Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 18: January 2014 - July 2018


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
IMO the lighting of the picture seems all wrong to have been taken where stated. Doctored photo? Might be. A lot being assumed. Sarah is an easy mark. Looks like a set-up. JMO. :cool:
 
Sarah Ferguson set to spill her secrets at £10k a time in Canada | Daily Mail Online

I don't think for one moment that Fergie will be spilling anything except her amazing secrets towards self-fulfilment and other bits of the psycho-babble she's been spouting for years. However, it seems to be pretty clear that this has been in the pipeline for some time. Fergie has alighted on a new source of income here, and was IMO a driving force in persuading Beatrice to do the same thing.
 
Curryong said:
Sarah Ferguson set to spill her secrets at £10k a time in Canada | Daily Mail Online

I don't think for one moment that Fergie will be spilling anything except her amazing secrets towards self-fulfilment and other bits of the psycho-babble she's been spouting for years. However, it seems to be pretty clear that this has been in the pipeline for some time. Fergie has alighted on a new source of income here, and was IMO a driving force in persuading Beatrice to do the same thing.
Click to expand...

It may be new in that it's in Canada, but in the past I've seen websites of U.S. agencies advertizing her as a speaker.
 
I can't imagine anyone would hire her, she makes a mess of everything she touches.
But perhaps she could tell people what not to do?


At least she has an occupation, sort of.
 
Whaaaat?? I realize she needs to make a living but this is...I can't even think of a word! :ohmy:
 
I don't understand why anyone is clutching their pearls over this news. Sarah has been on the public speaking circuit since her divorce in 1996. She's done public speaking tours in Canada for years. For whatever reason, likely a slow news day, the British tabs crafted an article out of the rate she's charging to give a speech from her Canadian agents.
 
I'm just surprised people are still paying her. She really isn't a glowing advertisement for anything.
 
In one of Fergie's bankruptcies it was reported that she owed her personal aide/assistant thousands but was only required to pay a ridiculously low amount - something like 10 p per pound.

Does anyone know if this the same personal assistant?
 
I don't think so. Andrews only worked for Sarah up until 1997 and that was years ahead of the bankruptcy.

Personally, I think whatever Andrews has been smoking, I want some. She wants Meryl Streep to play her should a movie be made? I think she's being far too over optimistic about just how popular the "life and times" of someone that left the British Royal Family 2 decades ago would be to the general public. In order to really sell, it would have to be loaded with some really provable juicy tidbits about Sarah and the royal family and if so, I think she'd better have some really good lawyers on retainer.

Personally, I wouldn't be interested in this book if it came to my door with a free case of wine but that's just me.
 
Last edited:
:previous: I wonder if the paragraph in the article referring to her as 'debt ridden' and as having several failed businesses in the U.S. refers to the past or to the present.
 
If this story is true and she is about to sue Murdoch's media, for the life of me I can't understand why it took her six years to figure out this plan of action. Is she grasping at straws because the bright ideas that were sure fire money making schemes weren't? Is she refusing to believe that because she was a member of the BRF two decades ago and left in disgrace that her star has faded and people have moved on? If we look really, really close at Sarah's eyes, will we see pound/dollar signs?

Stay tuned to for the next exciting episode of the Sarah, Duchess of York soap opera. :whistling:

sndral said:
:previous: I wonder if the paragraph in the article referring to her as 'debt ridden' and as having several failed businesses in the U.S. refers to the past or to the present.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be one bit surprised if that reference is referring to the present as well as the past. None of the things that I've seen or heard of her peddling sounded like something actually worth buying because the name "Sarah, Duchess of York" was highlighting them.
 
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade said:
Sarah Ferguson will take Rupert Murdoch's paper for millions over Prince Andrew 'sting'* | Daily Mail Online

Fergie seeking compensation for years of lost earnings, and claiming the story damaged her credibility and earning power.

Sure, its all the NotW fault. Fergie has always been a moneygrabbing embarrassment to the BRF long before being exposed. Let the fun begin!
Click to expand...


Must be a joke it was there on the tape to see no one to blame but her self


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
The question that now comes to my mind is and I'd appreciate input on this from anyone in the "know". How in the world can Sarah sue the News of the World that was responsible for the "fake sheikh" scheme to trap her into 'selling access" to Andrew if that paper no longer exists? It went out of business and closed in 2011 if I remember right. Can she sue Murdoch himself as the owner of the now defunct tabloid?

