The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #341  
Old 10-06-2019, 01:07 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 282
To think that when last week in Angola, he sat alone on that "Diana Bench" under that "Diana tree" pondering who knows what; all of this had already been triggered and he knew what was about to happen

https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/FN...b-eefee0bfb0f9
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #342  
Old 10-06-2019, 01:43 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,834
Time’s Up Bullies-
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news...mpression=true
__________________

__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #343  
Old 10-06-2019, 02:05 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Windsor, United Kingdom
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippy View Post
J*sus. Harry has totally gone off his rocker. Instead of punching outside, he would be wise to rather start digging inside.
I will not elaborate any further and refrain from this thread.

What he is doing will smoke out the inside..
Reply With Quote
  #344  
Old 10-06-2019, 02:12 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 13,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
I have maintained from the very beginning that the People interview from 5 of Meghan's friends, apparently done with her permission (otherwise how would those 5 friends have known the details of such an intimate letter?) was an absolutely terrible idea, and this is why. The public didn't need to know about Meghan's contact with her father, and the DM certainly didn't need to be tipped off to the existence of the letter. By portraying him in a negative light, Meghan's father had incentive to turn the letter over to the DM to, in his eyes possibly, set the record straight. It's one of several serious lapses in judgment from the Sussexes as has been discussed endlessly on these threads.

I'm not excusing the DM, and I personally hope Meghan prevails in the lawsuit, but there wouldn't have been a lawsuit at all if Meghan's friends had been discreet, and if she had not given them the go-ahead to share the details.

It seems you are absolutely right.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-share-it.html
I am posting this link because Thomas Markle's actions are part of the lawsuit and he explains why he gave the letter to the paper.
Reply With Quote
  #345  
Old 10-06-2019, 02:50 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,744
Once again, we have no verification that Meghan authorised anything. In fact, I think it is probably one of the new "royal rules" she knew she needed to follow.

To people of their situation the notion of keep calm and carry on must have been seen as something beyond reasonable and when the dirt really hit the fan they didn't think before they acted for their fiiend

I believe Meghan would have wanted to do what Harry advised and keep silent and Harry has found what happened to her far worse to bear than what happen to him.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #346  
Old 10-06-2019, 03:06 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaira View Post
IDK what will happen. I am curious if there is a group litigation potential here which would be a very different ball-game and bolster Harry's claims even more. But Harry has every right to sue over the hacking and conspiracy claims and it sounds like the 'why now' question is a matter of more information being uncovered more recently as well as him wanting to finally correct some wrongs from the past. Some may call that petty, but what does it matter? Wrongs were done (allegedly), they should be addressed.

There's another angle too. With Harry jumping in with his own lawsuit among the rest that have already filed, its brought this group action lawsuit to the front pages and top stories globally. How many of us consciously realized it was something ongoing before Harry's part was announced? Max the Milkman filing and Susie the Seamstress filing doesn't garner the publicity for this lawsuit as The Duke of Sussex does.

Yet another example of Harry doing what needs to be done. Its not his fight alone in the hacking lawsuit and like the man faced with moving a mountain all by himself with a shovel that turns around and finds the entire village coming towards him with shovels to help, Harry is adding his voice with a whole lot of other people. His voice just happens to have a wee bit of clout these days though and that's kind of like bringing in a bulldozer.

Now I have a conundrum that I hope someone can help my caffeine deprived and sluggish memory. Does anyone remember reading and seeing when Meghan's letter was first released in the British press that there were actual pictures in the article showing Meghan's letter in *her own handwriting*?

This makes me doubt that the press got an edited copy. They saw the original and photographed it. I seem to remember people making comments here on how beautiful her handwriting is. Or am I remembering things wrong? To me, regardless if the press got an edited version of the letter, they still infringed on Meghan's intellectual property by publishing it. Mr. Markle isn't going to save their slimy, ink stained, grubby fingers.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #347  
Old 10-06-2019, 03:19 AM
Dalriada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
It seems you are absolutely right.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-share-it.html
I am posting this link because Thomas Markle's actions are part of the lawsuit and he explains why he gave the letter to the paper.


