Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Ham pr disasters 54! ….the relentless reconciliation edition…

1000 replies

jeffgoldblum · 22/10/2026 15:02

Apologies for my tardiness! , the last thread finished unexpectedly!!! 😱

OP posts:
Thread gallery
36
valeriy2 · 23/10/2026 12:39

Tiddlywinks63 · 23/10/2026 12:36

Precisely. WTF would she contact the Met police when her father was in the USA and she was an American citizen? It makes no sense at all.

She's in the UK under royal protection - a letter alleging criminal activity comes to her attention and she passes it onto her handlers assuming what needs to be done is done. Police forces have established lines of communication.

AtIusvue · 23/10/2026 12:39

mysoddenbananabread · 23/10/2026 12:35

I'm wondering IF there were suspicions about him then they were involved here because of the possible appearance of him at the wedding ? Perhaps they had the knowledge IF this was the case but that then leads into more tin hat ideas - was TM set up to create a fuss as a reason to NOT have him at the wedding . 🤷‍♀️ IF IF IF

The BBC say they believe that they were told of the allegations after the wedding

readbutdonotpostoften · 23/10/2026 12:40

Too many holes in information being reported in the media about the allegations, too many inconsistencies over the years from HAM. If the technology (laptops, mobiles etc) can be proven not to be in a persons possession or used over the defining period there is a lot of doubt on who downloaded/uploaded images. So for me, more information needs to come out from more trustworthy sources.

As to HAM's statement - too early to have made one imo, the weekend papers are going to be full of further reports, so they may have been better waiting for more info to come out, or even not make a statement at all. If they have PR, they are either not very good or HAM do not listen to what their suggestion is.

Rhaidimiddim · 23/10/2026 12:41

notimagain · 23/10/2026 12:37

@Sometimeroyalist

If the letter was sent to them and they briefed Meghan, they should have followed up with the relevant authorities in the US. They have cross border relationships. They're nor supposed to just ignore crime

Ah, but despite the relationship when it suits in reality the US authorities can be highly protective of their own nationals...

They're not beyond extracting one of theirs from the UK before the police get fully involved if the individual is suspected of committing a crime on UK soil, so I suspect the relationship might be a bit like that other special one....

Possibly the best the MET could realistically do is pass the info on, they couldn't insist doors were kicked in Stateside.

Markle Snr had moved to Mexico already, hadn't he? Then to The Phillipines. So, beyond US jurisdiction, unless they really wanted to go after him.

QuirkyStork · 23/10/2026 12:42

notimagain · 23/10/2026 12:37

@Sometimeroyalist

If the letter was sent to them and they briefed Meghan, they should have followed up with the relevant authorities in the US. They have cross border relationships. They're nor supposed to just ignore crime

Ah, but despite the relationship when it suits in reality the US authorities can be highly protective of their own nationals...

They're not beyond extracting one of theirs from the UK before the police get fully involved if the individual is suspected of committing a crime on UK soil, so I suspect the relationship might be a bit like that other special one....

Possibly the best the MET could realistically do is pass the info on, they couldn't insist doors were kicked in Stateside.

Allow me to be real here. We're talking about a situation potentially involving minor grandchildren of the King of E., one day entering into contact with a relative/paedophile. And authorities would just ignore the matter?

Heyelpheyelp · 23/10/2026 12:43

Rhaidimiddim · 23/10/2026 12:41

Markle Snr had moved to Mexico already, hadn't he? Then to The Phillipines. So, beyond US jurisdiction, unless they really wanted to go after him.

Shouldn’t the Mexican police have investigated though?

notimagain · 23/10/2026 12:44

Rhaidimiddim · 23/10/2026 12:41

Markle Snr had moved to Mexico already, hadn't he? Then to The Phillipines. So, beyond US jurisdiction, unless they really wanted to go after him.

Haven't kept track, but in any event I'm not sure anyone should be leaping to blame the Met ATM.

Britain's no longer rules the waves and we've not got many if any gunboats to send to wherever.

If the local authorities can't or won't act I suspect there's not much the Met can do...

Guess we'll have to wait and see.

valeriy2 · 23/10/2026 12:44

readbutdonotpostoften · 23/10/2026 12:40

Too many holes in information being reported in the media about the allegations, too many inconsistencies over the years from HAM. If the technology (laptops, mobiles etc) can be proven not to be in a persons possession or used over the defining period there is a lot of doubt on who downloaded/uploaded images. So for me, more information needs to come out from more trustworthy sources.

As to HAM's statement - too early to have made one imo, the weekend papers are going to be full of further reports, so they may have been better waiting for more info to come out, or even not make a statement at all. If they have PR, they are either not very good or HAM do not listen to what their suggestion is.

Can we reasonably assume that the Royal Family knew about these allegations if Meghan used her protection to report them? And if so, why did they stand aside while the press attack dogs savaged her for distancing herself from Mr Markle?