It seems to me that this kind of lawsuit would be very involved, very expensive and Murdoch, himself, is loaded to the gills where Sarah is not. Who will foot the bill for her legal eagles?

This whole scheme sounds kind of fishy to me.
 
I would have thought it would be something you wouldn't want brought up again especially for her daughters sake. But money is money for Sarah.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
Osipi said:
The question that now comes to my mind is and I'd appreciate input on this from anyone in the "know". How in the world can Sarah sue the News of the World that was responsible for the "fake sheikh" scheme to trap her into 'selling access" to Andrew if that paper no longer exists? It went out of business and closed in 2011 if I remember right. Can she sue Murdoch himself as the owner of the now defunct tabloid?



It seems to me that this kind of lawsuit would be very involved, very expensive and Murdoch, himself, is loaded to the gills where Sarah is not. Who will foot the bill for her legal eagles?



This whole scheme sounds kind of fishy to me.
Click to expand...


She is presumably suing News International who published the News of the World.
 
Perhaps she is hoping for some sort of payout before it reaches court? Frankly I think this woman is becoming more deluded and eccentric as the years pass. This is yet another attempt at money-making from a new source, and inevitably we ask why now?

Have the drinks machines and hair straighteners Fergie was flogging on US shopping channels come up short, moneywise? Isn't anyone booking her for Canadian speaking engagements? Doesn't anyone want to know her business secrets? Isn't Andrew good for a million or so loan, or her daughters? If this thing does come to court the DM and other tabloids will have an absolute field day.
 
This would be a very expensive thing to do and Sarah doesnt have a small fortune to spend unless she is hoping the court makes the other side pay the lawyers fees if she wins? the fact they have named a law firm doing this for her it doesn't seem like something they are pulling out of thin air. A lot of crimes have time limits I'm not sure what it is for things like this. The biggest issues for her is that there is a video of her taking the money and talking about getting open doors for Andrew etc and that she admitted to it afterwards in her apology blaming stress and drinking I believe because if there is one thing we all know about Sarah is that NOTHING is ever her fault she is always the victim and the big mean press tricked her. I don't think she would have a leg to stand on so I don't see why anybody would be trying to make a deal out of court when they have all the aces. Or it's possible she is fishing to see if this is a good idea in which case someone needs to tell her it isn't. I can believe she is broke again she lives an expensive lifestyle and people would have to be sick of her needing money and to be bailed out. Andrew isn't her husband he already let's her live in his house/s cause sorry I don't believe for a second Sarah paid a cent towards the Chalet if she had money why didn't she buy herself a house? I also don't think Andrew would like people taking a closer look at him either with the stories that have been coming out about him. But then maybe Sarah has her own reasons.
 
Oh jeez, here we go! Why try and sue 6 years later? That itself it bad enough but the fact is she was caught red handed on video so how she can try and say its the papers fault seems bizarre to me. Surely if Sarah has respect for her daughters, her ex husband (Who whatever else he is has been generous to her) and the Queen, she wouldn't drag this scandal back up. With the greatest respect the York side of the RF have had enough scandals without bringing up old ones. Maybe she is desperate for money so much she is happy to try anything, I'm sure she will only go ahead if she can get some kind of discount or no win no fee deal using her connections.
 
I am going to wait until this story is confirmed. Incidently, I wonder how most of you would feel if your favourite Royal got set up by a fraudulent reporter who was introduced to them by a close 'friend", was lied to and filmed under false pretences. Leaving the morality alone, the legality sounds a bit sus to me.
 
MARG said:
I am going to wait until this story is confirmed. Incidently, I wonder how most of you would feel if your favourite Royal got set up by a fraudulent reporter who was introduced to them by a close 'friend", was lied to and filmed under false pretences. Leaving the morality alone, the legality sounds a bit sus to me.
Click to expand...


