News on Meghan and Harry

[Viviennemary]

Since they are in the news more or less daily why not a thread on this. Latest I've read over the last few days is that Meghan is going to produce a film from a book. And later this month she is teaming up with Michelle Obama for project on gender equality. Both sound interesting projects.

After seeing that Omid interview I don't believe that the friends just took it upon themselves to go to People, and that People ran that story without talking to her. I think she was disappointed that after several months her father hadn't had it published, so he was nudged. She seems to need her story to be heard, to get her side across, hence the irrelevant side issues of the royal courtiers and Eugenie and Beatrice in the court case.

If it comes to it is there any way MM can refuses to take the stand to be cross examined? Say on medical grounds i.e if she was pregnant?

Watching the circus that is the JD trial surely she can now see the papers win no matter what the verdict? If it was me I'd be doing everything in my power to halt the proceedings rather than hoping I'd gain a small moral victory on a copyright claim.

@WinnieTheW0rm

Not sure if this has already been asked but if the letter was written to Thomas Markle surely the letter would be his to do what he wants with it. If that is the case then Meghan has no case as it's not her letter

That's the difference between copyright and ownership.

He is the owner of the letter as he was the intended recipient and he possesses it.

But the writer of the letter can remain the copyright holder (there's may be legal points around whether that is always the case) and so it should not be reproduced without the copyright holder's consent - other than small excepts for (fair) comment.

So the case will look at who owns the copyright, whether previously published accounts were authorised, whether TM's actions were reasonable (in correcting unfair comment) and whether AN should have published.

MM launched the case against AN, as she could hardly sue her own father, but I think the reasonableness of his actions may well be a feature.

Her case against them will be scrutinised, so to that ecpxtent she is fours on trial. But the way she put it is snappier than 'claimant' and feeds her wider (and already partially struck out) narrative.

Thank you for explaining that to me. The outcome of this case will be interesting in the wider sense of ownership and copyright.

Meghan looks more and more naive . She does not look she had a clue what the expectations of her would be in the RF. The blame for that must lie with the RF for not laying it out for her, chapter and verse.
Harry said at the beginning he'd tried to prepare her but obviously so smitten he daren't risk scaring her off. As to the rest of the RF advising her - well that never went well, did it? There were high expectations from both camps and ultimately both were disappointed. If I'd been a senior royal then the engagement interview would have worried me tbh, and if I'd been MM (heaven forbid) then the nitpicking over hats and bare legs and closing card doors myself (how very dare I!) would have had me heading back across the pond.

For people who supposedly left their royal positions for a quiet and peaceful life earning their own income, H&M have yet to earn any income since living in LA and continue to make provocative statements in public which will attract media attention.

Also continues with court battle against Mail on Sunday over letter M wrote to her Dad whist now seeking court order to stop the 5 women who spoke to People magazine being named and appearing in court. All of which courts more media attention.

Most people who genuinely wanted less media attention would drop.case and not make public statements. Most people who wanted to earn their own living would stop sponging off Prince Charles and get a job and pay rent to person who's house she lives in.

A genuine persons behaviour is in line with what they say.

he nitpicking over hats and bare legs and closing card doors myself (how very dare I!) would have had me heading back across the pond.

Yes but that’s what you buy into if you are a member of the RF. she should have expected it!

I have always thought part of the problem with the RF and those marrying in is that they genuinely can’t understand how ‘normal’ people who have been used to living without security, protocol and constant restrictions struggle to adapt. If that’s all they have known themselves, how could they?
I don’t however think that whatever warnings were issued were listened to anyway. I think it must have been apparent that Harry was going to marry Meghan whatever. She didn’t want to listen to anyone telling her things she didn’t want to hear. He didn’t want her to hear them. If the family had stood against the marriage more forcefully, it would have made them both more determined. It seems William tried, and that led to a breakdown in their relationship, allegedly.

It seems to me if you write a confidential letter to another person it.is between you and the recipient. However by either showing the letter or disclosing the contents of it to 5 other people M broke her own confidentiality. Her Dad only disclosed part of the letter to set straight the account her friends had told People magazine about which he claims were a biases account of the letter as it only reported on little bits of letter to try to make M look good. As to M claiming she was unable to defend herself she had 15 members of her communication team at her disposal and she brought this case whilst still a senior royal so showing she could defend herself. Again what M says is different to reality of situation and her own behaviour.

didn't William advise H not to marry M so quickly? I imagine that was not received well and would lead to bad feeling.
why should the RF have stood against it more forcefully? he is a grown man, he should be allowed to marry who he likes.
this is not the 1930's.

• even the Mail did a straight-down-the-middle report on the forthcoming "Girls Up" thing It followed with some waspish reporting on Harry's Commonwealth speech, but stuck to what seem the facts with Meghan*

This is pretty much the Mail's MO. They only ever publish some neutral or fawning about one person, in order to contrast with a tearing down of another. They don't care who is the being fawned on and who torn down, they are happy to mix it up.

It would seem that their readership don't mind too much either

If it was me I'd be doing everything in my power to halt the proceedings rather than hoping I'd gain a small moral victory on a copyright claim

So would I, but surely to stop the case she's either got to withdraw all allegations - which seems unlikely - or hope AN will agree nominal damages to buy her off, which they may not be prepared to do; why would they, when they're getting so much out of reporting every last twist and turn?

Did she really think a behemoth like this would simply roll over instead of bringing in the big guns and using her case for all it's worth? Is it really possible she expected a live case to operate like an episode of Suits or that the role equated to in depth legal knowledge?

