Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Ham pr disasters 60! ….they are mysterious and murky….mendacious and moany …..the markle family ….

189 replies

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 18:03

Well apparently this story isn’t going anywhere!

OP posts:
nicegreenwillow · Today 07:08

Horses7 · Today 07:07

Just when we thought things couldn’t get worse the Daily Mail have found TMs storage unit in Mexico and apparently it’s full of a lot of questionable items….

Yes, we were saying that upthread, it was the headlines last night.

Horses7 · Today 07:12

nicegreenwillow · Today 07:08

Yes, we were saying that upthread, it was the headlines last night.

Oops must have missed that bit - did do a quick look but just back from holiday and was too occupied watching the last two episodes of Traitors! 🤣
So I’m sure everyone knows DM have reported him to FBI - can’t keep up, got to get first wash load in!

JSMill · Today 07:29

Mondommountain · Today 03:10

Meghan totally botched that statement, pompously announcing she knew about the allegations against her father for years, and predominantly using it to berate those who had criticised her for being estranged from him. She seems to have firmly believed she could leverage that to portray herself positively.

i think this has to be the ultimate PR Disaster for the Sussex’s, who would have thought , when the PR disaster threads started, their PR campaign would lead to this point.

IIRC there was nothing about the victims in that statement.

diddl · Today 07:33

BemusedAmerican · Yesterday 22:28

The Met reported to the Office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Revoke the NDA's of the employees of that Office. Ask them whether they knew and what actions they were instructed to take.

The Met had had sight/possession of the letter & were in a position to act on it or not.

Isn't that the pertinent thing?

Voolio · Today 08:04

diddl · Today 07:33

The Met had had sight/possession of the letter & were in a position to act on it or not.

Isn't that the pertinent thing?

It is indeed. They didn’t fulfil their obligations to pass it on to the appropriate overseas jurisdictions at the time so they are now doing that.

In addition the IOPC have requested an independent enquiry to determine why they failed to do this. We will have to wait for this to conclude to understand if there was any pressure from anyone outside of the Met to bury it, dismiss it etc.

JSMill · Today 08:10

This whole thing is awful. Nobody comes out looking good:
TM jr is trying to make some money out of his dad potentially committing sickening crimes. The Met were informed of a potential crime and failed to pass it on to the appropriate authorities.
The DM and the Sun have got their hands on the evidence and are potentially compromising the evidence.
MM has tried to use it to get sympathy and has exposed herself as actually being aware of a potential crime but was happy to stay quiet as long as her DCs were safe.
What a shit show.

BunnyBunbunbun · Today 08:16

diddl · Today 07:33

The Met had had sight/possession of the letter & were in a position to act on it or not.

Isn't that the pertinent thing?

They did act. They treated the letter in the way it deserved. It was passed on to the Sussex office for their awareness, but somewhere along the line there may have been a data breach. It would be interesting to know if that had anything to do with Meghan.

The letter was supposedly intended to warn the Met about security risks to Meghan, but it contained no real information on this. There appears to have been some unsubstantiated hearsay about Thomas Markle, but nothing specific and nothing clearly illegal. From what I can tell, it doesn't refer to any specific incident that could be investigated. The letter was apparently from his embittered ex-wife and appears to have been 6-7 handwritten pages of waffle and ranting. Check out the interview she did with the Mirror a couple of months later for a taste, although she says nothing about CSA in it.

MindThePause · Today 08:18

MindThePause · Today 06:55

There was a post on SM yesterday where one of the royal reporters (Sykes?) said Meghan had passed “the letter she cited” to The Telegraph.

It didn’t state which letter so I presumed a copy of the one she sent to her newly one legged dad in 2025. I don’t think she would be silly enough to give them the 2018/2019 Loveless letter. Not with a potential privacy data breech already in the mix.

But if there is information co-operation between MM and the Telegraph that might inform how they report on stories pertaining to this whole sorry mess.

Can’t edit the post, but found the “report” made yesterday that MM had handed “the letter” (still not sure which one) to The Daily Telegraph.

Did a little digging and apparently the Telegraph and the Sun are both owned by News Corp. So there is a connection, even if they operate as separate entities.

Link

Tom Sykes on Instagram: "Meghan's secret letter just landed at the Telegraph She built her whole case on something nobody knew existed. Now she's handed the original to the press—a move that raises questions about what the letter actually says and why...

426 likes, 251 comments - tomsykestheroyalist on October 30, 2026: "Meghan's secret letter just landed at the Telegraph She built her whole case on something nobody knew existed. Now she's handed the original to the press—a move that raises questions...

