Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Meghan court case live today

999 replies

callmeadoctor · 09/11/2021 12:57

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
ChristmasPlanning · 12/11/2021 23:47

[quote Serenster]The Duchess also involved her lawyers in her attempts to mislead the court and the world - as this article shows, one of the partners at Schillings issued a statement denying her involvement with the book and another filed a witness statement saying the same thing.

They should now be seriously considering whether they can continue to act for her as a client, as involving themselves in her falsehoods calls their own integrity into question, which is a big no no under the Solicitors’ Regulatory Authority’s code of conduct.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/etcanada.com/news/694182/meghan-markles-lawyers-deny-inaccurate-and-extremely-anodyne-finding-freedom-claims/amp/[/quote]
follow

prh47bridge · 12/11/2021 23:56

@Viviennemary

So is lying to the court a criminal offence even if you apologise and say it was a mistake. When you were caught out lying by another witness.
Perjury is a criminal offence. However, not every lie amounts to perjury.

To get a conviction, the prosecution have to show that the defendant knew their statement to the court was false and that this lie was material and relevant to the issues in the case. If Meghan believed her original statement was true, she cannot be convicted of perjury. Even if she knew she was making an untrue statement, it is clear from Mr Justice Warby's judgement that it had no bearing on his decision, so again, she cannot be convicted of perjury.

Witnesses in civil cases are hardly ever prosecuted for perjury.

StartupRepair · 13/11/2021 00:07

Not a Meghan fan at all but I will say the tone of her emails is perfectly friendly and professional.

2389Champ · 13/11/2021 00:26

It seems that Harry hasn’t learnt from his mother’s experiences - you can’t play the media to suit yourself. It’s an insatiable beast, the more you feed it, the more it wants. Diana used to tip off and use the press to ensure she either got her version of events across or the fact she’d made a ‘secret’ visit to a charity. She regularly used to use Richard Kay for this very purpose. But once she got that sort of arrangement, she created a feeding frenzy. This is exactly what is now happening to MM and PH.

The queen probably has the right approach, never explain, never complain. If you don’t give the media anything, they can speculate all they like but silence is so much more powerful.

grassisgreen · 13/11/2021 00:57

Schillings' website strapline : "We find evidence, establish the true narrative, and win cases, whilst keeping you safe. We fight falsehoods and protect privacy."
Schillings must be mortified - How did they test their client and the potential disclosure? Surely one of the highly experienced solicitors or barristers must have had an inkling things didn't smell right.
I cannot believe they didn't ask Meghan to check her phone or email for messages around that time.
What did their client actually check?

TitledLady · 13/11/2021 01:02

A full transcript of the text exchanges between Meghan and Jason Knauf are now available.

Meghan aside he appears to be a disingenuous weasel

amusedtodeath1 · 13/11/2021 01:28

I'm not keen on hypocrisy personally and while it's not the crime of the century, its yet another strong indication that they're not being genuine. That again isn't such a terrible thing, except for the fact that they keep bleating on about how unfair all the lies about them are, and how it shouldn't be allowed, etc.

Do they seriously think the public are stupid?

It's like PA thinking he could fool tha public with that interview, (aside from his disputable alleged behaviour), it really insulting that they really think we're that gullible.

Idiots all three of them IMO.

amusedtodeath1 · 13/11/2021 01:30

Posted before I could correct my errors, but you get the gist I hope.

BreadInCaptivity · 13/11/2021 01:41

@amusedtodeath1

I'm not keen on hypocrisy personally and while it's not the crime of the century, its yet another strong indication that they're not being genuine. That again isn't such a terrible thing, except for the fact that they keep bleating on about how unfair all the lies about them are, and how it shouldn't be allowed, etc.

Do they seriously think the public are stupid?

It's like PA thinking he could fool tha public with that interview, (aside from his disputable alleged behaviour), it really insulting that they really think we're that gullible.

Idiots all three of them IMO.

Agreed.

They think they are playing us like the Pied Piper of Hamelin but they aren't the musical virtuoso's they believe themselves to be.

The "notes" are discordant to anyone whose not volunteering to wear the auto-tune headphones they've supplied.

PurpleOkapi · 13/11/2021 05:15

Meghan's claim that Harry was "berated" by his family over Thomas's shenanigans and the media circus surrounding them is really interesting to me. I don't doubt that his family said something along the lines of "We told you so," or that they may have said it rather harshly. But think about it from their perspective: There were already well-founded concerns that they were rushing things. They'd never even lived in the same country before announcing their engagement. And Harry never once meeting Meghan's father prior to the wedding was irregular, to say the least. I'm sure several people suggested he make that happen somewhere along the way, and their advice was ignored.

So everyone was already concerned about Harry rushing down the aisle without ever meeting his new wife's family, among other reasons. And then, whoops! Turns out the family he didn't think it important to meet ahead of time is utterly batshit. I don't think him meeting them ahead of time would have solved any of the problems that having batshit in-laws would have caused anyway. But Harry and the rest of the royals would at least have known ahead of time that they were batshit, and could have planned around it - like not giving any of them an important role in the wedding.

There might have been some pressure on Harry not to marry her for that reason, and maybe that was why Meghan never pressed him to visit Thomas - she didn't want those issues known. She may have known all along that she was courting disaster by asking him to walk her down the aisle, but anything else would have required an explanation that she didn't want to provide to Harry's family.

So yeah, I think there was probably some amount of "You made this mess by being an idiot, now go fix it!" directed at Harry. And I think it was probably perfectly fair. If they'd gone about things more normally, Meghan's family's issues wouldn't have been a last-minute surprise that the royals learned about from reading the newspapers.

