Meghan has complained about Amol Rahman’s podcast

[Thoosa]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/17/meghan-markle-complains-bbc-podcast-claim-apologised-misleading/

She has complained to the BBC that he said on the podcast that she “misled the court” in the Daily Mail case.

I thought she apologised for misleading the court and insisted it was inadvertent?

AR’s BBC documentary seemed quite pro-Sussex, so this is confusing.

I hadn’t heard of the podcast but will have a listen now. (Streisand effect rides again,)

Is there some difference between British and American English that might explain this? I cannot figure it out,

I note that the BBC didn't apologise when issuing the 'correction', nor did they actually 'correct it. They simply laid out what H&M wanted putting straight. The level of splitting hairs though is astonishing. She implies that there is a difference between apologising for deliberately doing something wrong and apologising for accidentally doing something wrong. But an apology is an apology. You still apologize for bumping into someone accidentally. She is her own worst enemy. She did apologise to the court. This now makes her look very petty and controlling..and of course only draws more attention to the issue of whether she did intend to mislead the court.

@nottodaybatman

Again you are repeating William was involved but provide absolutely no proof.

It's not about winning or losing
I don't need you to agree with me

And yet you told me that I did agree with you. It definitely seems to be important to you that your opinions, which you present as facts are agreed with. Maybe you don't realise how you're coming across though?

It also confirms in peoole mind that she did cooperate with a book that she had previously denied doing but which they already believed she had done anyway. I don't know how she wins in this at all. How many people even listen to Amol Rahman? I've never heard of him. But I've now heard Meghan confirm that she misled the court.
I know actresses are taught that there's no such thing as bad publicity but sometimes it's better to just 🤐

Of course people will have different opinions and we don't all need to agree. How boring that would be. But you're stating things as fact when they're not. You can't be surprised if people then push back against that.

You can say that your gut feeling is that PW leaked to the MOS.
But if you say he definitely did, surely you must have some evidence to back that up. All I'm asking is that you show us the evidence, not some cobbled together theory about JS's court statement.

@ nottodaybatman

Several of us have asked what evidence you have that PW was involved ? Please clarify .

@Chilledchablis1

@ nottodaybatman “Jason pushes the issue and she authorised the standard bio facts to be released.”

Is mentioning that her half sister has 3 children by different men a standard bio fact ?

Her half sister who has been collaborating with single purpose hate accounts that have targeted, racially abused and profited from Meghan? . That half sister really hates Meghan to entertain people that have even threatened physically harming M. It was a low blow for M to mention the 3 different dads of Samantha’s children but she has done so much worse to Meghan and was given a platform to do that harm. Glad American media largely never entertained her.

@Chilledchablis1

@ nottodaybatman

Several of us have asked what evidence you have that PW was involved ? Please clarify .

I would like to see that proof too

@ SallyLockheart

I will have a glass of wine while we wait 🍷

Chilledchablis1 sadly we often get this on threads, where rather than posting something which can be backed up folk fling out a barrage of "facts", maybe in the hope something will stick

FWIW I could easily believe William went along with this, but I wouldn't pretend to know because there's a difference between opinion and facts

It must be tiring being them.

I do not understand the need to constantly correcting their images/what they say in the social media.

Just get on and enjoy the life with the little ones.

I simply said if an employee chooses to break an nda and they are not fired, I would argue that it is because their employer is happy for them to break the nda.

Jason volunteered to break the nda because he wanted to. The evidence he provided didn't help the case it just help the mail write negative articles. Ergo william, as his employer, was happy for him to do so

The reason I believe william wanted to do this and was happy for this to happen is because it is very dangerous to william to set the precedent that he doesn't care if his employees collaborate with tabloids particular a paper like the MoS

What his other employers want to share a few emails?

If there is another plausible reason to set the precedent that your employees can share any information they fancy with tabloids in random cases against the RF I am open to it.

If william did not give his permission to Jason, he should have fired him

So no proof then, just your supposition?

You do know that repeating your opinion more than 6 or however many times does not make it a fact, don’t you?

@nottodaybatman

If there is another plausible reason to set the precedent that your employees can share any information they fancy with tabloids in random cases against the RF I am open to it.

What is so hard for you to understand? If you signed an NDA with PW, you couldn't reveal things like an affair because it's not breaking the law. However if PW went to court and swore there was no affair but you had proof there was, you wouldn't be breaking an NDA to say he had lied in court. NDAs are not enforceable over criminal matters. Lying in court is perjury and you can go to jail. Can't you Jeffrey Archer?

@Chilledchablis1

@ SallyLockheart

I will have a glass of wine while we wait 🍷

Ditto. Then I’m off to watch more episodes of Money Heist on Netflix which is great😀

@nottodaybatman

If william did not give his permission to Jason, he should have fired him

On what grounds? You can't fire people for telling the truth?

Yes of course Sally
However if he didn't give permission why didn't he fire him.
Interesting precedent

@madisonbridges I admire your patience 🤣

@nottodaybatman

If william did not give his permission to Jason, he should have fired him

In May 2021 the Royal Foundation announced Jason Knauff was stepping down due to a planned relocation at the end of the year (his husband has a new job).

In July 2021 so after the May ruling and he had already resigned he approached the MOS with evidence that MM had misled the court. You have been advised many times that this is sufficient reason and justification to break a NDA and an employer would have no legal reason to be able to terminate employment.

Now William may or may not have supported that course of action or it might be the case that JK knew he was going anyway and would not face repercussions or he was pissed off that MM lied 🤥 .

Absolutely none of that shows that William was complicit.

I do think MM deserved to win her court case and if she had just sued them for breach of copyright it would have been straightforward and not the mess it ended up with.

Madison
Jason chose to go to court. This terrible FF lie being corrected made no difference
He could have been an anonymous source like the courtiers usually do in a newspaper article. Instead he sought out the MoS, went on the record and handed over emails. They is above and beyond. And the MoS still didn't win

Emails are the property of your employer.

This was all voluntary

From William's perspective the handing over emails just because the employee felt like it should have been a hard red line. Why didn't Jason just provide a statement? Why provide emails? What was the point?

@nottodaybatman
I simply said if an employee chooses to break an nda and they are not fired, I would argue that it is because their employer is happy for them to break the nda.

Nope. You said:
Why did william want to help the mos attack his sister in law.

All I am saying forgetting about approving basic facts being released while interesting is nowhere near as interesting as Jason Knauf and William working together with the MoS for years to attack meghan

But from the mos Court case we now know that the Cambridges were helping the mail.

That is really shocking. Meghan was pregnant during most of this and her brother in law was helping the mail attack her. Its wild

All of p4 of this thread.

Where's the proof?