Harry & Meghan: Legal Actions against the Media

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

It is possible the Duchess does not want to settle because then "We did do no wrong" remains hanging above the case.

Good point. How often have we heard that "x" settled out of court and then noticed they were right back doing the same thing again. A payout out of court is actually a drop in the bucket compared to having a court of law rule against them and impose penalties.

I don't think I'd want to settle out of court either. Meghan isn't doing this for the money as we know any monies won will be donated to an anti-bullying campaign. She wants justice.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Good point. How often have we heard that "x" settled out of court and then noticed they were right back doing the same thing again. A payout out of court is actually a drop in the bucket compared to having a court of law rule against them and impose penalties.

I don't think I'd want to settle out of court either. Meghan isn't doing this for the money as we know any monies won will be donated to an anti-bullying campaign. She wants justice.

And a verdict is open for appeal, both for the Duchess as well for the publisher. They can appeal, appeal and appeal until the European Court of Justice (or the Supreme Court, if the UK has left the EU in the meantime). This sets a final jurisprudence to which all British Courts will refer in future similar cases.

[JessRulz]

Several posts debating race have been removed. As we have mentioned multiple times, this is not the place to have them.

[Madame Verseau]

I don't think the friends speaking muddies the waters. The friends spoke of the letter, not release copies in their possession (I doubt they had copies.) Dad sent a redacted letter to DM. The crux of the case as I see it DM printed the letter without Meghan's permission. If DM could prove it had direct permission from Meghan there would be no lawsuit. Since it can't, DM is doing an end run with her friends and using Thomas Sr. as a human shield. I am surprised by Dad's interview. At this point contact between DM and Dad should be with DM lawyers taking a deposition or questioning him on the stand. Dad's interview comes off as tampering with a potential witness, especially when Dad admits he sent parts of a letter to DM.

[Osipi]

Do we know for a fact that it was redacted? Now, remember we're talking about a physical, handwritten letter here in Meghan's own handwriting of which the Mail even published a picture of. How does one "edit" a handwritten letter or redact it (with black magic marker as an example) and expect the Mail to believe they got the whole letter in its entirety. Did Mr. Markle rip up the letter and just give them pieces of it? Even then, any journalist worth their salt would know they're not getting the "full monty" of its contents.

Regardless of what happened with that letter, just the fact that they printed it without Meghan's permission is the crux of the lawsuit whether it was the full letter, an abridged edition of the letter or it had obscene doodles on it. Mr. Markle has no part in this and doesn't matter. His statements only make himself look the fool and pathetic and drives a wedge even further between him and his daughter. He's not helping the MoS either come to think of it. Come to think of it, even showing Meghan's personal handwriting (which she could claim is her own personal trademark) is an infringement perhaps?

I'd post a link to where the letter and handwriting is shown as I remember it from memory but I refuse to soil the thread with this kind of tabloid link.

[Dman]

The reason behind the timing of the Sussex lawsuit launch:
https://amp.ft.com/content/90507c1e-...mpression=true

[Elenath]

Originally Posted by Dman

The reason behind the timing of the Sussex lawsuit launch:
https://amp.ft.com/content/90507c1e-...mpression=true

Paywall

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Dman

The reason behind the timing of the Sussex lawsuit launch:
https://amp.ft.com/content/90507c1e-...mpression=true

It is behind a paywall but to sum it up: The courts were due to change on Oct 1 and by the Sussexes filing when they did it basically guaranteed it will stay with the court they desired who is more sympathetic to the rights of the owners instead of the publishers.

[Ista]

Originally Posted by ACO

It is behind a paywall but to sum it up: The courts were due to change on Oct 1 and by the Sussexes filing when they did it basically guaranteed it will stay with the court they desired who is more sympathetic to the rights of the publishers.

Sympathetic to the rights of the publishers, or sympathetic to the rights of the owners of the written material?

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Ista

Sympathetic to the rights of the publishers, or sympathetic to the rights of the owners of the written material?

Thank you for the catch. The rights of the owners. They were going to move on the 1st where the rights of the publishers would have likely had an advantage. The courts in which they are staying have been very favorable in other cases where big settlements have been dished out. So it was clearly strategic.

In other news it will seem Thomas Markle is making it known he is willing to fly to the UK if needed to appear in court. I don't think anyone is surprised by this news. What is interesting is apparently he has let it slip they haven't interacted since 2015. So this estrangement was before Harry and explains a lot why they have never met.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...e-dad-20526687

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by ACO

Thank you for the catch. The rights of the owners. They were going to move on the 1st where the rights of the publishers would have likely had an advantage. The courts in which they are staying have been very favorable in other cases where big settlements have been dished out. So it was clearly strategic.

