Meghan court case live today

[callmeadoctor]

The most measured and correct post I have seen so far.

Lolz

Erm, People magazine did not print the letter

If you read the quote you have posted from Serenster you will see she says “the existence of a letter and it’s contents. She did not say they had published the letter

And it’s ok for the friends to breach Meghan’s privacy, because it’s favourable towards her and against her father. But when it’s her father defending himself .. (regardless of ANL printing the actual letter) he’s the worst human being for it.

No. The father was, and is, absolutely permitted to defend himself. He is not being sued. The problem is that ANL went too far in printing large chunks of the letter. They could legitimately have run an item setting out the father's case and describing the contents of the letter, as Meghan's lawyers accepted. But publishing the actual contents of the letter was going too far.

Also, as it seems Meghan authorised her friends to talk to People Magazine

Meghan has always maintained that she did not know her friends had talked to People Magazine

www.pressgazette.co.uk/meghan-markle-vs-mos-duchess-unaware-friends-told-people-magazine-about-letter-to-her-father/

@smilesy

Erm, People magazine did not print the letter

If you read the quote you have posted from Serenster you will see she says “the existence of a letter and it’s contents. She did not say they had published the letter

Yes, so why should she sue them when they did not print the letter or excepts of it.

They talks about it's existence, not a publish parts of it. Copyright laws are straightforward and uncomplicated.

It's a bit like music or a book. Ed Sheeran can sing his song to thousands, tell his friends all about it. BBC radio can talk about the song on a panel show, what they cannot do without permission is play it.

I think my interpretation of the case so far is that whilst TM had a right to reply, and ANL possibly could have justified printing some extracts of the letter specifically relating to the points made in the people article about the letter, where they come unstuck is they printed other parts of the letter that were not related to the people article and it’s this that is seen as being disproportionate, even if it was proven Meghan had instructed her friends to talk to people magazine.

What I’m not clear on though is if there is evidence of manipulation from the claimant (within the letter or with her friends and people article) and also evidence of misleading the court in witness statements (regardless of if it affects the outcome) on a case that has very high public interest, if that affects the decision about going to trial. If someone has admitted to misleading the court then should all the evidence be tested at trial even if there is still not much chance of success? It somehow feels wrong that a defendant doesn’t get the chance to go to trial and defend themselves, loses the case when it’s been proven the claimant has false information in their witness statement whether intentional or not.

When ANL won the right to appeal I read the judge decided it wasn’t based on ANLs strength of evidence but because of high public interest. I haven’t read the judgment in full though so maybe that is too simplified.

[quote smilesy]Also, as it seems Meghan authorised her friends to talk to People Magazine

Meghan has always maintained that she did not know her friends had talked to People Magazine

www.pressgazette.co.uk/meghan-markle-vs-mos-duchess-unaware-friends-told-people-magazine-about-letter-to-her-father/[/quote]
After it turns out M&H did authorise their staff to talk to OS and even tell him what to say, it’s hard to believe any other denials.
As for the RF ‘berating’ her about her father, it’s understandable and rather normal. However, the RF have also got to consider how the situation looked to the rest of the world. Look at how lovely Charles was to Doria after the wedding ceremony. He clearly was sensitive to how uneasy the situation was for her. Perhaps he also felt sympathy for Thomas Markle and how strange and overwhelming the situation would be for him.

At the end of the day, it’s hard to understand why M never introduced her father to her future husband but expected him to rock up on the day and walk her down the aisle. Perhaps she was hoping he’d bottle it, which he did.

[quote smilesy]Also, as it seems Meghan authorised her friends to talk to People Magazine

Meghan has always maintained that she did not know her friends had talked to People Magazine

www.pressgazette.co.uk/meghan-markle-vs-mos-duchess-unaware-friends-told-people-magazine-about-letter-to-her-father/[/quote]
I think this will have been in the sworn statement too and is actually more relevant to the case than the book . This is the bit I actually most want to hear proven either way. I strongly suspect it would be a similar situation to the finding freedom mess. Authorised and involved, but distanced enough to make her feel justified in saying she had nothing to do with it.

I just don’t believe 5 close friends would do something like this without her permission. Not one of them stopped to think ‘oh we should check Meghan is ok with this’? No, don’t buy it at all.

I know it might make no difference to the case but I just want to know!

[quote smilesy]Also, as it seems Meghan authorised her friends to talk to People Magazine

Meghan has always maintained that she did not know her friends had talked to People Magazine

www.pressgazette.co.uk/meghan-markle-vs-mos-duchess-unaware-friends-told-people-magazine-about-letter-to-her-father/[/quote]
Apologies if I was wrong about that. But I remain of the view that the People's article was the right side of the line, unlike the various articles in the Mail.

Yes, so why should she sue them when they did not print the letter or excepts of it.

They talks about it's existence, not a publish parts of it. Copyright laws are straightforward and uncomplicated.

Not sure any if this matters anymore. Her credibility is damaged. She might win her case, but she will have lost more in the process.

Maybe posters should read this? Read at your leisure....

twitter.com/InvictusbyPepp/status/1459215824032518149

Her credibility isn't damaged in my book.

Her credibility isn't damaged in my book

I just don’t believe 5 close friends would do something like this without her permission. Not one of them stopped to think ‘oh we should check Meghan is ok with this’? No, don’t buy it at all.
I know it might make no difference to the case but I just want to know!

I could see that 5 good friends would want to defend her and feared that if they asked her, she might be forced by those around her to tell them not to do it. So they just did it off their own bat.

Before this trial, if she'd said that was the case, I might have had my doubts but I would have accepted it. Now, I know she forgets that she sent emails and had multiple discussions about what should be included in the book, all the while wanting to hide her involvement. So maybe she forgot about telling her friends. So now I might just go with my instincts rather than what she says.

