A positive thread on Harry and Meghan (aka Thread 6)

[Mummy195]

@rousette

I'm sure you won't mind that your excellent link gets 'pinned'.

Some of the things MM did before marrying H.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1282990766097301504.html

I wouldn't believe a word the misogynstic trash that is the Daily Mail writes. And I am certainly not going to click on a link and provide click bait for their right wing, fear mongering, Brexit loving, immigrant hating, xenophobic, festering rag.

@ TheNavigator it shows a copy of a legally drawn up document . I was musing about the new name.
No one is forcing you to click on anything so maybe climb off your high horse !?

I really couldn't put never complain, never explain and Prince Andrew in the same sentence together. He whinged about his DDs place in the RF, he whinged about their security detail, he then gave that interview and he is only quiet now because he's quite possibly tied inexorably to a paedophile! Oh... and he's kept his £300,000 tax funded bodyguards despite stepping away from royal duties.

Court documents from Ghislaine being released at the moment, don't see anything on that in the DM, they're too obsessed with sticking the knife in with M&H.

I really couldn't put never complain, never explain and Prince Andrew in the same sentence together.

Oh yes I agree, but he's done it since the tv interview hasn't he?

So is MM saying she knows the identity of the friends who spoke to People but she didn't know beforehand that they were going to do that?

Court documents from Ghislaine being released ATM, don't see anything on that in the DM

I think there's a 7 day hold on that while Maxwell's lawyers decide whether to appeal?

TBH I was surprised the judge suggested their release at all, since it's an obvious invitation for the briefs to cry "unfair trial". Maybe that was the idea though ... "the judge made a mistake, so now she can't be tried at all ... sorrreee"

DM did actually publish a nude photo of Ghislaine that was part of the released docs. However the article barely got any comments so it was quickly buried. Not surprisingly, nobody is interested or shocked by the fact that an alleged underage child trafficker and abuser has nudes somewhere.

The press are driven by clicks and they know H&M articles generate upwards of 5K comments and god knows how many views.

@MissEliza

So is MM saying she knows the identity of the friends who spoke to People but she didn't know beforehand that they were going to do that?

Yes. She's also put in her answers to the defence that she made an assumption it was someone else, spoke to them and she got it wrong, which somehow proves she had no idea.

think there's a 7 day hold on that while Maxwell's lawyers decide whether to appeal?

Must go and look. Thanks. I read this morning it was going to be by close of play Thursday

@GalaxyCake

DM did actually publish a nude photo of Ghislaine that was part of the released docs. However the article barely got any comments so it was quickly buried. Not surprisingly, nobody is interested or shocked by the fact that an alleged underage child trafficker and abuser has nudes somewhere.

The press are driven by clicks and they know H&M articles generate upwards of 5K comments and god knows how many views.

That is the reason I won't click - I refuse the feed the monster. And of course, the more M&H coverage, slyly digging up random facial expressions, touching her bump etc, the more they build the negative view to get posters frothing against her and clicking more. It is a tawdry circle jerk of hate.

Totally agree TheNavigator. I read one article last week, for the first time in god knows how long, and even felt a bit grubby after that

Court documents from Ghislaine being released ATM, don't see anything on that in the DM

I think there's a 7 day hold on that while Maxwell's lawyers decide whether to appeal?

Given the possible names involved, even if Andrew wasn't, the DM will be all over this like a rash as soon as it's allowed. Bet they can't wait.

I'm bemused by the suggestion the DM are giving PA some sort of special treatment over H&M. How does that benefit them? They would be reporting on both if they could. There is not a rule it can only be one member of the RF at any one time and they always choose H&M. There is just not much to report on with regards to PA right now. I'm sure it's coming though.

There were two updated articles on the GM case on the mailonline today - one referencing as PP says photos unearthed in court document and a second relating to whether she is queen bee in prison.

@Roussette

Totally agree TheNavigator. I read one article last week, for the first time in god knows how long, and even felt a bit grubby after that

How do you know what the DM do or don't report on then?

There were two updated articles on the GM case on the mailonline today

That's not Prince Andrew though is it? She's in prison for a reason. There's a lot of dodgy stuff he's done in the past... his relationships with dictators and suspect businessman, travelling the world in private jets with an endless taxpayer fund, he's unpleasant to staff, has few friends and to my mind decades of his arrogance and unpleasantness is far far worse than anything H&M have done.

But this thread is about H&M so I'll shut up now

How do you know what the DM do or don't report on then?

Because I'm ashamed to say I used to read it from time to time a long time ago. Not any more. It's sunk too far. And because of the quoting of it on the H&M threads, that gives me all the idea I need

There's a lot of dodgy stuff he's done in the past... his relationships with dictators and suspect businessman, travelling the world in private jets with an endless taxpayer fund, he's unpleasant to staff, has few friends

And you know all this because it was reported in the press? Or some other way?

Not being goady but what positive stuff is there to write? Genuinely?

I have not said I don't read the press? I get my news from all sorts of sources.

@Roussette

There were two updated articles on the GM case on the mailonline today

That's not Prince Andrew though is it? She's in prison for a reason. There's a lot of dodgy stuff he's done in the past... his relationships with dictators and suspect businessman, travelling the world in private jets with an endless taxpayer fund, he's unpleasant to staff, has few friends and to my mind decades of his arrogance and unpleasantness is far far worse than anything H&M have done.

But this thread is about H&M so I'll shut up now

Isn't this speculation?

Not being goady but what positive stuff is there to write? Genuinely?

On Andrew? Nowt!

OK, I know you didn't mean that

There has been positive stuff AFAIC but certain news outlets don't see it as that

Wolgirrl these positive threads started as a counterbalance to the endless Meghan bashing fed by the red tops by some posters. I agree, there really isn't much to write about, but such is the bizarre visceral hatred for H&M, posters do anyway, endlessly and unpleasantly on thread after thread. Thus this wee haven was created for posters who were uncomfortable that there was a place on Mumsnet where a woman has committed no crime was subject to endless, speculative vitriol.

I don’t see the benefit in making the names of the 5 witnesses public, and I see considerable harm in them being named. I would expect the injunction to be granted.

Isn't this speculation?

No.
Don't know how you can say that. Please don't ask me to send you links, it's too time consuming.
It is not speculation.

Apart from this bit...
"and to my mind decades of his arrogance and unpleasantness is far far worse than anything H&M have done"

Which is why I said 'to my mind' i.e. in my opinion

I thought the thread was about Harry and Meghan?

The court and AN are in receipt of court papers submitted by Meghan with the names included. So far, in public, the friends are ABCDE. Today’s case is about reporting their names at the future full hearing. It’s normal they would be named in open court. The barrister says that as M named her friends it’s now unreasonable for them to be kept confidential. We will see!