I don't think it's a slam dunk for Meghan at all, the copyright issue.

This is hardly the MoS's first rodeo, so to speak. It is inconceivable they didn't think they had reasonable basis to publish.

I read ages ago that she wanted to withdraw the case but the Mail said no. (Not sure this is even true.) I thought she would have the right to withdraw the case at any time. The costs must be mounting. I expect witnesses will be allowed to give evidence via web cam. But will it come to that. Can't see it myself. She might have an HM moment in the car on the way to court and remember something crucial to the case.

If it comes to it is there any way MM can refuses to take the stand to be cross examined? Say on medical grounds i.e if she was pregnant?

Firstly, Meghan really has to give evidence, and submit herself to cross-examination because if she doesn't do that there is a very high chance that the judge will conclude she hasn't proved her case (and she'll lose). There is ways that the court will deal with someone who, for medical or other reasons, can't deal with a court proceeding in the usual ways, but she'd need to present medical evidence to support it, and generally what happens is that the witness gets longer breaks/more broken up sessions not he stand etc.

I agree, FinallyHere, but that's the risk anyone takes in joining the soap opera the RF have become - especially if, instead of keeping their heads down, they publicise perceived grievances in an attempt to get "their side" across

I don't say it's right, but it happens - and one more RF "incomer" isn't going to change that as long as the family will throw them to the wolves to protect themselves

And you can't discontinue your case without paying all the other sides costs. They will be pretty high by now!

I think she knew exactly what the court case would entail. Her legal team would have told her. She just craves more attention. A person who genuinely wanted peace and quiet to raise her son out of the public spotlight would drop this case. They would not name their charity after their sons name either. M must miss the Sussex Royal platform where she could pronounce whatever she pleased to the public. Now she has to rely on charities to inform the public everytimr she does something. M just has to have it published.

Puzzled this is what I don't understand, cross post.

Do I think she should have been better advised wrt whether this was the particular hill to die on? Absolutely. There are loads of willing advisors with their hands out for cash from HNWs though. Ching, ching ching, in roll the fees. This is also what I find disgusting about this case.

KP/BP have been at this for literally decades. There is a reason they would have been advising 'no comment.' But no - take advice from some mates.

She might have an HM moment in the car on the way to court and remember something crucial to the case

Don't think it's not occurred to me
However that would still leave the issue of costs, and the clout the Queen possesses is hardly something Meghan enjoys - and nor are the RF likely to lend her a bit of it now

Omid Scobie has a very nice voice! But yes, that interview is the nail in the coffin. She's on extremely thin ice by continuing to deny knowledge when so many things are on film and forever documented online. Perhaps that's why she attempted to distance herself from Scobie regarding the book as she knew she'd be questioned about how much he knew and revealed about the letter.

That DM baby group article is a petty blow...almost seems like revenge for the injunction. Maybe they were preparing a big story revealing the 5 names (which would inevitably come out at some point) and she tried to throw a spanner in their works with the bizarrely worded injunction. Every parent of an only child toddler has probably said to someone what a shame it was that they were alone for so long during lockdown. MM probably mentioned that in passing to someone and that person passed it on.

It's almost terrifying to watch her dig herself deeper into a hole by constantly picking legal fights with the press. There is no way to win, and people have literally watched her ruin her own life, her family, close friends and Archie's future within the space of 2 years. And all that from a position of unimaginable wealth and privilege.

Do not understand why she doesn't just step away and give it all a rest. Living well is the best revenge.

I think AN know full well that they will lose. They are taking a calculated risk that the benefits to them will outweigh the compensation that will be required to pay.

If their intention is to discourage other victims from similar legal action, they will probably view the outcome as a success.

I think the story about Meghan not being able to join mum & baby groups was placed to cast doubt on the ‘5 close friends who are young mothers’. They play dirty.

Does anybody know where harry and Meghan are at the moment? Are they together or is harry in Uk (as is rumoured)

A person who genuinely wanted peace and quiet to raise her son out of the public spotlight would drop this case.

Exactly this! They wouldn't start the case in first place. Even if the letter publication was a gross violation of privacy, the content related to her wedding and her currently completely estranged/NC father. None of that matters a bit 2 years later, and if she dropped the matter then everything would be forgotten.

In a parallel world she would never have started the court case, started to miss her dad after moving back to LA where she'd reminded of her childhood. Privately starts up contact again and lets him meet his SIL and grandson for the first time. TM doesn't sound like a horrible person at all, just a shy man who's easily manipulated by the press.

Or she could have given the UK a few more years and let Archie grow up with his cousins. Once out of the baby stage it's a blessing to have same-aged trusted children around to play with. By then the media would probably have nothing more to report and leave them alone anyway.

KP/BP have been at this for literally decades. There is a reason they would have been advising 'no comment.' But no - take advice from some mates

Indeed, but whatever happens AN are going to win this one. If Meghan gets a payout it'll be eclipsed by what they've already made out of it, and if she loses all hell will be let loose with the reporting

Hideous as it is, AN have got her impaled on a pin and they'll keep her there just as long as it suits - but then, that's the risk she took in bringing this in the first place

I will repeat again what I said on a previous thread. MM did not want privacy, she wanted SECRECY. They are completely different things.

oh god, I hope she loses, and then the floodgates open and she will realise that she needs to take the criticism along with the praise just like every other celebrity who puts themselves out there instead of simply doing their job, taking the money and pissing off back home again.