Anyone starting to feel sorry for them?

[Aspargar]

https://archive.ph/vV0f9

No matter how preeningly narcissistic the couple may seem, surely even they must now have realised what the source of their woes is? The fact is: people were only interested in hearing what Harry and Meghan had to say when they were dishing the dirt on the royal family.Hence, in January last year, the record-breakingly vast sales of Harrys memoir Spare. with all its eye-popping claims about his brother, father and stepmother. But every time he, and Meghan, start talking about any other topic – be it sport, jam or social justice – the world turns off. No one cares. Now that the Sussexes have finished flogging all the family secrets, they’ve got nothing that anyone wants.

There is part of me that does feelsorry for them too. I mean 2024 has been a disaster, off the back of 2023 which was another disaster. It’s not going to get any better. Reap what you sow, so we knew it was coming their way but it’s all a bit sad and pathetic now. The faux tours, cards from ‘the office of’, as time goes on, the more pathetic that will look because they have lost all connection to the Royals

This must be their year of reckoning. He won’t win his cases, they will lose Netflix, the brand will face further set backs, they realise that their kids will never have a royal Christmas at Sandringham or summer at Balmoral, ever. In fact they are unlikely to ever meet the King again.

Its all came off the rails. We all knew it would happen. Many could even see the disaster impending from the engagement announcement. But it’s still hard to watch and that’s what makes me feel a bit sorry for them.

Prepared to be flamed! 😬

Harry has his case against the Sun in January. I’ve read it’s to last up to 8 weeks.

Im not sure what the date of the actual trial is, but if we say mid jan, that takes us into mid March.

Is Meghan really going to launch a cooking show on NF while his trial is ongoing?

It’s a lifestyle show, yet her hubby would be engaged in yet another paranoid crusade across the water. Doesn’t seem like you would want to associate that with aspirational lifestyle programming.

I mean, talking about herbal teas and self care and nourishing meals is all great, but fat use its been for Harry. He’s clearly unwell and yet another trial is here to prove it.

Am I right in thinking that this trial is the civil case establishing level of damages payable?

And that it's the risky one for Harry, as if the court awards him the same or less than the settlement he's already been offered, he'll have to pay both sides' expenses?

Over the next year he has three cases. The sun trial, the Security appeal and the DM trial.

That’s surely bad for the lifestyle brand- paranoid, entitled Prince constantly battling in court.

He’s going to be so tied up with these cases and Invictus, there’s no way he could be possibly be working on anything for NF.

It’s obvious that NF will be ending their contract now

Which leaves meghan out in her own. How can she launch her show with the toxic energy of the cases hanging around? She must have a small window late spring/ summer to do so. Between the cases and the Sept end date for NF contract.

If the show doesn’t happen by then, then it’s over

Harrys actions make launching her brand even more difficult. He really needs to give up this nonsense.

All I know about the Sun case, is that he refused a settlement and that means regardless of the outcome of the trial, he will have to pay all costs.

I think it’s the actual trial?. Not the award for damages.

So it means he will be paying millions regardless if the Sun is found to have hacked or not. Insanity.

Well, the puff pieces have suggested a spring launch date for ARO, so that doesn't seem to be a conflict of interest (and I'm not sure that her British husband's British court cases would necessarily be a show stopper for a US re-launch)

So the cases are - pse correct me if I'm wrong:

a) January v NGN (ie The Sun) civil case establishing level of damages
b) (date?) concluding stages of JR icw whether RAVEC isfit for purpose
c) (date?) v The Daily Mail (also a civil case establishing level of damages?)

The current contract with Netflix will mean they already ‘own’ MM cookery show. They could decide to hang onto it for a year or two, release immediately, or never, with publicity or without….

What's the cooking show about? Will MM be cooking?

Everyone assumes so.

Archewell said back in April last year that it celebrates the joys of cooking, gardening, entertaining, and friendship

Based on the trailer for Riveria Orchard, which is supposedly the springboard for the cookery show, it looks like she is going to spend half the time floating around corridors in a ballgown. The rest of the time picking lemons, arranging flowers and possibly cooking something. It doesn't appear to be a cooking show in any real sense.

Archewell said back in April last year that it celebrates the joys of cooking, gardening, entertaining, and friendship

That actually sounds really boring.

Slightly O/T but I'm utterly convinced by the conspiracy theory that Diana was never buried on the island but laid to rest beside her father in the local church

I hope this is true. The island grave is really lonely. I hope she's with other people.

And yes I know she's just a dead body now and she's not really 'with' anyone and I'm weird. But I wouldn't want my mum alone on a damp island.

