to believe H&M because of defamation laws?

[Shejustwentthere]

I've watched the full series on Harry and Meghan.
A few things have struck me.
The most important thing is that there are defamation laws in England. Damage to your reputation is grounds for pursuing such a case. That no such case has yet been initiated by William or Kate, suggests that there is truth in Harry and Meghan's version of events.
Meghan comes across as very vulnerable but very real. She also comes across as very much in love still; as does Harry.
I admire Harry for his decision to leave. I do buy his logic; if the tax payer had even 1% of a contribution to their lives financially, the media could then claim a public interest.
Harry comes across as incredibly intelligent. He has always been touted as the dumb one. He seems to be very much more than some dumb guy.
He adores Meghan and that seems to be reciprocated. She gave him an out.

Harry is very much is mother's son. Diana would have supported Meghan I think. I think they were kindred spirits (Diana and Harry) in a way. Pawns in the game where the king and queen reign...

Where has she alienated her maternal family, her mother has been by her side the whole time.

where is the rest of them? Were they even invited to her wedding?

Really? I thought that episode where they are in the back of a car ostensibly nervous about paparazzi following them was very telling. They they are, in the back of a big expensive chauffeur-driven car without blacked-out windows and, although they have masks on as they get in, they take the masks off. And there's a Netflix camera in with them. How much effort do you think they were making to avoid the paparazzi, realistically?

Have you read this assessment of their truthfulness by the American Behaviour Panel (4 people trained in U.S. in interrogation and analysing body language and being able to discern natural facial expressions from 'acting' ) Very interesting

#

Really, never have, never will, you sure 🤦‍♀️

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19599899

What rest of them? Not everyone has big families they grew up with. She said many times she never had a big family and cousins growing up.

This.

I guess if you only ever skirt around defamation, as pointed out up thread, you can always drag "the issue " up later when you need the cash or popularity is waning.

And of course she's coming across as likeable she's a blimmin actress.

And as someone who has suffered a miscarriage, they pissed me off royally when they claimed that was caused by stress.

The most important thing is that there are defamation laws in England. Damage to your reputation is grounds for pursuing such a case. That no such case has yet been initiated by William or Kate, suggests that there is truth in Harry and Meghan's version of events.

The RF never take people to court for defamation. There is litterally widespread promotion of the idea that they are secretly lizard people from the center of the earth- if they tolerate that I hardly think 'my brother is a big meanie' will register.

George V also sued over a claim that he married secretly before he came to the throne and that his marriage to Queen Mary was bigamous.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Mylius

Also interesting when you check this group's page, how many videos they have about H&M. They obviously make money by fuelling hate. Wonder what that kind of obsession tells you about?

Sorry but this is nonsense. We don’t know anything about Kate’s personality, just like we didn’t really know much about the Queen’s. Just because her public presentation is somewhat neutral, doesn’t tell us anything about the real person.

She was certainly not presented as a suitable wife or forced on William, times have changed and I don’t think anyone would have wanted to repeat the mistakes of the past. But more than that, her family were regarded as common quite frankly and she wouldn’t have been chosen in that way. William could very easily have married someone else.

I get a very different impression from photos, to me they look happy and of course there have been loads of pictures of George grinning away at events and so on while not posing. I get the impression that whatever their faults, the Middleton are a close and genuine family and that stability has really been good for William and the kids.

I expect that living up to his role and being responsible is sometimes a strain, but I doubt it has ever led to any jealousy of Harry.

I think your understanding of defamation is very hazy, OP!

It's widely known that he's thick as pigswill.

I'm not a royalist but the royal family are supposed to be above petty squabbles in public although granted they don't always succeed. If someone criticises them they're more likely to stay quiet and deal with it in not such a public way as suing people. Plus, in general suing someone can actually have the opposite effect to what you want. It can create more sensational stories and be damaging even if you win. Saying there must be truth in what H&M are saying because they're not being sued is just silly.

This is really embarrassing to read on so many levels

I assume the OP is genuine but saying Harry is intelligent did make me wonder for a second. It does seem like something you'd say and wonder if you've gone too far.

OP sounds extremely star struck and biased. Not sure how anyone can just decide they're sure of what the full story is when we've only heard one side of it.

Harry is playing the role of the 'spare' perfectly.

The role of the 'spare' is to create drama & act as a distraction to the heir. This is all done to protect Charles & William as it acts as a distraction from the real question which is how can the UK claim to be a democracy when we have a very real & active royal family?

This tactic has been deployed many times by the royal family over the years.
The fact that they still exist demonstrates it's effectiveness.

The real question is, what else is happening whilst everyone is talking about this nonsense?

Then why haven't they got themselves jobs based on their talents and interests? Why continue to make money off the HRH?

I moved abroad and I also have relatives I don't get on with who go round slagging me off and telling lies about me. I can't empathise with H&M because I would never dream of responding or airing my proof of the lies. I have my life here, my DH and kids here, I'm happy in my job and simply don't care enough to worry what anyone back home is saying about me. I'm their age and I realised long ago that "standing up for myself" or trying to give my side was not going to result in either a peaceful or happy life.

Now that religion is no longer the opium of the people, this family are.

