Harry and Meghan court dramas (not Suits)

[ARoseInHarlem]

Starting this thread while I digest the last few posts on the previous thread. I think the H&M saga could be as unsettling for the RF as the Charles & Diana bad publicity in the 1990s, if not worse.

Jeepers...

Sorry, was responding to the Johnny Depp stuff.

Yes the case is JD v The Sun.

Claimant response

The intention of the Letter was to make him stop his actions; it was not an attempt at reconciliation

@Roussette

Who reported it and why? Not me. Don't know.

I didn't direct my query to you, but thank you for your speedy response.

I do agree that Meghan should speak out in support of theatre, but not that she has a moral obligation to do so.

I’ve thought about this and think she does on the basis that she willingly took on the role as patron, and has continued to keep it. The same goes for anyone else who is patron of anywhere else.

and oddly enough, some of us blame Harry much more than his wife for a lot of what's gone badly

I feel Harry is around 99.9% responsible. Really I don’t see what loyalties Meghan is expected to have towards the U.K. and her husband’s family but I feel differently about Harry.

I think (but still reading) she is denying she knew the letter would be discussed in any interview, denying she knew there was an interview/article for people magazine, but I think it's worded in a way that she hasn't denied she knew her friends were going to be interviewed.

Surely if she is denying she knew there would be an interview it doesn’t matter how well worded it is to avoid denying that she knew her friends would be interviewed?

I don’t think many court proceedings put many people in a favourable light. Meghan is running the risk/likelihood of looking as bad as Johnny and Amber are.

I didn't direct my query to you, but thank you for your speedy response

No problem. I thought it was directed at everyone who posted on here

@Roussette

I didn't direct my query to you, but thank you for your speedy response

No problem. I thought it was directed at everyone who posted on here

Of course.

Blossom513

Claimant response

The intention of the Letter was to make him stop his actions; it was not an attempt at reconciliation

How sad that MM was determined to cut off her Dad .
The Markle side have gone very quiet . Did TM not say he would give an interview every month until MM spoke to him ? What about Samantha ? She was everywhere for a while .
I do feel there is much more to come out.

If she put in one response friend A did not know the contents then in another response friend A knew some of the contents, what happens now?

I don't know, but if the submission goes before the judge in that state I'd expect him to have something to say about it

What continues to confuse me, though, is how the hell the lawyers allowed something like that to pass. It's not even about "listening to advice" any more - if the responses say two diffferent things that's just plain wrong and surely something they'd have picked up?

When I saw their video, I started to hear Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers singing Refugee in my mind.

@myfloorneedssweeping

When I saw their video, I started to hear Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers singing Refugee in my mind.

Why so? That doesn't sound very kind.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

If she put in one response friend A did not know the contents then in another response friend A knew some of the contents, what happens now?

I don't know, but if the submission goes before the judge in that state I'd expect him to have something to say about it

What continues to confuse me, though, is how the hell the lawyers allowed something like that to pass. It's not even about "listening to advice" any more - if the responses say two diffferent things that's just plain wrong and surely something they'd have picked up?

Ultimately the lawyers will either do what they are instructed to do by their client or else they will cease to represent them.

@Oldbutstillgotit

Blossom513

Claimant response

The intention of the Letter was to make him stop his actions; it was not an attempt at reconciliation

How sad that MM was determined to cut off her Dad .
The Markle side have gone very quiet . Did TM not say he would give an interview every month until MM spoke to him ? What about Samantha ? She was everywhere for a while .
I do feel there is much more to come out.

Could they have been paid off in exchange for NDA? Maybe that’s why Harry can’t repay Frogmore Cottage in one go.

Ultimately the lawyers will either do what they are instructed to do by their client or else they will cease to represent them
This plus if they have changed lawyers, they may have missed some inconsistencies in paperwork they inherited.
From an NT pov, actors who are speaking out are calling on the govt to fund and save the arts. It's difficult to ask the govt to do something without making the statement political so that's probably why all the RF are staying away from it.
I agree with the PPs about the Depp case. This is why celebs and the RF try to avoid taking the media to court. Unless it's very clear cut (like the intrusion of the topless Kate pics) no-one ever comes out of it well.

My message was deleted! It concerned potential perjury. If only MN were so proactive about racist posts. I've reported several concerns about Islamaphobiac posts in the past and had replies saying those posts were fine. I'm clearly comparing apples to oranges but sometimes MN makes my blood boil because I've no idea what their values are.

What lawyers have they changed? In court they will use their hot shot barrister. They use their own solicitors. Not Charles’s solicitors. They won’t change barristers - I don’t think. They have gone to the celebrity high flyer.

The struck out elements smacked of MMs ego going into overdrive. They were irrelevant. I think some of her views in these papers might go the same way. She’s gunning for KP staff.

Before the case started it was well touted she would win the ownership of the letters issue. But there’s so much other baggage it seems damage limitation isn’t on her agenda.

Mine was deleted earlier too! I have no idea why. Nothing in it was what hasn’t been reported in the press. I suspect MN hq are not well read!

So, were H and M together in that video or was it edited to look like that (apparently the focus on them is different, but I am no expert.....)

Beautifully apt observation from Sarah Vine this evening, whereby she likens Meghan's gazing at Harry during his 'speech' as being like an adoring mother watching her slightly dim child reciting a poem off-by-heart!'

The clips they played on Newsnight just now were really about H&M seeking change in the organisation. The way The Queen has engaged with The Commonwealth wasn’t good enough now. H&M to the rescue.

I’m never sure who exactly benefits from The Commonwealth really. We seem to fold out dinner invites and nations gratefully accept invitations and have their photos taken with the Queen. She tries to avoid a few of them. So now it’s all about us admitting we were terrible colonial masters. Over to you then Harry for your new role.

Dole out dinner invitation...,

spectator.us/we-need-to-talk-about-prince-harry/

This is an interesting article. I am not a hater of this pair, far from it. How anyone can enter into some kind of pretence that all is normal is concerning though. Surely if this happened to anyone of your immediate family you would have huge concerns. I think the narrative would be different if Harry was female.

To be fair a lot of us waste a lot of time on these threads not just @rousette

So, legal people, is it likely that KP staff could be made to testify and MM's 5 friends? Lordy it will make tales of defecating on beds look tame in comparison

This whole case has a feel of a runaway train about it, I doubt PH and MM thought it was going to go this far or in this direction.