Harry and Meghan biography

[sunshinesupermum]

Hasn't Prince Harry learnt anything from his mother's experience of having someone write her biography 'to set the record straight'? Couldn't they have at least waited until after his grandmother's death, however long that might be?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8257071/Meghan-Harry-biography-bombshell-Royals.html

'This is the way my client wants to run her case',

I missed that bit, so not willing to take advice even from the legal experts you are paying? Yet more evidence of the infamous What Meghan wants, Meghan gets and how badly that plays out both when M does get what she wants and when she doesn't.

Mariposa - The money that William and Harry inherited from Princess Diana was held in trust until they each turned 30, I would imagine the same goes for money they would have inherited from the Queen Mother. As the Duchy of Cornwall Prince Charles earns money from the Duchy Estate some of which is used to fund his and William and Harry's private lifestyles plus their charities. So Harry and Meghan aren't financially dependent on Prince Charles as such, he has just chosen to fund their lifestyle while they settle in to their new life.

What a mess.

Just as an aside, re: Diana's mother. She didn't actually walk out on her children; she left her allegedly abusive husband, taking the children with her (certainly the youngest two, Diana and Charles). However, when they returned to see their father for a weekend visit, he refused to let Frances collect them, and she therefore lost "custody," which was then formalised in court.

Thinking about it even more that this is the way my client wants to run her case is such a telling comment on MM, her personality, who she thinks she is and how she expects everyone to behave towards her. So few words but so revealing.

MM's barrister is quoted as saying 'This is the way my client wants to run her case', which I think was a big hint that she wasn't taking his advice

I thought the same thing, but then I'm convinced Meghan wanted a bambi-eyed appearance in court which would cover her in glory and victimhood - except it's not working out quite like that

Certainly the main case has yet to go ahead, but the latest decision sounds to me like "stick to the point and stop whining about irrelevancies" which is a worhwhile suggestion in itself

Either way I'd love to be a fly on her wall right now

I think I read on here somewhere, that Harry is due to come into a further inheritance when he's 40. There was a wicked suggestion that Meghan was holding out for that!

M&H's actions viz the case indicate that they disregard information they don't like (not unknown amongst the RF), surround themselves with people whose opinions elevate them, and like many people of their age see themselves primarily (or only?) through the filter of other people's opinions (via SM, paper media, whatever).

They're not real (that's not the right word but I can't bring the right one to mind). They live in a virtual world, a parallel reality. It's the instagram likes that drives them. The life they want is a chimera.

It must be exhausting!

Why would these five friends testify if they have to give up their anonymity? They probably don't live in the UK, so I don't see how a UK court could compel them if they refuse.

I suspect they're pretty pissed off by now.

I have a feeling that M won't set foot in the UK again. Archie isn't going to be allowed to is he?

It all feels like it's falling apart quite spectacularly.

I can't see how MM isn't going to lose this case (in the sense of the bigger picture) even if she wins.

This grand plan to elevate their profile through controlling their brand is going to suffer if they continue with this case - I'm gobsmacked they didn't settle.

At the same time all those lovely money making opportunities (speaking engagements, acting roles etc) are all gone with the lockdown and with a global recession looming I wonder how much business (and public) appetite there will be for "hiring" H&M to speak for 15 minutes for ridiculous sums of money (I think it was reported they got $750k for their last speaking engagement).

Realistically the idea that they they are still in a position to rake in tens of millions must be pie in the sky and that situation isn't going to change any time soon.

In the meantime they are bleeding cash on expensive house rentals, security and court cases...

Call me Angelina - Yes, Prince William and Prince Harry will both inherit more money from the Trust Fund that the Queen Mother set up for them, when they each turn 40.

They both seem to favour a scorched Earth method of living, and will soon be with no friends at all.

How will they pay their legal costs if they lose? Prince Charles? It's a good thing they appear to have longevity genes as I can't see William indulging his brother as much as Charles and the queen have.