Nyxly · 13/11/2021 05:26

I think its entirely possible that Harry was told, by his family, that he needed to put effort in to resolve the problem. His in laws aren't going to be a problem that Harry can just let aides deal with and sending some texts.

Its all so complicated and there's definitely lies going on

But I imagine if my in laws were causing problems for my family or my family business, thw expectations would be that I and my partner try and handle it head on, in the first instance.

Roussette · 13/11/2021 07:40

Roussette, you're late to the party! Didn't think it would take 30 pages before you showed up. You've been doing good work on the 'is Johnson a disgusting scumbag' thread though so all is forgiven

Thanks for the welcome! at least I think it was a welcome!
Writing to my MP (let's not go there lol) and a magical day out was taking up my time but I appreciate I was missed Grin

Gilmore So frustrating. You ask me which Uni Wotton and Knauf like you don't believe it's true. Rubics then kindly provides an answer for you (you could've looked it up yourself). Then you dismiss it with a 'so what, even though they did go to the same Uni, it means nothing'. Wotton got stories ahead of the game on more than one occasion. They know each other. No one can deny that.

Serenster you and I will have to agree to disagree yet again I'm afraid. Everyone on royal threads goes on about how switched on the Queen is/was, how she has the final word etc, and I just don't believe she barely knew anything about the case 20 years ago.

Nyxly · 13/11/2021 07:51

I have to say, I was never convinced Ed the Queen had no real idea about the PB case. However, I don't really see how it's relevant to H&M

The Queen could have told a million lies. Doesn't justify H&M lying.

And yes while some people can believe they simply forgot they sent those emails.

I simply don't believe it.

I suppose like you can choose to believe the Queen lied regarding the PB case or not.

Roussette · 13/11/2021 07:56

I read on Twitter that W&K have rehired Knauf, does anyone know if that's true?
He gave 6 months notice, last I heard.

Nyxly we all have opinions and are allowed to express them.

Nyxly · 13/11/2021 07:57

@Roussette

I read on Twitter that W&K have rehired Knauf, does anyone know if that's true? He gave 6 months notice, last I heard.

Nyxly we all have opinions and are allowed to express them.

Where exactly did I say different?
artquejtion · 13/11/2021 08:05

[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]
Maybe she just forgot she authorised her friends to talk to People Magazine, easily done,

smilesy · 13/11/2021 08:13

Maybe she just forgot she authorised her friends to talk to People Magazine, easily done,

🤣

WinterFirTree · 13/11/2021 08:22

@Roussette

Roussette, you're late to the party! Didn't think it would take 30 pages before you showed up. You've been doing good work on the 'is Johnson a disgusting scumbag' thread though so all is forgiven

Thanks for the welcome! at least I think it was a welcome!
Writing to my MP (let's not go there lol) and a magical day out was taking up my time but I appreciate I was missed Grin

Gilmore So frustrating. You ask me which Uni Wotton and Knauf like you don't believe it's true. Rubics then kindly provides an answer for you (you could've looked it up yourself). Then you dismiss it with a 'so what, even though they did go to the same Uni, it means nothing'. Wotton got stories ahead of the game on more than one occasion. They know each other. No one can deny that.

Serenster you and I will have to agree to disagree yet again I'm afraid. Everyone on royal threads goes on about how switched on the Queen is/was, how she has the final word etc, and I just don't believe she barely knew anything about the case 20 years ago.

I disagree with you on nearly everything about MM @Rousette but I do genuinely like your style. :)
SallyLockheart · 13/11/2021 08:29

@smilesy

Maybe she just forgot she authorised her friends to talk to People Magazine, easily done,

🤣

🤣🤣🤣
Roussette · 13/11/2021 08:34

@WinterFirTree
Thank you, I appreciate that Smile

PickupaPenguin8 · 13/11/2021 08:48

@Nyxly

I think its entirely possible that Harry was told, by his family, that he needed to put effort in to resolve the problem. His in laws aren't going to be a problem that Harry can just let aides deal with and sending some texts.

Its all so complicated and there's definitely lies going on

But I imagine if my in laws were causing problems for my family or my family business, thw expectations would be that I and my partner try and handle it head on, in the first instance.

Exactly.
Gilmorehill · 13/11/2021 08:50

What strikes me is how cynical the letter was. Reading the news today, it seems to me the letter was designed to satisfy the royals M had tried. She involved employees in writing it to get it right. I feel she was aware it would end up in the public domain. She really had no intention of repairing her relationship with her father. It’s very cynical and hard hearted.

Peaseblossum22 · 13/11/2021 08:50

I suspect part of this is that in the past all of Harry’s problems were sorted for him . See the Vegas debacle , this time they effectively said to him ‘it’s your mess you sort it’ .

PickupaPenguin8 · 13/11/2021 08:57

@Peaseblossum22

I suspect part of this is that in the past all of Harry’s problems were sorted for him . See the Vegas debacle , this time they effectively said to him ‘it’s your mess you sort it’ .
Yes, I think that’s true. My whole opinion of Harry has totally changed in recent years. What I do a pretty shocking is the willingness on all sides to just lie to and manipulate the public. There is a huge arrogance there and an assumption that accountability and truth don’t really matter. We can’t believe anything we are told from the horses mouth or from ‘friends’ or advisors.
derxa · 13/11/2021 09:01

@Gilmorehill

What strikes me is how cynical the letter was. Reading the news today, it seems to me the letter was designed to satisfy the royals M had tried. She involved employees in writing it to get it right. I feel she was aware it would end up in the public domain. She really had no intention of repairing her relationship with her father. It’s very cynical and hard hearted.
It really is. It's so far away from how ordinary people try to solve family problems. Sit down and discuss.