If the argument is that members of the family knew, then surely the institution itself bears far greater responsibility for any failure to act than a family member who was personally burdened by that knowledge. We need to distinguish between an individual struggling with something deeply distressing and an institution that may have had the means, authority and responsibility to respond.

canklesmctacotits · 23/10/2026 12:46

It’s a choice to write to the Met and RAVEC about this, even if whoever it was also wrote to the FBI. At the time, the only reason the Met or RAVEC would even need to be cc-ed is because Meghan was marrying into the RF. I suspect that letter was also written by Thomas Jnr, who wrote to Harry at the time, because those two organizations would only be chosen by someone who doesn’t know/hasn’t been told how these things work. And those two organizations took it with the seriousness such a letter deserves: these allegations don’t pertain to a citizen or resident, neither are the victims relevant to the UK, we’ll let Harry and Meghan know we have this and we’ll put it on file.

Meanwhile, this letter has served as a very convenient reason for Meghan to keep her dad at arm’s length. The reason they gave was selling her down the river (the “tugging on heartstrings” letter), and no bride with this hanging over her would have gone down that path. She dumped him because he’s too common (sorry to be so crass), and this letter of allegations has given her cover. It’s transparent as day. If she believed these allegations, her riposte would have focused on her healing and therapy for it, efforts made to assist the authorities in their investigations, and generally been far more serious. As it is, it’s a clap back to all the questions about wanting reconciliation with Charles but not Thomas, and polishing her child-protecting halo. Harsh, perhaps, but I think true. But then in a cynical old shrew.

Also, you don’t go no contact overnight with your own dad for allegations. You would if it’s someone who has no bearing on your life: the fellow at the end of the road, the ice cream shop man, the security guard outside Asda. You’d avoid him on the strength of allegations alone because you don’t have him in our life in any meaningful way to begin with. But your own Dad?! Who you so publicly declared your love and affections for? No hunt for the truth? No communications outside of stitching him up in the heartstring-tugging letter? Nothing? Nah, don’t believe it. She thinks she’s clever but she’s just outed herself as far as I’m concerned. Now we know what was in that letter she sent him when he was lying in hospital in the Philippines: on the basis of these allegations, if you ever loved me at all, don’t come near me or my children again, if you do I’ll ruin you.

These things are so messy, so complicated, so traumatic irl. At the point where it’s allegations and nothing proven and a credible counter-allegation than Thomas Jnr has made it up or is the guilty party, this is not how a person reacts. Not without something else going on.

twosmallaxolotls · 23/10/2026 12:46

valeriy2 · 23/10/2026 12:44

Can we reasonably assume that the Royal Family knew about these allegations if Meghan used her protection to report them? And if so, why did they stand aside while the press attack dogs savaged her for distancing herself from Mr Markle?

If the argument is that members of the family knew, then surely the institution itself bears far greater responsibility for any failure to act than a family member who was personally burdened by that knowledge. We need to distinguish between an individual struggling with something deeply distressing and an institution that may have had the means, authority and responsibility to respond.

Well you seem absolutely determined to blame the RF, but at the moment it's all very confusing and the timeline makes no sense, so hold your horses.

FancyKitten · 23/10/2026 12:47

readbutdonotpostoften · 23/10/2026 12:40

Too many holes in information being reported in the media about the allegations, too many inconsistencies over the years from HAM. If the technology (laptops, mobiles etc) can be proven not to be in a persons possession or used over the defining period there is a lot of doubt on who downloaded/uploaded images. So for me, more information needs to come out from more trustworthy sources.

As to HAM's statement - too early to have made one imo, the weekend papers are going to be full of further reports, so they may have been better waiting for more info to come out, or even not make a statement at all. If they have PR, they are either not very good or HAM do not listen to what their suggestion is.

HAM / RF / press / PR / authorities / sources would have known this was all coming down the line? Assume TM Jnr was negotiating the right money with the paper before now…

Noodledog · 23/10/2026 12:47

MrsLeonFarrell · 23/10/2026 11:26

I don't support the way they have attacked the family at all. This isn't fiction with goodies and baddies, people are more complex than that.

I can understanding why Meghan gave another reason for cutting her father off. You can't comment in an investigation of course but even without that, why on earth would she to go public with this? Particularly if it wasn't proven.

I'm afraid I can't see how any positive spin can be put on this that makes Meghan look good. So she knew of allegations in 2018? So why did she sit on that knowledge for eight years, being perfectly well aware that her father was spending a lot of time in SEA. Because let's be honest, Western men spending a lot of time in SEA due to their.... proclivities is a cliche for a reason.

Which would mean Meghan knew TM was suspected of being a paedophile and did nothing, knowing full well children were at risk from him.It makes all her talk about the importance of children's safety online even more hollow than it already seemed.

Tbh, if it is true that Meghan knew in 2018, IMO that's the worst thing she's done. It really is unforgivable.

OneHundredYearsOfAttitude · 23/10/2026 12:47

Meghan is doing herself no favours with the over explaining, she should have just said no comment.

The problem is that by bringing the Met Police into this, she is bringing the Royal Family into it as well.