Surely this is why Meghan has been out and about on her own so much recently, to totally disassociate herself (and her brand) from Harry's never-ending crusades? I can't imagine for one moment that any of her significant dates will be squeezed in between his court cases - she will crack on to meet her own deadlines (if any have been set?) regardless of his commitments, no back rubs or hand holding this time.

I don't think that's quite right, from what I have read. If he wins, and the amount awarded is MORE than offered before it went to trial, then he isn't liable for the Sun's legal costs (on the grounds they hadn't offered enough money).

But if he wins and the amount awarded is LESS, then he will be liable, on the grounds he had been made a reasonable offer but turned it down.

Civil cases are supposed to establish what is reasonable compensation, and if reasonable compensation is offered without the involvement of the court it should be accepted rather than wasting court time (which is paid for by the tax payer!).

But the damages awarded by the court, are usually always very conservative, and will inevitably be less than what the Sun offered. Hence why Hugh grant accepted the settlement to avoid 10 million in legal fees.

So if the court awards less than what the Sun offered, he’s stuck with the legal fees. Which is realistically what will happen, EVEN if the court find in Harry’s favour, which I think in this case they will not. Again, leaving Harry to settle the fees.

The Sun case isn’t as strong as the others

I agree that there's a good chance that if he wins he will be awarded less, and therefore end up paying the Sun's legal costs as well. But that's a probability not a certainty.

I think he is misusing the court system for his own ego, with this case as well as the RAVEC one. And as a tax payer i resent that.

But maybe I'll be proved wrong!

As a tax payer do you resent having to fund the Royal Family?

Are you also resentful of taxpayers money being spent by the other claimant ( a former? Labour mp) who is also pressing ahead and hasn't settled?

They have settled o ee 30 claims.

Tbh it seems like Harry wants a win rather than the money. And the allegations on this case are very serious. Illegla hacking and surveillance of people to get information to then use by the media. If true, that is incredibly wrong and I don't blame any individual (famous or not) who wants to fight that in court.

Yes. In Spare, he talks about the press a lot. It's at least 20% of the book, and he undoubtedly blames them for his mum's death. This isn't about money for him; it's about revenge.

As a tax payer I don't resent paying for a head of state. Most democracies have them

It isnt money...because if it was he would have settled.

He stated in the recent NYT DealBook interview that he was 'doing it for the other claimants who have already settled' - so he sees himself in a very messianic way, the white knight / hero charging in .... but did any of these other claimants ask him for his 'sacrifice'?

His key delusional and grandiose traits on display again IMHO.

The substance of the allegations of hacking and surveillance have been heard in criminal cases and the Leveson enquiry. It has been shown that there was an appalling level of illegal behaviour by some sections of the press. It is a shame that Leveson II got shelved, but there is already a lot of evidence on record.

These cases do nothing to 'fight' those illegal activities, which are in the past.

These cases are to establish the amount to be paid in damages to compensate individuals who were past victims.

The only 'fight' is to establish specific incidents and allocate damages. The people bringing them aren't changing the media, because that has already been done.

So yes, if an individual does not agree with the level of compensation offered they should have recourse to the courts. But the proof of that is if they get awarded more by the court than.was offered prior to.legal action.

Using the courts for 'revenge', or to right a situation that has already been righted (substantially, and these cases will not address any current weaknesses) is misuse of the courts in my opinion.

But what is he trying to 'do', exactly?

If he gets a slightly higher payout, what does it achieve for the other claimants?

The newspapers involved will pay out a small amount more money, ok. But compared to the amount they pay out every year in these cases it is probably going to be a fairly small percentage more at best.

That the Sun etc are in the media again for past illegal activities? I doubt that is going to matter to anyone, it's old news.

We'd have to pay for the apparatus of a Head of State anyway. I'd rather an elected president, but accept I'd be outvoted in a referendum.

I 'resent', if that's the correct word, the accumulation of 'private wealth' by the royal family that allow secretive inheritances and trust funds to be set up for the benefit of those that used to be called 'royal hangers on' like Beatrice, Eugenie, and Harry.

Do you resent that Leveson II was shelved by the Conservative government of the time?

www.theguardian.com/media/2018/mar/01/leveson-2-explained-what-was-it-meant-to-achieve

But what is he trying to 'do', exactly?

I doubt he knows but its another spectacular demonstration of the Dunning-Kruger effect....."the tendency of people with low ability in a specific area to give overly positive assessments of this ability.[2][3][4] This is often seen as a cognitive bias, i.e. as a systematic tendency to engage in erroneous forms of thinking and judging.[5][6][7] In the case of the Dunning–Kruger effect, this applies mainly to people with low skill in a specific area trying to evaluate their competence within this area. The systematic error concerns their tendency to greatly overestimate their competence, i.e. to see themselves as more skilled than they are."

Harry will need the money to pay for the next litigation which is sure to follow