Pretty sure they're being offered free accommodation, we're paying for their security and Chuck is paying for their fripperies, so they're probably still entirely deluded about the state of things and possibly annoyed at a pandemic virus having stymied their cash making endeavours. The virus has rather abruptly usurped the platform of many attention-seeking, self-absorbed drama llamas.

TinRoofRusry - Prince Harry is a multi millionaire, he's got more than enough money to pay the court costs.

£8m/year we pay up for Harry to hide away in Malibu. He really is an entitled so-and-so, isn't he? Would you embarrassed to be bloody 35-years-old and living off Daddy and 'friends'?

Interestingly, does anyone else recall that the press had lots of "sources close to MM" saying that she was frustrated that she couldn't speak her mind or publicly defend the false articles against her. I wonder if that's why she wanted to fight her case in the courts with as much thrown in as possible, so that she could finally "tell her side"

I don't know if the five best friends can be compelled to give evidence, I would doubt it, hopefully some legal expert can clarify for us.

However, the five do seem to be fairly pivotal to the case for both sides - one side wants them to confirm how they knew about the letter and its' contents, and whether or not MM gave them permission, even tacitly, to the interviews. The other side needs them to state they did the interview entirely off their own backs and their 'best/close' friend was totally unaware they were doing this, but how they avoid knowledge of the letter and contents, I don't know.

I think a part of the MoS case appears to be that by dint of the interview these five gave privacy and copyright had already been breached and Thomas Markle had the right of reply. If the five refuse to appear I'm not sure which side will benefit the most, I tend to think their non appearance will weight more in favour of the MoS.

I struggle to believe that these five 'best/close' friends just woke up one day and decided I know what, let's all give an interview to People Magazine about MM and the rift with her dad and we can tell the world about the letter she wrote to her dad, this took planning and organising and I can't see them going ahead with the interview without first making MM aware and seeking approval. Imo they did it at MM's request. The daft thing is the furore around Thomas Markle and the wedding no show was dying down, interest had waned, it wasn't a big story anymore and all this interview did was stoke the embers back up into a fire and prompt Thomas Markle to retaliate, it was ill judged and ill timed.

I bet the five are totally pissed off, they are damned either way and whatever relationship they did have with MM will be under great strain now or even finished.

As DeRigeurMotis says, this court case, whatever the outcome, is going to be detrimental to the H&M brand.

I'm assuming that the MOS will call MM to testify. They can ask her, under the oath, if she knew her friends were going to talk to People magazine. She'll have to think very carefully about her reply.

People this self-absorbed actually believe their lies are the truth.

Do any of you think it a possibility that The Queen will step in last minute and shut the case down, the way she did with the Paul Burrells case once it became evident that all the RF dirty laundry was about to be aired?

www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/nov/01/monarchy

Presumably MM has already thought about this predicament...

Harry might be a multi millionaire but that doesn't mean that his millions are in a bank waiting to be withdrawn.
The money will be tied up in various funds, medium risk and high risk. A sum of money will be easily accessible but if a significant amount is needed then the money will need to be moved from whichever fund it's in to an easily accessible account. This takes time and documents need to be signed to make sure that money can be transferred.
With the hit that the stock market has taken in light of Covid 19 it's debatable whether Harry will still have his millions, that will depend on how good Harry's asset management team are.

And, as a result, have no problem lying under oath because they think everything they believe is true.

Do any of you think it a possibility that The Queen will step in last minute and shut the case down, the way she did with the Paul Burrells case once it became evident that all the RF dirty laundry was about to be aired?

You mean the Queen suddenly remembers that she was the one who phoned up The People?

I do not think for a millisecond that the Queen or anyone within the RF will go anywhere near this court case, they will allow MM to play this however she likes, after all they are no longer members of the RF so BP do not need to even comment. Whatever happens in the court case is no longer a reflection on the RF, and one might even hazard a guess that they are extremely relieved not to have to be part of another freak show after an already close shave with Andrew (I refuse to call that man a Prince)