We are living through a huge crisis globally. War, famine, poverty, hunger, disease, environmental devastation but the outrage on both sides about the tittle tattle and spats within this family of very little merit, is taking over the media (broadcast and social). It's truly mind blowing.

I have Netflix but no intention of watching it. The sooner we become a republic the better.

They take requests they will do what is popular if you watch they are actually interesting and factual not screaming she's a liar Jeremy Kyle style

Harry could easily have established a successful career whilst being a working family member, many of the others have. If he was actually intelligent something challenging would have appealled to him as a life occupation before now.

Instead he's drifted about aimlessly until this rather shallow woman came along and they are now going full on for a career being famous for being famous. Empty celebrities.

I suppose it's the best he can manage with her. It is her career choice for them both.

NC'd for this. I used to work for Farrer & Co and I don't believe them for the exact reason you do, OP. They've had everything checked by a lawyer (multiple lawyers) with a fine tooth comb to ensure that there's no possible way to be sued for defamation for it but make very clear messages. They've been doing it the whole time - at the Oprah interview with the whole "someone brought up the skin colour of the baby, I don't want to say who but it wasn't X and Y" - that literally translates as "I cannot be sued because I said no name".

It's phrases like "they wanted X" or "they suggested Y" - it's a listeners perspective. If you said to me "pass the napkins please" then you may want to wipe your child's face, but if I said "they wanted to wipe their own face" then it wouldn't be defamation because what I'm saying is my interpretation of what happened and, even though it's incorrect, it's not actually something the other side could prove was and intentional lie. We see this over and over with the H&M interviews. It's never "they said X" or "they did Y" - it's always "wanted/suggested/thought/felt/etc". The only times that it's explicitly saying someone said or did something, they're so vague they couldn't sued - either omitting who said or when they said or what the context was. All these comments of "it wouldn't be fair to go into detail" or "I don't want to name names" are literally "I'm avoiding being specific enough to be sued". On top of that, they know the royal family won't sue them.

Every post, interview answer, video clip etc is all explicitly planned in advance with a lawyer and a marketing team. It's an advertising campaign - none of it is written by H&M themselves (just like how no statements from the royal family are written by them).

I don't know how much of their version I believe but they are absolutely lying on a number of counts - that's a fact and a guarantee.

At the base of the whole situation, no one blamed them for wanting to step back.. to seek a private life to bring up their children in "peace".
What cheeses everyone off is the constant (and it is constant) bids for attention. They employ a PR company to keep them in the media FFS.
The pseudo royal progress through new york, the photographer "catching" them doing good works or laying flowers in a cemetary. It's all Me me me..

The self seving lies, the half truths and the bits they fail to mention are just plain irritating, and treat the public like villages idiots who should believe what they are told because they are being told it by their betters.

Why is the constant barrage of self produced media content, all with the same theme of victimhood, acceptable.

Filming from their £11m mansion saying how hard their life is, is at best tone deaf and at worst so narcisstic as to require professional help.

I ,for one, would be grateful if they did what the said they would do, and disappear into the sub ether to live their lives away from the glare of the media, and give us some "peace".

..and yes I have watched the netflix doco.. although I admit I had to take several breaks to avoid the onset of diabetes.

'It must be true because defamation laws' is a gloriously stupid and naive thing to say.

Defamation laws allow people to pursue in court if they wish to, but there's caveats and pitfalls to that too.

1. Its costly. This is a problem for the Royals image.
   The family spend a lot of effort trying to play down the Royal aspect and pitch a more middle class image to the press as it has wider appeal to the public. In taking on a legal case they would be forced to show wealth. So it's counter productive to their image to bring a case

2. It invites more press intrusion. This is a problem for the Royals who wish to cultivate a certain image.
   The family control their narrative by pr. If you invite even more scrutiny of private correspondence you 'shatter the mystery' of the Royals. That's their star appeal and the aloofness that makes the Royals. Its self defeating to go down this route even if the Royals did win.

3)Barbara Streisand.
The family understands the effect well. It makes a story bigger than it needed to be. It's a fools errand.

4. A court case would match the Sussex narrative
   The Sussexes are pushing a line about how they were bullied and silenced by the state and power of the Crown. In taking on a court case in what would be framed a David v Goliath case, the Sussexes can't lose even if they lose the case. Its a good example of 'it doesn't matter what is true, what matters is what people believe'

5. The no need to do anything approach.
   There may be a feeling that the further the Sussexes push this, the more it will eventually backfire on them if the Windsor maintain a united dignified front and just get on with things. In this way the Sussexes could end up being their own worst enemy as the public get fed up of it.

6. The historic approach of the Royals of not responding
   The Sussexes were well aware that the family were very unlikely to take to court even if they lied through their teeth.

7. The burden of proof.
   There is always a danger that there could be an issue with proof in a court case. This is one where its possibly in the eye of the beholder anyway with he said she said simply being misinterpreted. It would be for the Sussexes to prove something but that also involves the family disproving it to an extent too. This isn't necessarily a straightforward case. It's possible both sides utterly believe their own version of events and the evidence could be read in both ways to a degree.

Honestly the Royals would have to be insane to take it on as it could do more harm than good even if they win.

The only conclusion you can draw from the lack of defamation case is that its not in the interests of the Royals to bring one, not that it must mean what the Sussexes say is true.