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DfHGwFoEjJ3/?xtok=cnBxMDY3czE4YjBx

Voolio · Today 08:18

JSMill · Today 08:10

This whole thing is awful. Nobody comes out looking good:
TM jr is trying to make some money out of his dad potentially committing sickening crimes. The Met were informed of a potential crime and failed to pass it on to the appropriate authorities.
The DM and the Sun have got their hands on the evidence and are potentially compromising the evidence.
MM has tried to use it to get sympathy and has exposed herself as actually being aware of a potential crime but was happy to stay quiet as long as her DCs were safe.
What a shit show.

100% and we don’t yet know who, if anyone in the RF machine (beyond The Office of H&M) was privy to this information at the time and if they did nothing or if they sought to influence police obligations to pass this on to the appropriate overseas authorities. The additional independent investigation requested by the IOPC yesterday will clarify why the police failed in their obligations.

Beesandhoney123 · Today 08:20

M complaining KC showed no respect to her ref the july visit always amazes me in its sheer effrontry.
Does no one say to her ' No. They don't like you. They dont have to like you. What did you think would happen? '

PammyPrang · Today 08:23

I presume the “security” issue of the letter was potential blackmail, rather than any physical threat. If the letter were passed to MM and she ignored it (or thought Omg - quick - this looks bad for me, hide it) then I suppose the Met might not pursue. Perhaps they were even told Oh, what nasty rubbish! And the matter ended there.

There is no doubting TM is a gross pig and his son not much better. I can imagine that M is hideously embarrassed by such low-life relations. However the timeline is so off that my sympathy for her is stretched.

Voolio · Today 08:23

BunnyBunbunbun · Today 08:16

They did act. They treated the letter in the way it deserved. It was passed on to the Sussex office for their awareness, but somewhere along the line there may have been a data breach. It would be interesting to know if that had anything to do with Meghan.

The letter was supposedly intended to warn the Met about security risks to Meghan, but it contained no real information on this. There appears to have been some unsubstantiated hearsay about Thomas Markle, but nothing specific and nothing clearly illegal. From what I can tell, it doesn't refer to any specific incident that could be investigated. The letter was apparently from his embittered ex-wife and appears to have been 6-7 handwritten pages of waffle and ranting. Check out the interview she did with the Mirror a couple of months later for a taste, although she says nothing about CSA in it.

No they did not act as the letter deserved or as per standard operating procedures.

The IOPC yesterday announced that their investigation showed that the Met failed to refer the letter on to LE overseas as obligated and they have determined that a further independent investigation is now required to uncover why they failed to do this.

LookOutLookOutTomCruiseIsAbout · Today 08:23

MindThePause · Today 08:18

Can’t edit the post, but found the “report” made yesterday that MM had handed “the letter” (still not sure which one) to The Daily Telegraph.

Did a little digging and apparently the Telegraph and the Sun are both owned by News Corp. So there is a connection, even if they operate as separate entities.

Link

She got a lot of stick for collaborating with the Sun to leverage child abuse as a PR opportunity. Presumably she’s hoping everyone will be fine with it if she’s working with the Telegraph instead.

Kingzandqueens · Today 08:27

JSMill · Today 08:10

This whole thing is awful. Nobody comes out looking good:
TM jr is trying to make some money out of his dad potentially committing sickening crimes. The Met were informed of a potential crime and failed to pass it on to the appropriate authorities.
The DM and the Sun have got their hands on the evidence and are potentially compromising the evidence.
MM has tried to use it to get sympathy and has exposed herself as actually being aware of a potential crime but was happy to stay quiet as long as her DCs were safe.
What a shit show.

She didn't have children when she received the letter so she could have taken a major stand then or even gone & confronted the dad & the ex wife about the content of the letter
If it were me I would have left no stone unturned if my father was accused of such awful acts.

Handbagsandoldcurtains · Today 08:28

AcrossthePond55 · Yesterday 22:57

As far as this 'joint office' stuff, even if the letter was sent to a 'joint office' that doesn't necessarily follow that each letter was seen by both parties. It's quite possible that they even had separate staff handling their mail. So a letter comes addressed to the DssOS, gets routed to the staff handling Sussex mail and from there to MM herself. It's quite probable that the staff of the D&DoC never even saw the letter.

Musing on another subject, this has gotten so bad and so messy that I'm even more sure that the midnight flit was to get out of California before the shit hit the fan and hopefully under the 'protective wing' of the RF. MM (at least) knew that if she remained in CA she might very well be requested by the police or FBI for an interview and subject to a subpoena if she refused IF allegations were made that involved crimes in CA. And she would NOT have wanted that, if only for the publicity it would garner. There's always someone hanging around the PD and FBI offices looking for a scoop, and often someone inside who is willing to provide one. TBF as far as I know, there have been no allegations of crimes committed here by TMSr.