I don't think this has been her finest moment. No wonder she looked tense at the veterans gala.

Even if we take all that away, Meghan's lawyers, on her behalf, accepted that the Mail could legitimately have run a story about the letter outlining its contents. So, in their view (with which I tend to concur), the article in People Magazine was on the right side of the line

Yes, this is in essence an argument about which side of the line ANL will fall. I have always understood the breach of copyright claim to be pretty open and shut, but the the breach of privacy claim to be less strong. Interesting that she chose to include it, but then she had a scattergun approach to her claims at first, with several allegations struck out by the judge (interestingly, they included a claim that ANL acted dishonestly and in bad faith - hmmm, Meghan).

Be that as it may, ANL clearly took a calculated risk in publishing the extracts from the letter (they didn’t publish it in full), and Meghan took a calculated risk in suing them over it. Given how it’s playing out, Meghan may well ending up winning the battle, and having the summary judgment granted to her upheld, but it’s hard to see that she hasn’t lost the war. ANL will have good arguments to make in relation to damages and costs, this could well be a Pyrrhic victory.

Yes I read that Roussette but I’m not sure what that proves. Thomas Markle may well have been evasive about what treatment he was receiving and Knauf has never said he did not help her to draft the letter or support her in doing it. But that is just one text you have quoted. What about the many emails that contradict her never having any involvement in Finding Freedom? Those are what undermine her credibility. No one said that she has been economical with the truth in all areas.

'At the end of the day, it’s hard to understand why M never introduced her father to her future husband but expected him to rock up on the day and walk her down the aisle. Perhaps she was hoping he’d bottle it, which he did.'

Yes it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to work out that someone living a quiet life would need to feel involved and included from the start, to feel part of it all. Absolutely mismanaged from the outset.

@ChardonnaysPetDragon

Her credibility isn't damaged in my book

I'll have to add a

With regards to Meghan's credibility, didn't the Queen herself suddenly 'remember' conversations with Paul Burrell regarding something that went to court?

Even if you take the emails as showing clear cooperation, it's not as if she commissioned the book to be written or even sounded particularly keen on the whole thing; she stated that she didn't think Omid Scobie was very reliable, she didn't meet with him, and it sounds as if she was actively advised by KP to give that information. I don't think there was anything in the 'background' email that wasn't in the public domain anyway so how can that be a breach of privacy? And providing some bulletpoints to a member of staff who handles the press for you doesn't sound like they were exactly working together. Meghan also suggested she should ask her friends not to cooperate on the book but was advised against this. The whole narrative about Finding Freedom has been that Harry and Meghan wanted the book written and were actively involved. The texts don't indicate that to me at all.

Roussette there is nothing Meghan could do that would damage her credibility for you as you are far to invested in her. All that correspondence proves is there is absolutely no love there between father and daughter which is really sad as there was before the marriage apparently. Meghan must have been extremely frustrated after all that effort writing it that her father kept it hidden away to begin with. Getting her friends to call it a ‘loving letter’ was clearly what pushed him to reveal it plus all the tabloid pressure.

'At the end of the day, it’s hard to understand why M never introduced her father to her future husband but expected him to rock up on the day and walk her down the aisle. Perhaps she was hoping he’d bottle it, which he did.'

It has been reported that Harry flew out to meet her dad and he didn't make himself available. Also it's clear from the text messages that they were frantically trying to contact him, help him and give him a way back in after the staged photos. Many offers to provide security, anxiety over his health and trying to reach out.

Also, having read the Jason Knauf’s emails, the “5 friends voluntarily approaching People magazine without her knowledge” really starts to look unlikely. She was clearly very willing to provide the Finding Freedom authors with all sorts of private information in the knowledge that the book would be favourable to her. It seems unlikely that the People article wasn’t written on the same basis, with the basic set up being Meghan would be able to claim she had nothing to do with it, just as she claimed for Finding Freedom.

She also outlined carefully to Jason all the precautions she had taken in case the letter leaked, so why would on earth would she have given the details of the letter to her friends, and then not been concerned at all when they leaked it?

She also said, tellingly “ And if he leaks it… at least the world will know the truth. Words I could never voice publicly”. I think that does give a clue as to her real intentions.

Meghan must have been extremely frustrated after all that effort writing it that her father kept it hidden away to begin with.

Meghan said in the texts that she knew there was a possibility it would be leaked but she hoped not as it wouldn't show Thomas Markle in a good light. Doesn't sound like she wanted it leaked, just that if it were, she was anxious there was nothing that could be taken out of context. Her motivation was to try and get him to stop talking to the press. There's no evidence at all that she actively hoped he would release it.

@Aspiringmatriarch

'At the end of the day, it’s hard to understand why M never introduced her father to her future husband but expected him to rock up on the day and walk her down the aisle. Perhaps she was hoping he’d bottle it, which he did.'

It has been reported that Harry flew out to meet her dad and he didn't make himself available. Also it's clear from the text messages that they were frantically trying to contact him, help him and give him a way back in after the staged photos. Many offers to provide security, anxiety over his health and trying to reach out.

I have never ever heard that H flew out to Mexico. Frankly, I don’t believe it.

@Aspiringmatriarch
With regards to Meghan's credibility, didn't the Queen herself suddenly 'remember' conversations with Paul Burrell regarding something that went to court?

She did and as I recall everyone sniggered and said, "Queenie's lying because she doesn't want stuff to come out in court." Lol. No one could prove the Queen lied and secrets remained secret. (As much as Burrell could keep anything secret, that is!) Maybe Meghan should have studied the Queens playbook instead of proving that she lies.