Yes, I think the “sisterhood’s” leaking details of the letter is plausible as and some of them have been publicly vocal over the past summer in support of Meghan against bad press coverage especially Jessica Mulroney. The current court action was predictable even back then when the letter was published as former Buckingham Palace press secretary Dickie Arbiter, said: ‘Assuming – and as these sources are anonymous we don’t know for sure – that this was done with her agreement, it has opened a Pandora’s Box, in my opinion.”
Reply With Quote
  #348  
Old 10-06-2019, 03:42 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,198
There is a huge difference between referring to an author's words and actually putting the entire work into the public domain.

Right now, I could go back in the archives and quote a statement that was actually in the letter Meghan wrote to her father (from the photographs I seem to remember but the jury is still out on that). Such as the heading was "Dearest Daddy". I can quote up to 20% of the contents in this letter right here on TRF *but* I also have to link to my "source" (usually in this case, the author of an article). The letter was printed in the first place without the permission of its author. My link would be valid as I have faith that I'm giving credit where its due to the one that wrote the article about Meghan's letter.

I've had something similar happen to me on the scale of a grain of sand on a huge beach compared to Meghan's letter. When Will and Kate first got engaged, I kind of made up a poem about it and posted it here. Perusing some royal FB sites, I was surprised to see my poem posted by someone else. My response was to PM the person here ans say "I'm glad you really liked my original poem but if you're going to post it elsewhere, also post the name of the person that wrote it".

Meghan's friends did nothing wrong with referring to the fact that Meghan wrote her father a letter or even mentioning the tone of the letter. They did not share Meghan's entire personal letter to her father in its entirety but alluded to points made in the letter. Most likely too that before even thinking about referring to their friend's letter, they asked permission from Meghan. The press did not ask permission and therefore infringed on Meghan's intellectual property by printing the entire letter without permission. That's the whole crux of the lawsuit.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #349  
Old 10-06-2019, 03:46 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 282
Though they are not a party of the lawsuit (the issue is copyright/publishing/consent). Dragging them into it ie subpoenas depositions etc will be impossible. People Magazine is not about to expose its sources. I mean til today we don't know who was the Washington Post Deep Throat. Since if MoS want to go down this road, I am sure Harry and they lawyers would love to depose those infamous Palace Sources MoS and DM love to quote and refer to.
Reply With Quote
  #350  
Old 10-06-2019, 04:03 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,198
I am not familiar with what the laws are in the UK regarding sources but here in the States, there is such a thing called "reporter's privilege".

Reporter's privilege in the United States (also journalist's privilege, newsman's privilege, or press privilege), is a "reporter's protection under constitutional or statutory law, from being compelled to testify about confidential information or sources."

As People Magazine is an American publication, this privilege would apply to them and they could refuse to name their sources. I've seen shows and heard of cases where a journalist would refuse to reveal sources and the judge sentenced them to jail for "contempt".

I don't think we're going to see this kind of action taken. Especially if this case reaches beyond UK borders into American publications or even an American himself.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #351  
Old 10-06-2019, 05:18 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 826
Do we even know for certain those were Meghan's friends who talked about the letter? I mean, I find it hard to believe she send copies of the letter to her friends. She may have talked about it to them, but they don't know exactly what's in it. The only people who do are the ones who read it. And my guess would be Harry and some of her staff.
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 10-06-2019, 05:41 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 13,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
There's another angle too. With Harry jumping in with his own lawsuit among the rest that have already filed, its brought this group action lawsuit to the front pages and top stories globally. How many of us consciously realized it was something ongoing before Harry's part was announced? Max the Milkman filing and Susie the Seamstress filing doesn't garner the publicity for this lawsuit as The Duke of Sussex does.

Yet another example of Harry doing what needs to be done. Its not his fight alone in the hacking lawsuit and like the man faced with moving a mountain all by himself with a shovel that turns around and finds the entire village coming towards him with shovels to help, Harry is adding his voice with a whole lot of other people. His voice just happens to have a wee bit of clout these days though and that's kind of like bringing in a bulldozer.

Are you referring to the phone hacking scandal? We don't know yet the details but if Harry will be referring to his phone being hacked in the wake of the investigations of 2005 or 2011, he should have filed a lawsuit back then. These investigations made world wide news, he should have added his voice then.
Not sure his phone has been hacked by a newspaper since.
It strikes me as odd that he brings this issue on the table now and somehow relates it to his anger about the treatment of his wife by filing both lawsuits around the same time.
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 10-06-2019, 07:08 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
The goodwill generated by the tour is now forgotten , at least in the UK [hopefully not in Africa], and Mr Markle is 'front page' again..