And I think that was the real reason for the meeting in July with KC. I doubt very much that KC was given the actual reason for wanting back in, but I do believe that the private conversation between KC and H was probably H begging and KC telling him politely to lie down on the bed HaM had made. And didn't M say she felt 'disrespected' not to be included in the private conversation? I'm sure the correct word is 'panicked' when she didn't get what she wanted, the inclusion in the RF and the PR machine that work for them

A thought has occurred to me following your post. Has M been back to the US since their UK return? We know H has had autocuegate, but M ?

Thank you Jeff for your continued sterling efforts.

Kingzandqueens · Today 08:29

LookOutLookOutTomCruiseIsAbout · Today 08:23

She got a lot of stick for collaborating with the Sun to leverage child abuse as a PR opportunity. Presumably she’s hoping everyone will be fine with it if she’s working with the Telegraph instead.

I think it was also the fact that her brother was using the Sun so it looked like they were in coohoots especially with her releasing her rambling infactual statement just hours after Tommy Js story broke.

Dontevenlookatme · Today 08:29

It is a complete shit show.

It’s going to be very hard to establish a reliable chain of evidence when so many parties have had their fingers in the pie.

I would like to see the exact nature of the allegations made. I’m not surprised the Met concluded it was not for them if it contained vague allegations and no substantiating evidence but I do think it odd that they thought it worth bringing to the attention of the RF through the Office of the D&DoS but not to LE agencies in the countries concerned.

Even if TMSnr turns out to have been completely stitched up by his son, it’s out there that he used sex workers, and some very young ones. How he can assert that he never slept with underage girls is unclear, presumably sex workers don’t routinely disclose their age in these encounters?

It all makes sickening reading, I’m having to stay away from a lot of the details.

I can’t believe I’m saying this but I think Meghan is getting a hard time. Once again she’s put her foot firmly in her mouth by trying to cover her own back, but I don’t agree with those who say she should have made contact with her half siblings. She has good reason for distancing herself and in her position I wouldn’t engage either. I’m surprised that she didn’t get someone to follow this up but I suppose she just hoped it would go away and it did, for eight years. Maybe she didn’t believe the allegations at the time and so didn’t think anyone was genuinely at risk. She’s massively mishandled the situation now but I can see how things might have looked to her then.

Like I said on the last thread, she’s way, way out of her depth. I cannot stand the woman but I wouldn’t wish this on anyone.

MindThePause · Today 08:31

LookOutLookOutTomCruiseIsAbout · Today 08:23

She got a lot of stick for collaborating with the Sun to leverage child abuse as a PR opportunity. Presumably she’s hoping everyone will be fine with it if she’s working with the Telegraph instead.

A better fit for Duchess than a red top. Still not sure handing them any letters was a good idea though. We shall see.

Voolio · Today 08:32

Beesandhoney123 · Today 08:20

M complaining KC showed no respect to her ref the july visit always amazes me in its sheer effrontry.
Does no one say to her ' No. They don't like you. They dont have to like you. What did you think would happen? '

Yes that always tickles me too - she said she felt ‘humiliated and sidelined’ after the July meeting with C&C - always amusing when the deluded and grandiose narcissist gets a taste of their own medicine. I actually can’t believe she said it out loud - never mind brief the press on her hurty feelings - what was her expectations of doing so - that C&C would say ‘Oh no poor petal - that was never our intention. You should always be main character and venerated. How can we make amends - can we give you a sparkly hat and a fancy chair to make up for it?’

JSMill · Today 08:33

Kingzandqueens · Today 08:27

She didn't have children when she received the letter so she could have taken a major stand then or even gone & confronted the dad & the ex wife about the content of the letter
If it were me I would have left no stone unturned if my father was accused of such awful acts.

Absolutely.

LookOutLookOutTomCruiseIsAbout · Today 08:38

I think that either letter is a bit of a nothing burger, which the Met wouldn’t mind becoming public knowledge as they are getting stick for not referring. This would be bad news for Meghan, as she already looks stupid and deceitful for claiming it was the reason she cut her father off, months before she received it. Even worse if there wasn’t anything in the letter worth cutting him off for.