In other news it will seem Thomas Markle is making it known he is willing to fly to the UK if needed to appear in court. I don't think anyone is surprised by this news. What is interesting is apparently he has let it slip they haven't interacted since 2015. So this estrangement was before Harry and explains a lot why they have never met.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...e-dad-20526687

I would take anything Tom Markle says with a large mound of salt. He couldn't even fly over for the wedding, but he's willing to fly over for court?
Other than driving to LA sometimes, he doesn't seem to go anywhere.
2015 was only the year before Harry and Meghan met, so not really that long.
Maybe Tom was the one who didn't want to meet Harry, he's the one who ditched the wedding under strange circumstances. Maybe he put Meghan and Harry off when they wanted to go see him, or wanted him to meet them somewhere. We don't really know.

[ACO]

I don't believe much of anything Thomas says but I can see with this legal case happening the press wanting to not be caught telling untruths is a priority right now. 2015 is only 4 years ago but it also was before Harry despite people claiming she "ghosted" her father due to her new relationship. Clearly damage was already done long before Harry walked into her life.

Though most figured as much when she has a year and a half relationship with a man and her father never once met him despite him meeting everyone else important to her. Thomas has nothing to do with this case though. She isn't suing him and not sure why he would need to be in the courts. Though I am not surprised that he would want to be called in.

[Zaira]

Wait, Meghan posted in 2016 on IG that she was spending Thanksgiving with her mom and dad, didnt she? And I could have sworn she also posted about visiting him in MX in May 2016 (granted still before Harry) when she and Cory went before they broke up. I could be remember those two things wrong though. Its been a while since I've seen the posts in question.

And there are pics of her and him at her first wedding so IDK about the Mirror saying he wasn't there.

[Madame Verseau]

Originally Posted by ACO

I don't believe much of anything Thomas says but I can see with this legal case happening the press wanting to not be caught telling untruths is a priority right now. 2015 is only 4 years ago but it also was before Harry despite people claiming she "ghosted" her father due to her new relationship. Clearly damage was already done long before Harry walked into her life.

Though most figured as much when she has a year and a half relationship with a man and her father never once met him despite him meeting everyone else important to her. Thomas has nothing to do with this case though. She isn't suing him and not sure why he would need to be in the courts. Though I am not surprised that he would want to be called in.

Meghan has never named Dad in the suit. Dad follows the internet and he probably knows outside some British media outlets he is getting trashed. People on other sites still call him a bad father after this latest interview. (I'm being kind saying bad father; some people are saying a lot worse. ) His ego is bruised once again and he claims he wants to testify. And what if the court calls his bluff and orders him to appear of give a deposition? DM doesn't want him in court because he would be an unreliable witness for them who would probably spill A LOT of tea on the tabloid. But it seems DM wants to use him as a human shield to get Meghan to drop the suit. It runs the risks of being a bad look if her lawyers go after Dad, but after the rollout of this case they have planned for most contingencies.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by tommy100

I hate to say it but I do think part of the issue is that the difference between British and American ways of doing things. I know we always think we are so similar, share a common language etc but really we have very different ways of doing things and with different intent and attitudes behind them. None of this is to say the British way is better or the American way is wrong, nor is to say every one in the UK thinks this way or acts this way but in general while people think we are so similar we are not and that is why sometimes Meghan is criticised for doing the right things but in the wrong way if that makes sense. TBH to a degree Harry is more to blame as he has seemed to just allow Meghan to do things the way she wants, which is fine, but he hasn't appeared to explain why things have been done the way they have by the RF for so long and the way British people see things. The problem lies somewhere in the fact that the BRF has mastered the art of doing good without appearing to want to do good - the way the Queen, Camilla, Kate appear in the crowd almost as if they've just stopped by on their way out, not appearing to expect anyone to be there to meet them, waving at them etc. The way the Queen Mother visited the damage of the Blitz almost as if she'd popped round to her friends house for a cup of tea and oh look its been damaged. Of course in reality they all know they are the star attraction, they know they need to put on a bit of show (I mean as if a women in the East End of London would pop round to her friends in her furs and diamonds) but the point is its made to appear as if nothing is expected. I guess its why people always thing the British talk about the weather as if it rains all the time, we have a hard time selling ourselves and making ourselves look good and stand out in a way that comes more natural to Americans. Hence why it feels a little uncomfortable to us when a member of the RF is so open about wanting to change the world., its not a bad thing but its not an attitude that comes naturally to Brits to be so confident and think so big. Its not a flaw in Meghan at all, like any culture difference it can be hard to understand at times.

This is a very thoughtful, objective post. I agree, there are some cultural differences at play here. The British (in IMO) tend to be very understated. I can see that Meghan's vocal go-getter attitude might rub some people the wrong way.