If the Met knew about abuse allegations against TM, then so did the Royal Family, there's no way they wouldn't have been told. And if they knew then why would they have pushed her to reconcile with him? Even in July this year she was asked if she would reconcile.

None of it makes sense. And now the Met or the Royal Family may have to comment on this fiasco.

AtIusvue · 23/10/2026 12:50

OneHundredYearsOfAttitude · 23/10/2026 12:47

Meghan is doing herself no favours with the over explaining, she should have just said no comment.

The problem is that by bringing the Met Police into this, she is bringing the Royal Family into it as well.

If the Met knew about abuse allegations against TM, then so did the Royal Family, there's no way they wouldn't have been told. And if they knew then why would they have pushed her to reconcile with him? Even in July this year she was asked if she would reconcile.

None of it makes sense. And now the Met or the Royal Family may have to comment on this fiasco.

By bringing the Met into it, they will have to confirm or deny now.

Just like the Archbishop had to get involved when she said she actually got married the day before her wedding.

LifeIsTooShort247 · 23/10/2026 12:51

readbutdonotpostoften · 23/10/2026 12:40

Too many holes in information being reported in the media about the allegations, too many inconsistencies over the years from HAM. If the technology (laptops, mobiles etc) can be proven not to be in a persons possession or used over the defining period there is a lot of doubt on who downloaded/uploaded images. So for me, more information needs to come out from more trustworthy sources.

As to HAM's statement - too early to have made one imo, the weekend papers are going to be full of further reports, so they may have been better waiting for more info to come out, or even not make a statement at all. If they have PR, they are either not very good or HAM do not listen to what their suggestion is.

Did you wait for more information to come out before making comments on it?

MaidOfSteel · 23/10/2026 12:52

Mossyfox · 23/10/2026 12:31

Don't know what to believe in this web of lies and denials. Somebody is lying.

And we all know who has form for telling lies.

HoldMyWine · 23/10/2026 12:53

Sometimeroyalist · 23/10/2026 12:18

The one bit of the Meghan letter that is plausible is that the Met knew all about it and has done nothing for 8 years. They are utterly useless and have a particularly bad track record on investigating SA.

The Met wouldn’t investigate it though, TM has never been in the UK.

QuirkyStork · 23/10/2026 12:54

Yes, she has now involved the British authorities and potentially the RF, so allegations will have to be investigated. Not just a personal/family matter. Really bad move.

Kingsandqueenz · 23/10/2026 12:54

valeriy2 · 23/10/2026 12:44

Can we reasonably assume that the Royal Family knew about these allegations if Meghan used her protection to report them? And if so, why did they stand aside while the press attack dogs savaged her for distancing herself from Mr Markle?

If the argument is that members of the family knew, then surely the institution itself bears far greater responsibility for any failure to act than a family member who was personally burdened by that knowledge. We need to distinguish between an individual struggling with something deeply distressing and an institution that may have had the means, authority and responsibility to respond.

Well Harry said in an interview he took full responsibility for Meghan having no relationship with her father! This makes no sense! Why is he blaming himself?

Badvocthebad · 23/10/2026 12:56

My thoughts are with the child victims of these vile crimes

Kingsandqueenz · 23/10/2026 12:56

OneHundredYearsOfAttitude · 23/10/2026 12:47

Meghan is doing herself no favours with the over explaining, she should have just said no comment.

The problem is that by bringing the Met Police into this, she is bringing the Royal Family into it as well.

If the Met knew about abuse allegations against TM, then so did the Royal Family, there's no way they wouldn't have been told. And if they knew then why would they have pushed her to reconcile with him? Even in July this year she was asked if she would reconcile.

None of it makes sense. And now the Met or the Royal Family may have to comment on this fiasco.

Once again Meghan has put it out there for all their lies & inaccuracies to be disected & contradicted!
Who if anybody is advising herself & Harry?

HoldMyWine · 23/10/2026 12:57

This is the problem with HaM always having the last word, there are so many inconsistencies, no one knows what is true or not.

Noodledog · 23/10/2026 12:58

HoldMyWine · 23/10/2026 12:53

The Met wouldn’t investigate it though, TM has never been in the UK.

But presumably the Met would have passed the information to whoever's jurisdiction it was? Or is the suggestion that the Met received a letter alleging that Meghan's father was a paedophile and simply thought "oh, this hasn't got anything to do with us" , and chucked it in the bin?

Although to be fair, these days I could believe the Met might do that!

jeffgoldblum · 23/10/2026 13:00

valeriy2 · 23/10/2026 12:35

Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that there’s no way back for H&M and they now have to sing for their supper. Surely, though, there’s at least £10 million on the table for what she knew, when she knew it, and how she feels about it all.

Are you really proposing this as a money spinning opportunity for them? Seriously? 😬

OP posts:
Kingsandqueenz · 23/10/2026 13:00

HoldMyWine · 23/10/2026 12:57

This is the problem with HaM always having the last word, there are so many inconsistencies, no one knows what is true or not.

And the truth is so easy to find out with the click of a button. They constantly contradict & lie ,no wonder the public is so tired & weary of them...

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread