Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Ham pr disasters 57! ….continuing the confusion and controversy….

798 replies

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 19:46

Once more into the breach dear friends!!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
19
Rhaidimiddim · Yesterday 21:45

pipinghot · Yesterday 21:21

We don't know that TM is a sex offender. It's only been alleged by his son - and his ex wife.

Unpleasant character he seems so. He himself has just said yes I use 'prostitutes' none were 'under age'. Make of that what you will.

Being pedantic, at this point it has been alleged by his estranged son and daughter; and it is alleged that it was alleged by his (now-dead) ex-wife, who is in no position to clarify what she was, or wasn't alleging in 2019.

DontLiveByTheClouds · Yesterday 21:47

dreamerhereawake · Yesterday 21:27

Behave?

We are all different. 🤷🏽‍♀️

You were implying Meghan might have used a surrogate.

dreamerhereawake · Yesterday 21:54

DontLiveByTheClouds · Yesterday 21:47

You were implying Meghan might have used a surrogate.

Where on earth did I say that?

It ain’t me that should be behaving.

If you are going to accuse me of anything, make it something I’m guilty of. Not what you think or feel.

Thanks.

DontLiveByTheClouds · Yesterday 21:56

dreamerhereawake · Yesterday 21:54

Where on earth did I say that?

It ain’t me that should be behaving.

If you are going to accuse me of anything, make it something I’m guilty of. Not what you think or feel.

Thanks.

At 21:23.

What don't you know if I don't know is not implying she didn't use a surrogate?

Lunde · Yesterday 21:57

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · Yesterday 21:00

Thomas Jr. did not leave the material at the flat for the police to find; he physically carried the boxes into the Cebu City Police station himself, He didn't just walk into the police station alone; he brought The Sun's veteran reporter, Nick Parker, with him to film and photograph the entire drop-off.
I find all the above extremely interesting.

Stinks of set-up, doesn't it? if nothing else, he and the Sun have ruined any chance of a prosecution by their evidence tampering.

Isn't that an offence?

Didn't TMJ also give the devices to his friend the IT guy to root around through before handing them over to police?

But then again nothing says good citizen reporting serious and horrific crime like posing for photos with the (well rummaged) evidence for the Sun's photographer!

It doesn't appear that anyone is seriously looking for a conviction - it is more about TMJ getting his $80,000 fee for selling the story.

Ham pr disasters 57! ….continuing the confusion and controversy….
Ham pr disasters 57! ….continuing the confusion and controversy….
MeghanAndTheSeals · Yesterday 22:00

i can hardly keep up with these threads! As a complete aside I’m picturing Charles Spencer, sat in his library by candlelight, thinking “but what about my book?” Sad times.

dreamerhereawake · Yesterday 22:01

@DontLiveByTheClouds

I’ll tell you what I do know.

Not to argue with people who see what they want to see but not what you’ve written.

Or engage with people spoiling for argument.

And I know It is pointless trying to explain to someone who is determined not to hear.

NFIT

DontLiveByTheClouds · Yesterday 22:04

dreamerhereawake · Yesterday 22:01

@DontLiveByTheClouds

I’ll tell you what I do know.

Not to argue with people who see what they want to see but not what you’ve written.

Or engage with people spoiling for argument.

And I know It is pointless trying to explain to someone who is determined not to hear.

NFIT

Edited

I'm 100% willing to hear. I read your I don't know to be sceptical. If you were meaning it factually then I do completely apologise.

No idea what NFIT means but I see you didn't explain.

Onebigsham · Yesterday 22:05

AllegationsMayVary · Yesterday 21:29

That’s not true. Someone posted her exclusive interview with The Mirror in May 2019 on the last thread where she is saying how TM should never be allowed in Archie’s life and listing out all his horrible characteristics especially as a negligent father and dreadful husband. Notably she didn’t allege CSA in the interview.

I very much doubt she did it for free. A bit late to the party but still had her snout in the trough.

Interesting that this was in the May of 2019 after her letter earlier in Jan which we now know didn’t get the impact she has hoped.

@CantBeArsedToThinkOfAName linked the single article she took part in (thank you!). The cashing in I had in mind was more about the pre wedding Markle/Dooley circus that gave numerous interviews and marched into London Town to do commentary for various news networks on the wedding of someone they hardly knew. Not a person giving a single interview months later.

But it’s interesting the way you dismiss Loveless as yet another Markle on the make. Why should anyone serious have believed anything she said, then? Why would her letter making accusations about her ex be taken any more seriously than the Mirror article? Why should the police believe her, let alone Meghan?

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:09

Lunde · Yesterday 21:57

Didn't TMJ also give the devices to his friend the IT guy to root around through before handing them over to police?

But then again nothing says good citizen reporting serious and horrific crime like posing for photos with the (well rummaged) evidence for the Sun's photographer!

It doesn't appear that anyone is seriously looking for a conviction - it is more about TMJ getting his $80,000 fee for selling the story.

TMJ really is absolutely hideous

BigWillyLittleTodger · Yesterday 22:11

MeghanAndTheSeals · Yesterday 22:00

i can hardly keep up with these threads! As a complete aside I’m picturing Charles Spencer, sat in his library by candlelight, thinking “but what about my book?” Sad times.

