The Times

[Rushingfool]

Anyone else think The Times should not be printing extracts from this new book about Royal Courtiers at this time? Incredibly stupid given that H&M are trying to mend fences? I feel really quite cross for everyone involved - William's efforts to build bridges etc, all going to be in vain now. Very naughty.

You’re are missing the point: the queen’s staff made the decision to lend. The decision to lend M the jewels lies ultimately with the queen herself. Her staff are her servants.

The whole palace fucked up and M is the one who carried the can. The gift should never have been accepted in the first place, and due diligence should have been applied to outing of them in public.

So should she have said "Go and tell Elizabeth I won't put them on in case they are blood diamonds, I need to know their origin first"

I mean there's no winning for Meghan unfortunately. Had she asked, she would have been accused of snubbing a gift from the queen.

Here's another link showing several times Eugenie broke protocol - re: fashion etc. So what IF Meghan refused to wear a hat . . .
www.hellomagazine.com/healthandbeauty/makeup/20220701144377/princess-eugenie-colourful-nails-royal-beauty-protocol/?viewas=amp

I would ask why you are setting higher standards of Meghan versus the rest of the Royal Family when it comes to wearing dubious diamonds?

She was in the door for 18 months yet she's being judged more harshly than the rest of the family?

Why is that?

I got the feeling that was done deliberately since they did like Meghan - then Leaked this. otherwise who apart from the palace servants would have known where they came from? ... then leaked the story

They don't want there - as it so happens in these types of relationships - people and family always think he should have married someone else. Some people have said Harry should leave her

@Coucous think you meant to write 'they didn't like Meghan'.

An interesting observation. Why in all the history of dodgy diamonds was she the focus and not other members of the family?

So you ARE saying that Meghan had no agency over her own decisions and would have worn the jewels unquestionably?
I'm very confused.
Surely to wear them once would be a mistake but to wear them twice?
No questions asked?
TBH you're not making her look great regarding this particular issue.
Contrary to what you might think I'm hoping this isn't true because it will be like a cascading house of cards if any of the stories are true in the excerpts we've seen so far.
FWIW I don't believe either M or H are setting out to deceive or be dishonest, quite the contrary.
But their intentions are, at best, poorly acquitted with little apparent awareness of how they would be perceived.
The earring example is just one of many contradictions in their actions.
You can't have it both ways

As others have said, the RF have staff to go through this, Meghan should not have been expected to check the earrings, expecting her to even think of that is batshit crazy in fact, beyond batshit crazy, and taking nitpicking to the absolute, absolute extreme. That is why the RF have staff they pay for. The paid staffers should have checked the background on the earrings, and reported to the Queen. Who should have removed them from the jewellery collection.

All I'm asking is for some empathy for a human who has faults like the rest of us and not to destroy her like she's a dehumanised 'figure'.

Great posts by @Hillcrest2022 and ^^ this sentence is why I come on these threads. Meghan is held up to far higher standards than any other member of the RF. Why?

I think it's pathetic that serialisation is going down the route of what jewellery Meghan wore. Let's look at the outrage about the diamond necklace given to Beatrice from one of her father's pals... a Libyan businessman with convictions for drugs and arms offences. (who even attended Eugenie's wedding).

And before anyone jumps on me for bringing up PA, I will continue to do so whilst Meghan is vilified for what other members of the RF have done in the past, or still do.

I’m confused by all this talk of lending M the diamonds. She was given them as a wedding present. They were not lent by the Queen, who presumably had nothing to do with them.

If she didn’t know they had a dubious provenance the first time she wore them, she certainly knew the second time. She still wore them.

Meghan also wanted to keep freebies being sent by clothes manufacturers etc, even though she knew this was against protocol. She thought the ‘rules’ shouldn’t apply to her.

I agree that she seems to be held to a higher standard than the other Royals at times. I think that’s got a lot to do with her self righteousness. She talks a lot and proclaims her credentials. She sets herself up as a standard because she talks about compassion, high ideals . She’s appears to look down at the other members of the family and considers herself superior. Her whole modus operandi is that she is better and special. The lecturing, the homilies, the earnestness. I think it grates on many people. She doesn’t appear to have any humility, learn from her mistakes, or take advice. It doesn’t make her relatable or likeable for many people. Also, because she was a new member of the family, her every action was scrutinised. That’s still the case now, because she continues to make sure she’s constantly in the news for something or other. The constant self promotion grates.

Its human nature that if someone seems to think they are on a level which is higher than the rest of us, if they appear humourless earnest and without humility, and promote themselves tirelessly , we look for faults. We look for the cracks. It isn’t fair at times, no. However that is what I think is happening and why she at times appears to be held to different standards.

Also, staff can’t be blamed. Meghan would have chosen to wear the earrings herself from her own collection. Staff are not going to dictate what jewellery is worn. That’s a personal decision. They would have acted on orders.

She’s appears to look down at the other members of the family and considers herself superior. Her whole modus operandi is that she is better and special

How? I think a lot of things about her, not all good, but I've never come across or thought of that as being her MO.

Who else is dissected like this?

@SilverLiningPlaybook As previous posters said, all gifts of jewellery are property of the Crown, not the individual person. Meghan didn't get to keep the earrings like you or I would with our wedding presents. They are owned and kept by the Crown. And since they're held by the Crown and collated by the Crown, it's their staff's responsibility to check the information out.

So was Meghan ‘set up’ to wear the diamond earrings by staff, who were economical with the truth, knowing she’d get in the shit at some point?

