More News on Harry and Meghan

[Viviennemary]

Two little bits of news I read today. First the bells won't ring out at Westminster Abbey for Meghans birthday next month and she'll be devastated. No I don't think she'll even expect them to ring. And I had to smile at Bogart the dog was left behind in Canada because it didn't take to Harry. What else could she do. Hardly leave Harry behind. And it would have been a worry with a baby in the house too. She did the right thing here.

@ WinnieTheW0rm apologies . No he is not suing , it was “ simply” an ill judged letter .

Taking photos of Archie is disgusting and I can understand they might want to get away from the RF and live quietly and peacefully with their little family.
But why oh why would you go to LA to do that? They must either be extremely dim or they actually want all of the publicity. Which is it?

I was waking along the beach with my toddler DS the other day and there was a drone flying around. Plenty of people on the beach but noone near us whilst walking. At one point it was hovering directly above us and it made me feel really, really uncomfortable that they were filming or taking photos. Couldn't see who was operating. I can't help but think there must be some really sinister uses for these sometimes.

There ought to be a law prohibiting the flying of drones over private property. They should never have been invented.

@Fairyliz

Taking photos of Archie is disgusting and I can understand they might want to get away from the RF and live quietly and peacefully with their little family. But why oh why would you go to LA to do that? They must either be extremely dim or they actually want all of the publicity. Which is it?

How about it's just the place they want to live? Why are they either extremely dim or publicity seeking? Given that it's illegal to invade someone's privacy in this way with a drone in California, maybe they hoped that the legislation might give them the protection of privacy in their own home.

TheNavigator

Well a quick google shows there were also drones trying to pap them at Frogmore, so the argument that is was somehow their fault for leaving the UK doesn't hold water.

I did Google and there were articles around the time Archie expected . A drone had been spotted however the police acted quickly , put up signs and made it clear it was illegal . I can’t see an more recent articles .
Not sure about Californian law but do H and M have similar protection there ?

Will no one think of the protection officers

Frogmore is in the Windsor Great Park which is a banned zone for flying drones because of it's location, directly under the main Heathrow departure and arrivals flightpath. It offered more privacy but they didn't want to live there.

Unfortunately H&M's new home in an exclusive estate full of the super wealthy and famous is a target for these paps' drones so I don't know what they can do to protect their privacy. The helicopters must be annoying not only them but their neighbours.

Yes. Photos from drones over private land is illegal. The idea that the press would leave them alone in LA is of course ridiculous. No chance.

Is this a photo that has been published, or one that's been taken but not yet published?

they knew what they were getting in to when choosing to live (for now) in such a paparazzi hotspot, and decided that in the overall scale, the benefits of the new life there outweigh the downsides for them.

I genuinely wonder if they did. We hear about how awfully intrusive the press can be but Harry would have had life long protection and Meghan was an almost unknown actress in Canada, let alone LA where A listers live. So I can imagine that they didn’t realise how relentless and horrendous it can be.

The agreement the RF has with the British media means papped shots tend to have no/little value in the U.K. because they won’t publish them. Royal protection and security will also mean they can lead a relatively private life whilst away from public engagements.

Considering how litigatious they are, it reinforces my belief Meghan knew about the People interview because no action has currently been taken against it.

This is from an article from Fox News

“Markle, 38, and Harry, 35, said the tabloid harassment finally came to a head when they saw that a photo of Archie was being offered to media outlets that was purportedly taken on a family outing in Malibu, when it was clearly shot while he was in their yard, unbeknownst to them.”

@ButteryPuffin

Is this a photo that has been published, or one that's been taken but not yet published?

I think it was published in a German magazine or tabloid, but then available on the internet. It's of Doria outside with Archie on a little ride on trolley/trike thing. It looks like it's on their patio.

I think it was published in a German magazine or tabloid, but then available on the internet. It's of Doria outside with Archie on a little ride on trolley/trike thing. It looks like it's on their patio

Totally awful.

Yes that’s shocking .

I don't think the defence of it being a day out in Malibu will wash; Doria isn't wearing anything on her feet, which would be unusual for a day out but not for stepping outside your home on a hot day.

@WinnieTheW0rm I understood what you mean and agree completely.