What a triumph for Mrs Clintons [newly imported] PR team...
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 10-06-2019, 07:28 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elenath View Post
Do we even know for certain those were Meghan's friends who talked about the letter? I mean, I find it hard to believe she send copies of the letter to her friends. She may have talked about it to them, but they don't know exactly what's in it. The only people who do are the ones who read it. And my guess would be Harry and some of her staff.
Quotes from the People Magazine cover story back in February (link):

Quote:
Meghan Markle‘s close friends are opening up for the first time about the woman they know and love.

After maintaining their silence for nearly two years, five women who form an essential part of Meghan’s inner circle have spoken with PEOPLE to “stand up against the global bullying we are seeing and speak the truth about our friend,” says a longtime friend and former costar.
Quote:
In candid interviews, the women — who requested anonymity to protect the private relationships they hold dear — set the record straight on everything from Meghan’s relationship with her dad to an up-close view of her wedding to the reality of her day-to-day life at Kensington Palace’s Nottingham Cottage.
The same day People did a follow up article specifically about the situation with Meghan's father and the letter (link).

Quote:
“After the wedding she wrote him a letter. She’s like, ‘Dad, I’m so heartbroken. I love you. I have one father. Please stop victimizing me through the media so we can repair our relationship.’
Reply With Quote
  #355  
Old 10-06-2019, 07:30 AM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
The goodwill generated by the tour is now forgotten , at least in the UK [hopefully not in Africa], and Mr Markle is 'front page' again..

What a triumph for Mrs Clintons [newly imported] PR team...
Well said. So within a few days, Harry & Meghan's misjudgements have led to:

> Meghan's broken relationship with her father back on the front pages

> Potential for uniting the Press in fighting H&M's potential "war"

> Recent very successful charitable endeavours, including SmartWorks, all forgotten

> Goodwill of recent official trip to Africa eroded.

Lack of judgement, being badly advised, not understanding the basic role of a second tier royal, not seeking or listening to sage advice from Charles, William or the BP staff: not sure which of these is driving these actions.
Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 10-06-2019, 07:40 AM
carlota's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 8,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
The goodwill generated by the tour is now forgotten , at least in the UK [hopefully not in Africa], and Mr Markle is 'front page' again..

What a triumph for Mrs Clintons [newly imported] PR team...
Quote:
Well said. So within a few days, Harry & Meghan's misjudgements have led to:

> Meghan's broken relationship with her father back on the front pages

> Potential for uniting the Press in fighting H&M's potential "war"

> Recent very successful charitable endeavours, including SmartWorks, all forgotten

> Goodwill of recent official trip to Africa eroded.

Lack of judgement, being badly advised, not understanding the basic role of a second tier royal, not seeking or listening to sage advice from Charles, William or the BP staff: not sure which of these is driving these actions.
i agree! but although i have blamed their PR team in the past (along with H&M) i no longer do. no respectable, experienced PR team would have advised them to do this. to me, this is the making of H&M - despite the well intentioned advice that their PR team, Charles, William or the BP staff will have given them.

they are carving their own grave. we all know who will suffer from this: whilst harry was always seen as a bit of a 'black sheep' whose actions were forgotten/ignored (his naked pictures, his racist costumes, etc...), meghan's popularity has never been high. harry is trying to help meghan with this, but he's actually going to do more damage than good IMO, as evidenced by the events mentioned before by muriel:

> Meghan's broken relationship with her father back on the front pages

> Potential for uniting the Press in fighting H&M's potential "war"

> Recent very successful charitable endeavours, including SmartWorks, all forgotten

> Goodwill of recent official trip to Africa eroded.
__________________
The Humane Society of the United States is the nation’s largest and most effective animal protection organization.
https://www.humanesociety.org
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 10-06-2019, 07:54 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by alvinking View Post
Though they are not a party of the lawsuit (the issue is copyright/publishing/consent). Dragging them into it ie subpoenas depositions etc will be impossible. People Magazine is not about to expose its sources. I mean til today we don't know who was the Washington Post Deep Throat. Since if MoS want to go down this road, I am sure Harry and they lawyers would love to depose those infamous Palace Sources MoS and DM love to quote and refer to.
Totally off topic but FYI—Deep Throat was identified as Mark Felt, Associate Director of the FBI. They even made a movie about him in 2017 starring Liam Neeson. But your point is correct, The Post never revealed their source. Felt revealed himself as Deep Throat in 2005, 3 years before his death at age 95.