Given she had paid advisers AND Harry looking after her, I really can’t make head nor tail of it, especially the second occasion, unless someone was blatantly lying to her about their provenance. Otherwise she wouldn’t have worn them, would she? And Harry wouldn’t have let her, pointing out the bad associations.

Who on earth even accepted the damn earrings in the first place? They’d hardly have come directly to Meghan’s gaff via DPD.

That Times article is confusing. Maybe it’s too early and I need a coffee.

It’s outrageous the level of mental gymnastics people are resorting to in order to alleviate these claims. A number of people are coming out and describing bullying by Meghan. It’s clear from the timing they didn’t want to upset the queen out of loyalty but now she’s gone, the gloves are off. She had no qualms about smearing the RF so what’s the issue here?

my sympathy is for people who have had to work under these conditions, not for these two overinflated egos who have behaved like brats and treated people like shit.

but according to some
on this thread - their “truths” are to be believed but no one else’s are.

So staff who are paid peanuts are expected to check out the provenance of each piece of jewellery received by any member of the family and do research on it, then advise whether or not it should be worn. I really doubt it, but I might be wrong . I wonder if anyone in the know somehow could clarify. Certainly the Queen is not going to be consulted on each member of the family and their jewellery choices on every occasion.

Meghan is know for not listening to advice.

Are earrings like that locked away? I’d assume they’re in a safe in a special room. I wonder what the drill is to access them?

I mean, I’m trying to look at this from all angles, and it doesn’t make any sense.

I’ll get that coffee now.

I don’t believe she is, here.

We’ve discussed several times here the fact that royal family members are often put in a difficult position when given lavish gifts from foreign regimes. As representatives of the government they would cause offence if they refuse them. They don’t have to wear them though.

Sophie was harshly criticised in the press for being given a suite a gift of diamonds by the rulers of Bahrain when she and Edward were on an official visit there. Criticised just for being given them, mind, which was something she had no control over. She has never worn them.

The earrings in question here were not an issue when they were given to the Queen as a wedding present for Meghan. It was only after the Saudi invoment in Khashoggi’s murder came to light that they became controversial, and it was only after that that the earrings were worn. There was an intentional obscuring of where they came from i.e. someone must have knew that the identity of the donor was a problem.

Meghan write in her emails to Jason Knauf right around this time that she was annoyed that people thought she relied on other people for styling as styling herself was one of the few things she retained complete control of. And she obviously liked these earrings, as she wore them twice in quick succession. I find it bizarre that people would suggest that she didn’t choose to wear the earrings herself.

I also find it bizarre that people think she didn’t know that hugely expensive diamond earrings she picked to wear twice to set off evening gowns were a wedding gift to her, and from whom. Her senior staff (back in London when she first wore them in Fiji) obviously knew this. Meghan must also have signed off on a thank you note for her wedding gifts, even if she didn’t pen them herself - that is absolutely protocol.

So on this one, someone knew the provenance needed to be concealed when the earrings were worn first in Fiji and then in London. I think it’s pretty clear that the roads lead back to Meghan here, but obviously other people will disagree.

I’m not a great Meghan fan as I don’t believe you should air your grievances in public. However on the earrings, I would have thought it was her staff’s job to check their provenance not hers.

On the bullying claims, well it appears the gloves are off. My question is why now?

The Queen is dead. That’s why.

Here's another link showing several times Eugenie broke protocol - re: fashion etc. So what IF Meghan refused to wear a hat . . .
www.hellomagazine.com/healthandbeauty/makeup/20220701144377/princess-eugenie-colourful-nails-royal-beauty-protocol/?viewas=amp

Sigh. There is absolutely no royal protocol about nail polish. Diana wore read nail polish a lot - google it. This is just a good example of a clickbait article that are super common in the media - to get people to click to read a mundane story with a juicy headline. Because mention of Meghan drove a lot of clicks (as she obviously still does) there were an awful lot of these nothing stories about her.

However on the earrings, I would have thought it was her staff’s job to check their provenance not hers.

The account in the Times points out that not all of the Sussex’s staff travelled with them on the Australia and New Zealand tour. Staff left back in London did recognise the earrings, and clocked the issue with her wearing them, and raised it - Harry was said to be surprised the staff knew where they came from. Meghan then wore them again a second time after that.

I’m not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing, @Serenster. I’m trying to look at the possible scenarios from all angles I suppose, that people are putting forward, because it’s interesting and also all so … odd. Especially the second occasion of M wearing the tainted earrings.

Do you think then that there might have been a point when staff, rather than refusing to hand them over a second time, just thought, ‘oh well sod it, drop yourself in the shit then, we’ve tried to warn you’.

But is that really how jewellery loans from the Queen’s collection would have worked??

I think the nail polish and tights issue is a class thing. In those sorts of circles ‘nice gels’ are not expected to wear bright nail polish on high profile occasions and to wear tights . It may seem old fashioned but I think there is a clash of cultural norms there.

I was always told wearing anything but pale unobtrusive colours of nail polish was vulgar when growing up. Meghan wouldn’t have been brought up like that. I’m sure other Royals have worn brighter colours in some occasions, but it’s not usual. Since the Royals are there to do a job, and attention is supposed to be focused on the people they are there to support, drawing attention to their own personal appearance is not considered good form. I think that’s where the bump holding etc drew criticism.

Someone like Princess Anne never ever makes an event about herself. Her clothes jewellery and make up are secondary to the event. It doesn’t generate publicity, but she focuses on the job, not her appearance.