Omid Scobie writing tell all book

[CosmosQueen]

The biographer of the Duke and Duchess of Sussexwarned that his next book will reveal moments that the Royal family should be “ashamed of”.
Omid Scobie claimed he was one of few journalists writing about the Royal family whose work was impartial and “spin-free”
As such, he said his forthcoming book, provocatively titled Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy’s Fight for Survival, would focus on the negative as much as the positive and would shine a light on “unsolved mysteries”
“Endgame not only looks at the successes of our Royal family but also the failures; the things to be proud of and those they should be ashamed of,” he wrote in the I newspaper

Just when will this end? I feel so sorry for their poor children who will have to live with the knowledge that their parents and his obnoxious individual were prepared to do anything to make money.

Perjury is a criminal offence. She was not tried for perjury.

What you have said there is untrue.

From the Telegraph who is not pro Meghan
'Her admission that she misled the court in a sworn statement also raises the issue of whether she committed perjury though legal experts suggest her actions have not crossed the threshold for what is a criminal offence that carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment'

link please.

Samcro, google the court case. she had to amend her court submissions as she originally said she didn’t provide material for Omid Scobie’s book but evidence was submitted by Jason Knauff showing that was not the case

Excuse me. You said she committed perjury. She did not.

I would imagine you do have to be tried for perjury for someone to say she committed it.
I am no legal expert but even the Telegraph says she was not guilty of perjury. And the Telegraph never have a good word to say about her.

The Queen suddenly remembering something with her Paul Burrell case... ooops, I've just remembered Paul can have those Diana possessions!

Keep on about her lying if you want. She was not accused and tried for perjury. However many times you say it.

@costacoughee you stated she committed perjury. link to that please.

All I know is she wasn't tried for perjury, whatever you say. And many of the mainstream media called it 'a mistake'. She apologised to the court. I have looked everywhere. Nowhere does it say she committed perjury. Except on here. With you.

I will leave it now, because you want to believe that and I don't want to burst your bubble!

you stated she committed perjury,
I asked for a link to that. I know what perjury is. also that its a crime.

Good. Its a stupid thing to go over. She isn't the first person to have forgotten an email she wrote and no longer had possession of. The mistake had absolutely no bearing or relevance to the case at all, it was raised by Williams buddy Knauf to continue the narrative the institution and press have persisted with, that she is a liar. That's the only reason he did it because the book the statement was about came out well after The Fail printed her fathers letter. She didn't;t provide info or correspond with Scobie directly, as always they contact her chief of communications and they discuss it and provide info if they chose to. Nothing sinister about it. Its a mistake. Its not like she accepted suitcases of cash from Qatari politicians.

ok will try again.
obviously my previous post was seen as a PA.
I would like to see a link to the actual committed perjury statement made by I presume the judge, please.

I believe the judge referred to it as an unfortunate mistake. If someone makes a statement that they genuinely believe to be true, it is not perjury if the statement turns out not to be true. Its about whether the judge believes they did so intentionally or not, or they believe what their statement said- she wasn't in court, it was her written testimony. As she didn't have access to those emails during that time any longer, she says she misremembered the situation and apologised to the court. She was never accused of committing perjury by the judge or anyone else. The statement had no bearing on her case so any omission was not relevant, so I'm assuming that is why the judge dismissed it as an error that would not help her case anyway.

@Iwantcakeeveryday

Where did the judge say that ? Can you link please as I thought those were Meghan’s barristers comments ?

The court of appeal also heard Knauf provided information
to the authors of the Sussexes’ biography, Finding Freedom, and that Meghan had provided him with a list of “background reminders” on her life story before his two-hour meeting with them.
Knauf’s witness statement prompted the duchess to apologise for unintentionally misleading the court over whether he had given information to the book’s authors. She had not remembered the emails between her and Knauf, she said in a statement.
The court of appeal noted the duchess’s apology, and said that “this was, at best, an unfortunate lapse of memory on her part, but did not bear on the issues”. It said it found the “new evidence” provided by ANL “of little assistance”.
Upholding Warby’s “careful” decision on summary judgment, the appeal judges said it was “hard to see what evidence could have been adduced at trial that would have altered the situation”.
Vos said: “The judge had correctly decided that, whilst it might have been proportionate to publish a very small part of the letter for that purpose, it was not necessary to publish half the contents of the letter as Associated Newspapers had done.”
Texts released by the court in November showed Meghan expressing her frustration with the royal family, describing them as “constantly berating” Harry over the negative publicity surrounding her father before their wedding. This was a catalyst for her writing the letter, to protect Harry from his family, she wrote to Knauf.*

Kanuf shared personal texts not relevant to the case. There is no defence for that. He still works for William.

you can dress it up how you like. but she was not accused of committing perjury. lots of people misremember things including the queen. thats different to committing perjury. (of you check with my hairdressers husband)

Well try as you might, the courts disagreed with you and the nasty people at the fail. They lost. The information was irrelevant and nobody ever said it was perjury. Perjury is when you intentionally lie.