Prince Harry takes legal action against the press

[Usethegoodbudder]

m.eonline.com/news/1078711/prince-harry-defends-meghan-markle-against-ruthless-tabloid-campaign

About bloody time I say!

"They" didn't ship the cars there. Jesus 🙄

@Dandelion oh he'll win alright. He wouldn't be taking action unless he had a pretty watertight case. I'd say he has been waiting for them to royally mess up, pun intended, and they have.

I think this is mad timing. People were just feeling warmer towards then after they relaxed and brought out Archie on the tour.

And now this.

He's as thick as two short planks. And let's not forget who sold that letter... her father!

Hmmm...notice the Mail have dropped their "Royal car crash" story quite a bit down their news feed, AND edited the title 🤔🤔

It wouldn't have gone ahead without the Queen signing off

On that basis the Queen very probably "signed off" on Paul Burrell's prosecution too, and look what happened to that ... yet another bear which might have been better left to sleep

Good about time. Maybe posters will mind their language on MN too. And MN will take threads down quicker

Do you believe people are not entitled to their opinion about a public figure whose lifestyle they are funding?

Generally it is pure racism that drives the disgusting coverage. No more no less

Please explain why it is racism. Give some examples of the racism.

Pretty normal night out with a shit faced chauffeur @Joe2019

well they did pipe up about the environment then ship the cars all the way there....

Could have used cars already there if bothered about the environment

That wasn't Harry or Meghan's decision. It was the security team ffs

Of course it'll all work out if the Queen's signed off on it, it's not like anything she's signed off has gone wrong recently 😁

@Dandelion1993 “they” didn’t ship them there ffs and it explains clearly in the article why the vehicles suggested to them weren’t safe enough

Do you believe people are not entitled to their opinion about a public figure whose lifestyle they are funding?

You know how Meghan was already a millionaire from her acting work? How exactly are you funding her lifestyle?

I think the car article is a pretty good example of how the press can take a run of the mill action and spin it to portray Harry and Meghan negatively. That's why I'm not sure pissing off the Mail like this is a wise move in a long run.

Tbh H & M have been more than patient with the media. It's about time they put a stop to it. I thought the pictures of Harry as a baby and Archie as a baby were to show how similar they look.

TeamHarry

Their protection squad made the decision about the vehicles, not Harry and Meghan.

Can't believe anyone would swallow that pile of shite served up by the Mail.

The issue is the scum mail on Sunday published a private letter which they had no right to do.
70p per year does not give them or anyone else carte blanche to slander and libel

Hmm.

I can see why they’re doing it and can totally understand Harry’s anger. It’s a great statement which really conveys the damage these stories have done.

But the Mail is a huge media outlet- isn’t their website the most visited English language site on the internet? They have deep deeeeeep pockets. At this stage I’m sure they’ve weighed up any potential losses from a lawsuit against the fact that their racist readers seem to love nothing more than reading about Meghan Markle insisting on having air fresheners at her wedding or whatever nonsense they’re spouting that week.

I don’t think this will stop them for one minute.

He will win the case, it’s hard to see how the MOS will successfully defend it.

He wouldn't be taking action unless he had a pretty watertight case

Again, like Burrell's trial? There's some interesting info here on "arrangements" made to suit the RF over that - not that it did them any good in the end: www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/nov/02/monarchy.jeevanvasagar1

Not to worry, though ... should anything embarrassing theaten to appear during Harry's case, I guess the Queen could always "remember a conversation" again

My point is...what if they don’t?

I suspect they know that the Mail aren't going to want to publish the full transcript of that letter, which will show up their deliberate smears. Also, I suspect they have been paying the Markles for quite some time, encouraging them to come up with more and more 'revelations' for their next payday. What other motive could a father who allegedly wants to make up with his daughter have for publishing a private letter in the international press?

There's a huge difference between the burden proof needed for a criminal trial and the balance of probability for a civil action.

Remember the "Rich and Exotic
DNA" comment?

"Harry's girl is Straight outta Compton"

There's two examples

Again, like Burrell's trial?

That was a criminal case, with the decision to prosecute taken by the CPS, based on police evidence. Or do you think the Queen told them to do it?

I can't possibly know what the Queen told anyone, Piano, but I definitely believe her influence would stretch to quashing a case she didn't wish to be brought in her courts

TBF Joe's correct that the burden of proof is different in civil as opposed to criminal cases, but if people like us are aware of this I imagine the Mail's extensive legal team are too

Personally I think this will be settled out of court with everyone sworn to secrecy about the outcome, but as a PP asked, "what if they don't?"