They choose to live in LA That’s fine that’s their choice perhaps she loves the city she grew up in or the feel work opportunities are there...like anyone they’ll have multiple reasons for moving to their chosen city. And like anyone they have to go there with their eyes wide open. Is it right to be papped - no of course it bloody isnt (though many famous people do work along side paps). Should a child be drone photographer in their own garden - definitely not!! Was it something that they could have predicted would happen - YES. That’s the point. It’s not about it being acceptable or right it’s just about it being something they could have. foreseen. Like I move to a centrally located amazing flat. I love it it’s right beside my favourite shops bars coffee shops and my work. Ideal. It’s also just along the street from to a nightclub and people make a lot of noise at 2am kicking out and I’ve had people pissing on my doorstep on occasion. Is it RIGHT? No of course it bloody isn’t. Is it something I considered and Watched happening before moving to my flat so knew it would happen? YES and i accepted this horrible side because the positives of the flat out weighted them. Same with la and pap.

And yeah they’d not have had drones taking their kid’s picture at frogmore. It just wouldn’t have happened ever with protection and it being illegal and closely monitored. Then the press here can’t publish so no market.

Oh and I find the assumption that they left because of a sex abuser in the family (I don’t believe that’s actually been proven but will let that slide as no PA fan myself anyway!) and racists in the family ... completely laughable. The old racist was in that family long before MM joined. She knew what family she was marrying into. The rumours on PA were there long before too. She went in eyes and Wide open Regarding type of family. Her “H” also has some pretty questionable past behaviour but she still married him so
Her principle weren’t that strong. And BOTH of them are more than happy to still trade on royal status (not using HRH is utterly irrelevant if they use duke duchess as to general population in US and indeed here there is no understand of any distinctions). The are also BOTH very very happy to still be taking masses of cash form the family. So no I really don’t think they left the family for moral reasons

If it’s illegal to publish private photos taken this way maybe that’s why the American media didn’t want to touch them & the people who were trying to sell them mislabelled them. It’s awful though, have never seen pap photos of celebrities & children in their private backyards on TMZ & the like.

All very good points @WaterWishWash. I’d hate their life. I hope they are predominately happy and end up having the life they are hoping/aiming for but there is nothing appealing about it to me right now.

The idea of a child or anyone being photographed in their private garden is disgusting. Is it illegal? If I walk along the street and take a picture of a tree and happen to catch child isn’t their garden is that illegal? Obviously selling is different but what’s the actual law on photographing gardens and goings on?

As I said I wouldn’t have happened at frogmore. I don’t recall ever having seen or heard about any private picture of the Cambridge children in their garden. I HAVE seen and hear of pap photos of them in public places though. George and granny at a beach when he was a toddler and Kate and George at a farm park. Nothing more recent. These weren’t published in uk obviously and I don’t know if any legal action was taken but I assume not. Taking legal action is what’s getting this more press too. Lots reading that mail article will now be googling for the picture and seeing it. No lawsuit no mail article and no publicity. They’ve made that drone shot more valuable. They’d be better focusing energies on having drone use above their home banned somehow surely.

@WaterWishWash

The idea of a child or anyone being photographed in their private garden is disgusting. Is it illegal? If I walk along the street and take a picture of a tree and happen to catch child isn’t their garden is that illegal? Obviously selling is different but what’s the actual law on photographing gardens and goings on?

As I said I wouldn’t have happened at frogmore. I don’t recall ever having seen or heard about any private picture of the Cambridge children in their garden. I HAVE seen and hear of pap photos of them in public places though. George and granny at a beach when he was a toddler and Kate and George at a farm park. Nothing more recent. These weren’t published in uk obviously and I don’t know if any legal action was taken but I assume not. Taking legal action is what’s getting this more press too. Lots reading that mail article will now be googling for the picture and seeing it. No lawsuit no mail article and no publicity. They’ve made that drone shot more valuable. They’d be better focusing energies on having drone use above their home banned somehow surely.

I don’t think it is illegal to take a photo in those circumstances. Must admit that I wouldn’t like a stranger taking a picture of a tree and having my child in the background and I’m completely devoid of any celebrity status!

If they are being phographed by drones in their own garden then I think that is absolutely not on. In a public place it would depend on the laws in the country they are in. They are in the news now on a daily basis. Some private life . Bits of that Scobie book are being released this weekend apparently.

The lawsuit says it’s illegal in California to take photos of people in their private homes using drones & telephoto lenses.

I think it was published in a German magazine or tabloid, but then available on the internet. It's of Doria outside with Archie on a little ride on trolley/trike thing. It looks like it's on their patio

Yet the awful British press that H&M despise and have criticised so much have not actually printed it.

Didn’t the DM do a quick post & delete of a photo of Harry playing with dogs in the backyard a while ago?.