Ham pr disasters 55! …no neither David Attenborough or John major will be head of state! ….

Unless there is some huge backstory about how Meghan had concerns before this, which I doubt as she was praising him just a couple of years before, I really don’t buy this.
I have a family member who was accused of following girls in his car near schools. It turned out that someone took the number plate down wrong by 1 digit so was nothing to do with my family member. I can’t imagine cutting them off on the basis of the accusation unless it was completely believable, in which case I’d have already cut them off. Before distancing yourself from someone that close to you you’d want to get to the truth. From the comments I’ve read under articles about this, I don’t think many others are buying the poor Meghan narrative either.

He must be lighting a big one tonight…

Did you catch the bit on the GQ interview when the interviewer asks about the decision to move back and he says 'I hoped that..' then he catches himself as says 'WE hoped that the children could go to school in Britain.'
He's always hoped for it, but something major must've changed for her to agree.

I would imagine so

Because that's what The Sun (which also seems to have been chatting with Sussex spokespeople) implies:

"The force declined to answer a question from The Sun on whether they had forwarded any information from the letter to legal agencies abroad."

Several things could be going on here: 1) the Met examined the letter but didn't consider it credible; 2) the Met messed up and didn't pass the letter on due to error or negligence; 3) the Met did pass the letter on to the correct jurisdiction and the police there investigated and didn't find any basis to the allegations; 4) the police abroad didn't investigate the letter due to error or negligence.

So if I understand correctly, the 'letter' is not a communication between police forces, but rather contains allegations against Thomas Markle made by an unnamed individual? Why would such a letter be sent to the Met, given that he is not British and the alleged crimes were not committed there? And given that the Met have said they did not investigate TM, can we assume that they would have passed the allegations on to the relevant police forces, if they believed said allegations had any merit?

it's all a mess.

Meg says she was ‘subsequently’ told…..so does that mean she will claim she was told weeks/months after the Met Dept were told….claiming it happened after the wedding….when if there are are any records, it will clearly be before the wedding.

Sussex sources are saying it’s weeks after the wedding. That would fit in with her ‘subsequently’ narrative she’s putting out.

Exactly. ‘Did Meghan say that?! The Briddish press said that!’

Here we go again. More ‘progressive’ sycophancy from the Sussex WhatsApp Media Squad.

Or another (rather cynical admittedly) possibility; the letter was written recently and the Met haven’t seen it at all 🤔

The sun:

‘Meghan yesterday claimed she cut off all ties with her father after the letter was passed to her soon after her wedding to Harry.’

It’s very hard to believe that they would find out this info quickly after the wedding. Had this info been told before the wedding, the wedding may not have gone ahead

The press need to find out the truth of the date that this info was passed.

Actually there was another mention, now I think about it - Harry’s account of Meg mistaking Andrew for QEII’s personal assistant and handbag carrier?

Because that happened

Maybe the reason Meghan kept making those references to the Little Mermaid was because her wedding to Harry was akin to when Eric marries Ursula in disguise 😂

Seriously though, the wedding seems like it was on a wing and a prayer to stretch the thinly constructed 'fairy tale' out just long enough before the ugly cracks started appearing or Meghan's disney princess mask slipped.

Haha. The is probably the first thing I've ever heard of Meghan that I've liked.

But she knew Eugenie before she met Harry, so she must have known who her Dad was?

Didn't they say the 'Fixated Individuals' department of the Met was dealing with the letter? Perhaps it was written in an attempt to blackmail Meghan? That would explain why the 'letter' was passed on to her, even if the allegations were later found not to be credible?

Just making stuff up as I go along here! What a horrible situation.

Have HAM announced their November/ December engagements yet ?

A lot of it stinks to high heaven tbh. I really hope if TM is guilty, he is charged

They’re trying to imply it’s something official, but it could have been a random fixated nutter, maybe?

I wonder if it’s one of those blokes who went to jail (ie very quickly found and prosecuted)? There were three or four of them I think at the time. Neil Basu spoke of them.

‘Meghan yesterday claimed she cut off all ties with her father after the letter was passed to her soon after her wedding to Harry.’

So why had she never arranged a meeting between him and H back in 2017? I think she'd already decided to cut him off, for whatever reason.

(I'm expressing no opinion on the allegations; that's a matter for the appropriate law enforcement agencies.)

Yet again, they are dominating the headlines. I feel sorry for their kids now they are getting older. These constant horrible headlines

I think it’s all going to get very messy indeed.
It would now appear rather than something coming up during the vetting process this is a letter from a potentially ‘fixated individual’ which the Met and presumably Ravec received/examined and Meghan has implied she believed the content enough to cease contact with her father and it would be investigated further.
The two things cannot be true - she believed the letter or it was ‘just’ a fixated individual. Sorry to be very cynical here but has she used this latest news about Markle senior’s CSA images to bring up this information from 8 years ago in order to expose the Met and Ravec failing to pass the letter’s contents through the proper channels to be investigated further. She may be playing a very dangerous game because Ravec have failed to agree to give HaM protection in the present day?
I really hope my cynicism is unfounded- I think I may need to step away from this board for a while as I’m beginning to doubt my own sanity with all these smoke & mirrors.

They have made the biggest mess possible for those children. When you think of the options and privilege that was open to them upon starting their family, it really is astonishing and criminal what a horrible life they've made for A&L. They are terrible parents, utterly selfish and stupid.

Pagesix are running a live news feed on this.
This is really too big for Sussex PR to handle and feel like it will get a lot worse.

You are not alone. That has crossed my mind too. I would put nothing and I mean nothing past HAM.

Judging by Nottingham, it doesn't look like they have have their desired security

My own family is extremely dysfunctional. There is a lot kept from my now adult children. This pair are so hideously selfish, it's beyond belief