Or it’s possible the Met wanted to refer and didn’t, due to pressure from someone. I think this would most likely be Meghan, as the RF had no reason to protect Thomas senior, they hadn’t even met him. I think it’s unlikely they would have made a mistake like that in the midst of the AMW shitstorm, and also unlikely Meghan wouldn’t have mentioned it by now if they had. From the Sussex POV though, a revelation like this would not have been the launchpad for Megxit that they were looking for. Obviously this scenario would be catastrophic for Meghan, if she squashed further referral because of how it might look for her and then lied about being assured there would be an investigation. Might explain the ‘break’ from public life they have suddenly taken.

Kingzandqueens · Today 08:40

Dontevenlookatme · Today 08:29

It is a complete shit show.

It’s going to be very hard to establish a reliable chain of evidence when so many parties have had their fingers in the pie.

I would like to see the exact nature of the allegations made. I’m not surprised the Met concluded it was not for them if it contained vague allegations and no substantiating evidence but I do think it odd that they thought it worth bringing to the attention of the RF through the Office of the D&DoS but not to LE agencies in the countries concerned.

Even if TMSnr turns out to have been completely stitched up by his son, it’s out there that he used sex workers, and some very young ones. How he can assert that he never slept with underage girls is unclear, presumably sex workers don’t routinely disclose their age in these encounters?

It all makes sickening reading, I’m having to stay away from a lot of the details.

I can’t believe I’m saying this but I think Meghan is getting a hard time. Once again she’s put her foot firmly in her mouth by trying to cover her own back, but I don’t agree with those who say she should have made contact with her half siblings. She has good reason for distancing herself and in her position I wouldn’t engage either. I’m surprised that she didn’t get someone to follow this up but I suppose she just hoped it would go away and it did, for eight years. Maybe she didn’t believe the allegations at the time and so didn’t think anyone was genuinely at risk. She’s massively mishandled the situation now but I can see how things might have looked to her then.

Like I said on the last thread, she’s way, way out of her depth. I cannot stand the woman but I wouldn’t wish this on anyone.

I agree it is a complete shit show. However I do feel if she was the only one who had recieved the letter she should have made contact (even through solicitors) with her brother & sister to ascertain how much they knew & if a letter had also been recieved by them.

MindThePause · Today 08:46

Kingzandqueens · Today 08:27

She didn't have children when she received the letter so she could have taken a major stand then or even gone & confronted the dad & the ex wife about the content of the letter
If it were me I would have left no stone unturned if my father was accused of such awful acts.

It is one thing to be handed definitive evidence, or be presented with a highly credible accusation. The emotional impact (regardless of whether your gut has feelings about the allegations being possible true or probably false) is not to be sniffed at. Because without evidence or credible accusation you don’t have anything to go on.

Paralysis is not unusual and can last for years. Decades even. You can be estranged from a parent for very good reasons, but still love & miss them. The happy unsullied memories from childhood become like a snow globe, that you can shake, and take your nervous system back to a time when parental love was uncomplicated, warm and secure. Grief is love with nowhere to go, and death is not necessarily the first time a child has to grieve the loss of the parent they used to have.

I empathise with her on a human level.

But PR-wise (and for the sake of her own time and space to digest latest developments) her statement would have served her interests better if it had been short, requested privacy, placed the focus on formal investigation by the relevant authorities and made no attempt to entangle her paternal estrangement with the current revelations.

Noseyoldcow · Today 08:47

LookOutLookOutTomCruiseIsAbout · Today 08:38

I think that either letter is a bit of a nothing burger, which the Met wouldn’t mind becoming public knowledge as they are getting stick for not referring. This would be bad news for Meghan, as she already looks stupid and deceitful for claiming it was the reason she cut her father off, months before she received it. Even worse if there wasn’t anything in the letter worth cutting him off for.

Or it’s possible the Met wanted to refer and didn’t, due to pressure from someone. I think this would most likely be Meghan, as the RF had no reason to protect Thomas senior, they hadn’t even met him. I think it’s unlikely they would have made a mistake like that in the midst of the AMW shitstorm, and also unlikely Meghan wouldn’t have mentioned it by now if they had. From the Sussex POV though, a revelation like this would not have been the launchpad for Megxit that they were looking for. Obviously this scenario would be catastrophic for Meghan, if she squashed further referral because of how it might look for her and then lied about being assured there would be an investigation. Might explain the ‘break’ from public life they have suddenly taken.

Meghan already looks stupid and deceitful full stop, and not just over this latest debacle.

Mylovelygreendress · Today 08:56

Enty on X

Blind Item #9
The lawyers of the alliterate one have been in contact with the FBI and want to have written questions, while the FBI wants to have an actual sit down meeting with her. Look for it to happen within the next week. There is a growing concern that the dad might try to unalive himself. They want the alliterate one on record prior to that.