I don’t see a judge allowing the MoS to drag irrelevant people, depositions or testimony into court. I don’t see how the People magazine article or Meghan’s dad saying he wanted to “set the record straight” by releasing her letter is any defense for the MoS. The point is copyright and ownership of the words.

And anyway, the deluded Tom Markle did set the record straight- for Meghan, not himself. He showed that he was a liar, who couldn’t keep his stories straight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Now I have a conundrum that I hope someone can help my caffeine deprived and sluggish memory. Does anyone remember reading and seeing when Meghan's letter was first released in the British press that there were actual pictures in the article showing Meghan's letter in *her own handwriting*?

This makes me doubt that the press got an edited copy. They saw the original and photographed it. I seem to remember people making comments here on how beautiful her handwriting is. Or am I remembering things wrong? To me, regardless if the press got an edited version of the letter, they still infringed on Meghan's intellectual property by publishing it. Mr. Markle isn't going to save their slimy, ink stained, grubby fingers.
You are correct-an actual excerpt of the letter in Meghan’s handwriting was printed in the article.
Reply With Quote
  #358  
Old 10-06-2019, 08:21 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,744
There are a lot of articles on the net and it's interesting that once again the Morning Egomaniac led the charge. Weirdly, he always begins by giving his CV as if having Meghan as a Twitter follower bestows credibility on him. It doesn't.

Many RR's such as Dickie Arbiter have stated that following the scandal and new rules there was a much quieter media response and then cam the internet and scandals that never occurred were posted and their authors stated things as gospel.

They have heated up since the ascent of the Cambridge's but in the beginning at least they backed off Catherine during her maternity leave.

11 years later all bets are off. The media trolls seem to be able to publish what they like, outright lies or half truths. Like Harry and Meghan OWE their entire lives to the media and, when accepting the gift of Frogmore, they signed away any rights to a life.

If I doubted this, all the dire predictions of the media destroying their lives work and not following them any more were two of the more outrageous seasons given for why they should have never have complained shocked me.

No royal is the servant of the media and reputable RR's will continue their reputable way and slime will contemplate the pros and cons of killing the geese that lay the golden eggs.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #359  
Old 10-06-2019, 08:23 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
The goodwill generated by the tour is now forgotten , at least in the UK [hopefully not in Africa], and Mr Markle is 'front page' again..

What a triumph for Mrs Clintons [newly imported] PR team...
It is not about goodwill. It is about Justice. After all: popularity ("goodwill") comes by feet and leaves on horseback. His own mother, his own father, his own stepmother, all have experienced this so-called "goodwill". The one week it is Hosanna! The other week it is Crucify Him!
Reply With Quote
  #360  
Old 10-06-2019, 08:30 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Hamilton, United Kingdom
Posts: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
Are you referring to the phone hacking scandal? We don't know yet the details but if Harry will be referring to his phone being hacked in the wake of the investigations of 2005 or 2011, he should have filed a lawsuit back then. These investigations made world wide news, he should have added his voice then.
Not sure his phone has been hacked by a newspaper since.
It strikes me as odd that he brings this issue on the table now and somehow relates it to his anger about the treatment of his wife by filing both lawsuits around the same time.



The precedent for this has been that you have 6 years from realizing you were hacked to when you can sue .


There have been a continual stream of cases and payouts under those rules since Leveson .And he is part of a huge numbers of these cases being lodged now at the same time .
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
abdication america anastasia anastasia once upon a time archie mountbatten-windsor background story baptism biography bridal gown britain british british royal family china chinese commonwealth countries countess of snowdon customs daisy doge of venice doll dubai duke of sussex facts family life fashion and style george vi gustaf vi adolf hello! imperial household intro italian royal family jack brooksbank jacobite japan jewellery king edward vii king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers luxembourg mary: crown princess of denmark meghan markle nepalese royal jewels plantinum jubilee prince constantijn prince dimitri princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak princess ribha queen consort queen mathilde queen maxima random facts royal ancestry royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown serbian royal family solomon j solomon speech suthida taiwan tradition uae customs united states of america wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:14 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×