If my fav royal was drunk and selling out her husband I would feel totally disgusted with him/her. By the by I don't think of Fergie as a royal.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
If anyone doesn't know what happened its on YouTube


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
You can't be setup if you have done nothing wrong. They heard what she was doing and went out to prove it. If Sarah hadn't already done this they wouldn't off just thought it up one day. Sarah gave them the ammunition and maybe her "friend" wasn't being treated so well or was as disgusted by this as a lot of other people were. I doubt anyone is going to confirm this she isn't part of the Royal Family. IF she proceeds we will hear more about it. It isn't like Sarah would have answered any questions honestly. Why has she waited so long if there are legal issues? She could of sued back then but didn't in fact she said sorry. But some lawyers can make a case out of almost nothing these days so you never know I would be pretty surprised if she won. Rupert could make this case go for years and where is Sarah planning on getting the money to fight this from? Big lawyers have very big fees. It could as I said before they could just be testing the waters to see where things stand.
 
When one hears the name Rupert Murdoch, the first words that normally come to mind are adjectives like sleaze, trash, hacking among other not too flattering adjectives. This is a man who has made a fortune off of yellow journalism.

Yes, Sarah was caught with her hand in the cookie jar by devious means that have become synonymous with Murdoch. Was it illegal for the paper that Murdoch owned to do this? I don't know. Some in law enforcement use this kind of method and its called a "sting".

One thing this story has done is to dig up old mistakes and reanimate the Saga of Sarah just as it seemed she was pulling things together nicely for herself. I can't seriously believe that any good will come out of this latest revelation and do really hope its all a bunch of hot air.
 
Hard to see how she could recover much in a lawsuit when:
The statute of limitations for libel/defamation is one year in GB, if Wiki is to be believed.
Truth is an absolute defense - and her behavior is on tape.
For damages I assume that in the UK (like in the USA) you have to show your reputation was damaged by the libel and in Sarah's case IMO her reputation was already in pretty bad shape before she was taped offering to sell access to her ex hubby.
 
Sarah's lawsuit makes no sense to me. :confused: It seems to me that the publicity will simply confirm what many thought about her before the story broke: that she was desperately using her royal connection (or ex-connection) to make money. Sarah met with the "shiek" voluntarily. Even if she was under the influence during the meeting doesn't mean she was in that condition when she made the appointment. (Am I crazy to think that perhaps she's using the threat of giving testimony to extort money from her ex-relatives?)
 
The 'rumored law suit' which has not been made public is a load of BS IMO. For one thing, a defamation/slander suit needs to be brought within a year of publication.

Q. Any Time Limit to Starting a Defamation Claim?

A. Court proceedings must be issued within one year from the date of publication, i.e. if a publication is dated 1 January 2007 then proceedings must be issued on or by 31 December 2007.
The Court may in exceptional circumstances allow the issue of a claim outside this time limit, but will rarely be prepared to do this.
Click to expand...

The information comes from a UK law firm
Defamation Libel & Slander FAQs | Slater and Gordon Lawyers UK
 
Its so weird that this has even come up. I wonder if that law office wanted some publicity? The fact they named one as being her lawyers is odd if this is just a made up story. Wow one year she really has missed the boat. And how would she prove she lost anything? I did think what someone above me said that maybe this story is being floated because she needs money and is kind of a passive/aggressive way to get whatever it is she needs or wants. Cause I wouldn't put it past her I'm sorry but Sarah has shown she isn't above doing anything to get money. The only problem is that for Sarah it never seems enough she refuses to cut down her lifestyle even though she can't afford to live it.
 
royal rob said:
If my fav royal was drunk and selling out her husband I would feel totally disgusted with him/her. By the by I don't think of Fergie as a royal.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Click to expand...

I don't think of Fergie as a royal either, she is just an overwhelming embarrassment.
I expect she is broke (again!) and is desperately hoping Murdoch will choose to settle rather than fighting things out in court.

There seems to be no limits to this woman's greed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

iceflower
Princess Caroline Current Events Part 4: January 2024 -
Replies
6
Views
3K
iceflower
iceflower
iceflower
Prince Albert & Princess Charlene Current Events Part 6: January 2024 -
Replies
9
Views
3K
iceflower
iceflower
Marengo
  • Sticky
United Kingdom: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
2 3
Replies
63
Views
4K
Biri
B
Marengo
Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 20: Sep 2022 -
3 4 5
Replies
138
Views
9K
iceflower
iceflower
An Ard Ri
  • Sticky
Prince Daniel's Current Events, Part 4
Replies
15
Views
2K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom