the article about Meghan running her "letter" past the staff and I thought at the time why would she do that for a "private letter" to her father? It was all a PR exercise to boost Meghan and again, put her in the victim's role concerning her father. The way she has absolutely trashed and libeled her father when he has done nothing to her, but loved her, there's something wrong with Meghan, psychologically.
Should there be a trial, oh "H" to the yes. There's too much not to be considered. Meghan is rolling deeper in the muck for herself and she's pulling Harry in as well.

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by karenl on January 24, 2021, 1:11 am, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

It dawned me that Christian Jones worked for the Sussexes and now for the Cambridges. It was announced this week he would be leaving his position to take another job. Could part of the reason be the lawsuit and his possible role with the letter? On the other hand, Christian moving on from the Cambridges to a new job could have nothing to do with the lawsuit and working for the Harkles.

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Hollie24 on January 24, 2021, 1:58 am, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

Yeah, sara Latham's involvement surprised me too. That was a stupid move on her part. I agree with Murky Meg. I can't see any judge stopping this lawsuit from going to full trial. I am confused about why Meghan told her five friends to babble to People about the letter while simultaneously plotting with Scobie to make it a centerpiece of the fantasy novel masquerading as fact. If someone could enlighten me, I'd be grateful. I'm too slow tokeep up with the changes in whatever narrative Meghan's producing at any one time.

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Susan T on January 24, 2021, 9:12 am, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

Scobie has been filmed claiming that Meghan expected her father to leak the letter. Maybe the plan was that if Thomas didn't do as expected, Scobie would do the honors in the book.

But at some point, when Thomas didn't follow Meghan's script, she decided she couldn't wait for Scobie's book to be released and authorized friends to leak info about it.

I think originally the book was supposed to be released around their first wedding anniversary/Archie's birth, but as the drama ratcheted up, either Meghan, the authors, or the publishers decided the latest developments must be included and consequently the release date of the book got pushed back.

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Martha on January 24, 2021, 2:44 pm, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

Meghan wanted the book published months before the August release. Was this an attempt to provide a distraction and control the narrative?

===

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Susan T on January 24, 2021, 4:00 pm, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

When hasn't she tried to control the narrative and/or distract us from some mess she's created?

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Martha on January 24, 2021, 5:22 pm, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

True, but it's usually been some stupid upstaging effort. Having the release date of a book changed is a bigger deal, even for Meghan.

Speaking of shameless grabs for attention, where are they? There have been a few instances where the opportunity to upstage has gone unanswered. Sophie's birthday, Eugenie's impending baby, a surprise honor from the queen to mark the Cambridges' anniversary. I keep thinking we're about to be treated to staged pap photos or another inane quote to help us along our journey to wokeness. Are they actually following the First Rule? I wonder if they were told very bluntly by BP to curb their enthusiasm for self-promotion.

===

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Susan T on January 24, 2021, 6:26 pm, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

Sophie's birthday isn't worth upstaging. The media doesn't pay much attention to Sophie.

It's just rumors from an "expert" that the Queen is going to give Catherine some fabulous gift and the anniversary isn't until April. Any upstaging will be done on the anniversary or on the days immediately before or after.

Same with Eugenie's baby. The upstaging will be done when it's announced that Eugenie has been admitted to the hospital, when she's had the baby, or when she leaves the hospital.

I'm hoping the judge doesn't upstage Eugenie by releasing his decision on the day the baby is born.

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Cynthia on January 24, 2021, 7:31 pm, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

I dunno --I thought his "interview" where he blamed everything on "tech" was pretty epic.

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Martha on January 24, 2021, 7:33 pm, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

Maybe we've become numb to the dumb? Harry was ridiculous but not worth taking seriously. They definitely aren't victims despite their attempts to convince us otherwise.

===

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by karenl on January 24, 2021, 7:52 pm, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

Cynthia, I thought at first, "surely you jest." Then I got the drift of your post.

This message is locked.

Re: More Murky Meg

Posted by Hollie24 on January 24, 2021, 3:56 pm, in reply to "Re: More Murky Meg"

That makes sense. Thanks.

Meghan I think Meghan was used to manipulating Thomas and was confident he'd react in a certain way. When he failed to follow the script, she decided to try to rewrite it. She hasn't learned she can't do that. The court case is certainly getting more interesting.

This message is locked.

Has the Megxit review been cancelled?

Posted by Martha on January 23, 2021, 12:26 pm, in reply to "January 19 - Sussex Thread"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9151069/Megxit-WORKING-no-need-planned-one-year-review-Royal-expert-says.html

===

This message is locked.

Re: Has the Megxit review been cancelled?

Posted by Susan T on January 23, 2021, 1:27 pm, in reply to "Has the Megxit review been cancelled? "

My opinion hasn't changed since the article appeared last week.

Katie Nichol's is opining, guessing, or indulging in wishful thinking.

Nothing final can be put in place until Harry can meet with the Queen, Charles, and William in person. Nothing of importance can be resolved in a zoom chat unless the Queen, Charles and William don't mind risking it all appearing on Netflix or Spotify.

This message is locked.

Re: Has the Megxit review been cancelled?

Posted by Martha on January 23, 2021, 2:07 pm, in reply to "Re: Has the Megxit review been cancelled? "

I agree. The article makes it sound like a certainty, but I put it in question form because it IS questionible until BP says otherwise. Harkle pronouncements are self-serving and thus taken with a salt lick. The only agreement I can believe is to delay the meeting until it's safer to travel. Any communication regarding this would have to be carefully handled because neither Harkle can be trusted to maintain confidentiality, despite privacy bleats to the contrary. Privacy only matter when it comes to hiding their own shady business. When it comes to twisting things to make themselves look like noble victims all boundaries are heaved out the window.

===

This message is locked.

Re: Has the Megxit review been cancelled?

Posted by karenl on January 24, 2021, 1:06 am, in reply to "Re: Has the Megxit review been cancelled? "

We've heard nothing from BP and I'll wait for the Palace to issue an official statement on the subject of the Megxit review. The Palace hasn't even commented on the article and it's exclamation.
Katie Nicholl doesn't know, she's just going through the motions for Sussexland.

This message is locked.

Murky Meg

Posted by Hollie24 on January 27, 2021, 1:47 pm, in reply to "January 19 - Sussex Thread"

Apparently Meghan and Harry want to limit free speech, and someone's passed along that the Sussexes are being tipped as youth ambassadors for the Biden administration. My take: Meghan and Harry have always wanted to control the commentary on them, so so I believe the first bit; as for the second, that follows the usual Sussex pattern of plop the idea out there in hopes someone will fullfill it.

This message is locked.

Re: Murky Meg

Posted by Martha on January 27, 2021, 4:30 pm, in reply to "Murky Meg"

This just reminded me how much I don't miss them, their upstaging nonsense and illogical woke pronouncements. They want to control speech while serving as U.S. youth ambassadors? They're loons.

===

This message is locked.

Re: Murky Meg

Posted by karenl on January 27, 2021, 7:49 pm, in reply to "Re: Murky Meg"

More trying to ride on the coattails of the President and Vice President. It didn't work with the Obamas so now let's move on to the Bidens and Kamala Harris. Right now the President and Vice President have more problems on their hands than the woke couple from Santa Barbara wanting to grand stand. Important, critical problems.
Limiting the Free Speech of the Constitution is laughable. Meghan wants political office ie. President, but she wants criticism of her as a part of US free speech removed? If that's her worry, she'll never make it as a politician, as I've always contended. Harry's nothing more than his wife's mouthpiece.

This message is locked.

« Back to index

316

[ Royal News and Views ]