This made me 😂 🦢

AnAlpacaForChristmasPleaseSanta · Yesterday 22:16

MeghanAndTheSeals · Yesterday 22:00

i can hardly keep up with these threads! As a complete aside I’m picturing Charles Spencer, sat in his library by candlelight, thinking “but what about my book?” Sad times.

God that feels like a million years ago now.

MissTFied · Yesterday 22:20

So when MM 'reached out' to her father in hospital after his leg was amputated, we were wrong to assume she was a caring daughter enquiring after her father's health?

Now we learn she took the opportunity to tell him to get help and that he would never see his grandchildren.

Disingenuous, as ever.

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:21

If HAM can't get royal "glitter " (I can't say the A word) in the near future. What then ?

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:22

MissTFied · Yesterday 22:20

So when MM 'reached out' to her father in hospital after his leg was amputated, we were wrong to assume she was a caring daughter enquiring after her father's health?

Now we learn she took the opportunity to tell him to get help and that he would never see his grandchildren.

Disingenuous, as ever.

"Get help" just goes to show how far removed from reality she is.

Mylovelygreendress · Yesterday 22:29

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:21

If HAM can't get royal "glitter " (I can't say the A word) in the near future. What then ?

Another book ? Interviews ?
I also foresee a divorce .

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:31

Mylovelygreendress · Yesterday 22:29

Another book ? Interviews ?
I also foresee a divorce .

Definitely an interview. Maybe OW doesn't want their stench on them (yet) divorce? I'm just not sure as H and her title is all she has

Lunde · Yesterday 22:36

MeghanAndTheSeals · Yesterday 22:00

i can hardly keep up with these threads! As a complete aside I’m picturing Charles Spencer, sat in his library by candlelight, thinking “but what about my book?” Sad times.

I guess there wont be an invitation to Christmas at Althorp either.

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:39

Lunde · Yesterday 22:36

I guess there wont be an invitation to Christmas at Althorp either.

CS is as opportunistic as his horrible nephew. If he thinks it will suit him, he'll associate with them. Could a be spin, shame on the RF for judging Meg on her father's sins, blah blah

Passingthroughagain · Yesterday 22:40

Latest Sun "exclusive" has just dropped. Awful if true, but it again answers the question of why the Met didn't act - they had no jurisdiction over an American living in Mexico going to the Far East.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/40806546/thomas-markle-ex-wife-sick-confession/

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:43

Passingthroughagain · Yesterday 22:40

Latest Sun "exclusive" has just dropped. Awful if true, but it again answers the question of why the Met didn't act - they had no jurisdiction over an American living in Mexico going to the Far East.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/40806546/thomas-markle-ex-wife-sick-confession/

Odd his first wife left her 2 young children with him. It's all a hideous mess

MissTFied · Yesterday 22:43

The titles need to go.

HAM can do nothing about it, except have a massive tantrum which will be ignored by the RF and any further accusations against the RF would be disbelieved by the public. The drama is an embarrassment.

A line needs to be drawn.

AcrossthePond55 · Yesterday 22:46

Thanks for the new thread @jeffgoldblum You deserve a 🥇 for keeping on top of things!

A poster on the last thread asked a question regarding CA's statute of limitations on child sex crimes vis a vis the 2019 alleged letter from Loveless (is it still alleged or do we now consider it confirmed). The thread was closed before I could reply so I'll apologize for forgetting the posters name.

Calif does have a Statute of Limitations (SoL) on some CSA crimes, but there is generally no SoL on crimes involving forced acts. There is also no SoL for continuous acts of any kind with a child under age 14 or any act at all with a child under age 10 (those ages have specific laws & heavier penalties). This pertains to criminal prosecution. As far as CSA crimes that might have a SoL, that is decided on a case by case basis.

There is NO SoL on filing a civil claim against one's abuser.

So whether or not the allegations in the 2019 letter were subject to a SoL is impossible to say. It may be that whatever allegations Loveless made were subject to the SoL and that's why the letters contents weren't considered 'actionable'. But that decision should have been made by CA LE, not the Met. If the Met didn't pass the letter on to CA LE (assuming her allegations were for offenses committed in CA) because they thought the SoL date had passed, then they committed a serious error.

This whole situation is so FUBAR it isn't even funny. Not that it's remotely funny in the first place. And no one involved from M on down has helped the situation one little bit. If everyone had kept their gobs shut and let whatever LE involved investigate, it would have been much better. And any 'truth' that came out of it would have been something people could probably have depended on to be accurate. As it is chances are we will never know the absolute truth.

nicegreenwillow · Yesterday 22:46

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:39

CS is as opportunistic as his horrible nephew. If he thinks it will suit him, he'll associate with them. Could a be spin, shame on the RF for judging Meg on her father's sins, blah blah

Absolutely, that man is as wiley as they come. No moral compass.

Starryfifty · Yesterday 22:46

MissTFied · Yesterday 22:43

The titles need to go.

HAM can do nothing about it, except have a massive tantrum which will be ignored by the RF and any further accusations against the RF would be disbelieved by the public. The drama is an embarrassment.

A line needs to be drawn.

I agree with you. TM senior isn't long for this world but his hideous son and daughter have years of carnage in them. TM junior (IMO) is absolutely repulsive and I wouldn't be surprised if very similar allegations come out about him

Swipe left for the next trending thread