Harry & Meghan, all welcome (aka positive thread, now renamed!)

[Roussette]

Here we are, let's inform, discuss, share and respect.

Well, I guess that settles it as to how Scobie got some of his stories. I've always kept an open mind around whether H&M fed them to him or if he'd simply invented the lot/pinched them from the press, but this isn't some silly rumour - it's the judge's own remarks based on the evidence

What a god awful mess, and how profoundly unwise the couple are to have ever entered into it

I can’t help feeling M has been very naive indeed. I struggle to understand her thinking really.

I can’t bear Johnny Depp. Keanu Reeves, though .... 💕

Not to go too off piste, but I do love Keanu Reeves. He just has a quiet dignity. He's had a lot of tragedy in his life and dealt with it and I love how he has used his wealth to help others.

I now want to watch JOhn Wick again.

It seems difficult to find someone who has a bad word to say about Keanu Reeves.

Save your breath, SunbathingDragon; it's already been suggested that the judge is corrupt and I'm only waiting for the assertion that the story actually came from court staff who are in cahoots with him

I hold no brief for any of the RF, but I try to stick to the facts and didn't want to assume any of Scobie's stories came direct from H&M ... so to read that the judge believes they have is a bit much

Above all, why would anyone with even a shred of integrity bring a lawsuit which centres on confidentiality, then wilfully break it themselves?

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Save your breath, SunbathingDragon; it's already been suggested that the judge is corrupt and I'm only waiting for the assertion that the story actually came from court staff who are in cahoots with him

I hold no brief for any of the RF, but I try to stick to the facts and didn't want to assume any of Scobie's stories came direct from H&M ... so to read that the judge believes they have is a bit much

Above all, why would anyone with even a shred of integrity bring a lawsuit which centres on confidentiality, then wilfully break it themselves?

Very true.

I think some can’t see they do any wrong (whilst admittedly others can’t see they do any right) and it’s whether those who are such ardent supporters would be prepared to change their views in line with a court of law or remain steadfast.

and it’s whether those who are such ardent supporters would be prepared to change their views in line with a court of law or remain steadfast

Presume that's aimed at me and others on the more positive side?!

Haven't been following enough, (no broadband, long story...)
I saw she had won the case to protect the friends identities, but the judge has criticised both sides for tit-for-tat publicity campaigns. That's about it from what I've skim read

Not specifically aimed at anyone I’ve seen post on any of the threads or necessarily on MN. More of a general musing.

If anything, perhaps more directed towards the celebrity world of anything (which, of course, could include anyone on here).

Fair enuf Sunbathing

From my reading of the judgement the Judge is getting pretty pissed off with all of them - he seems keen to inject some speed into proceedings.

From my reading of the judgement the Judge is getting pretty pissed off with all of them - he seems keen to inject some speed into proceedings

Yes, I picked up on that bit too
Trouble is, I don't imagine AN are in any rush while they're making so much out of this, and given everything that's come out I don't expect MM's especially keen to get into court either

And meanwhile the costs keep going up and up, and somebody will have to pay them ...

Yup but 100% it has to be owned it's not just the DM at it. This cannot be brushed aside.

Well that's pretty damning from the judge. Clear both sides are briefing out stories to suit their narrative. MM would be wise to drop the case and rethink her strategy now.

It's interesting - I think that she would have had her exit strategy, had the judge said he would allow the names to be published. She had already hinted that it would be too high a price to pay for her friends to be "outed."
I wonder if she welcomed today's ruling?

She can't drop the case now without AN agreeing and she'd have to pay their costs, from what I remember.

I wonder if she welcomed today's ruling?

She wants to protect her friends so I don't doubt it

Anyway, back to Kee (as I call him). I’d bloody thrive if I was anywhere near him.

It would have given her the perfect excuse to drop the case though, costs notwithstanding. Otherwise, how could she explain dropping it, without losing face?

@Roussette I read the judgment rather than ‘skim reading’ - the names are not to be published at this stage. This may change as the case progresses.
Not as simple as ‘won’

Nishky...
The Express headlines says WINS (in capitals) as does the Guardian, and other sources from the US, I was just repeating what they said.
I have no doubt you have read it in far more detail than me, as I said I only skim read as my internet was down.

Quotes from the judge for those who have only skimmed, sourced from the Telegraph, interesting article for those with a subscription. I have only pulled a few bits but it may get deleted.

The judge said in a 20-page ruling that "for the time being at least" the five friends should have their identities protected "in the interests of the administration of justice". He stressed that while their anonymity remained in place "at this stage", that "may fade or even evaporate if and when there is a trial at which one or more of the sources gives evidence".

However, in the ruling Mr Justice Warby said it was "clear that neither side has, so far, been willing to confine the presentation of its case to the courtroom". He added that there was evidence to support the newspaper's claims that the duchess's team had been "energetically briefing the media about these proceedings from the outset".

He noted how the title page of Meghan's witness statement was posted on a Twitter account belonging to Omid Scobie...Mr Justice Warby said it seemed "very likely" that he had been "provided with a copy by representatives of the claimant [Meghan]".The judge highlighted how a press officer at the Duke and Duchess's foundation had sent journalists a "crib sheet" and "legal filing" of the duchess's reply to court papers.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/05/meghan-markle-privacy-claim-mail-sunday-publisher-loses-latest/

Fascinating stuff. Thanks for that.

I think Meghan had a clear case about the letter and will win that. But she has muddied the waters by throwing in everything that she feels is an injustice and that is not how the law works. Plus the links to Scobie and the questions about their involvement with the book make it all very murky.