Of course some of the media coverage has been uncomfortable, and indeed sometimes downright unpleasant but we must look at the media as a whole not just those with the loudest voices. Yes Piers Morgan has a vendetta against Meghan and at times it appears childish but is it any worse than all the US late show hosts who openly mock and dislike Trump?

IMO it is different. US late show hosts are comedians. It's understood they mock Trump & exaggerate for laughs. Piers Morgan, on the other hand, is downright mean-spirited.

But to come down on all the media seems extreme, I mean how many reporters, photographers are out there like Arthur Edwards, Nicholas Whitchell, Chris Ship etc who aren't breaking laws, being bitchy, finding every excuse to blame everything on Meghan and yet now feel tarred with the same brush as those few who have done the very worst. That simply isn't conducive to a fruitful working relationship.

The vast majority of the mainstream media seem to be treating Meghan and Harry in much the same way as they treat any new royal couple. Sadly there has perhaps been more to talk and gossip about but that is largely due to the nature of Meghan's relationship with her family and her celebrity friends. Again she is 1000% entitled to have those relationships in those ways but likewise it is not illegal for the media to talk about them.

I do not blame Meghan and Harry for this but at times they do seem not to have helped, announcing you are suing a British newspaper on the last day of an official taxpayer funded tour, the timing for no apparent legal reason, then people calling the media out for not reporting on their visits on that last day is just ridiculous. It was clear the media would report on the legal action, and it appeared almost as if they did it to show that the media wouldn't report on the work and issues of the last day to show how unfair they think the media are. It just seems a bit counter productive.

Another good point. I agree, Harry and Meghan should be careful and not lump serious journalists (who genuinely want to report on the royals) with the gossipy tabloid reporters who just want clicks. It's unfair to the journalists and won't win them over to the Sussex camp.

I also see another cultural difference that Meghan probably isn't used to: In the United States we don't have an aggressive (and sometimes mean-spirited) tabloid press dominating our media (but rest assured, we have our own media issues to contend with).

Yes we have tabloids but for the most part they limit themselves to celebrity gossip. Their circulation is limited and we turn to other sources for serious news. In the United States, USA Today and the Wall Street Journal are the top two newspapers in terms of circulation. In Britain, on the other hand, The Sun and the Daily Mail (both tabloids) are at the top (I'm basing my information on Statista).

I also think the tabloids tend to get away with more. The U.S. news media are constantly calling one another out on articles containing (real or perceived) lies, misinformation, distortions, or even political slant. Graham Norton made the following statement in the Guardian, comparing the Telegraph's attitude to inaccurate articles versus U.S. newspapers [bold facing mine]:

"In America you couldn’t do that. The New York Times or The Washington Post, if they get caught out there’s hell to pay. When I do an interview with an American newspaper, I get all these follow-up calls, asking, ‘Did you say this?’ and ‘Can you just verify the spelling of the surname of the person you mentioned?’ They’re really on it in the way that, no disrespect, we’re not on it here."

Again, I suspect Meghan isn't used to this aggressive tabloid culture. Combine that with Harry's already hostile view of the tabloid media and you end up with a lot of anger and resentment.

[duchessrachel]

Back in 2016 when Prince Harry issued a statement regarding the mistreatment of Meghan, Prince William issued a statement of support. Has William given any public support for Harry's recent statement on the press he made at the end of his and Meghan's tour?

[LadyGlendower]

I think there are good reasons for both sides to depose Mr. Markle. The chain of custody of the letter was Meghan to Markle to MoS. Even though he is not named, he is guilty of copyright infringement by his act of giving the contents of letter to the MoS to be published.

The publisher can argue that Markle shares responsibility and call him to testify---and they know the Meghan does not want him in court or they would have named him in the suit. It's pretty significant emotional leverage; perhaps the Sussex attorneys could depose Markle at a distance to head this off.

Settlement looks very desirable for both sides and I hope this is the outcome.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by LadyGlendower

I think there are good reasons for both sides to depose Mr. Markle. The chain of custody of the letter was Meghan to Markle to MoS. Even though he is not named, he is guilty of copyright infringement by his act of giving the contents of letter to the MoS to be published.

The publisher can argue that Markle shares responsibility and call him to testify---and they know the Meghan does not want him in court or they would have named him in the suit. It's pretty significant emotional leverage; perhaps the Sussex attorneys could depose Markle at a distance to head this off.

Settlement looks very desirable for both sides and I hope this is the outcome.

I am not sure that is legally true.

[Elenath]

I don’t think Meghan would want her father to testify, because if he does and his statement is not in her favour.. all chances of reconciliation will fly out the window. If I were in her position I’d like the door to remain open. Even if it’s just a bit.

[LadyGlendower]

It's my understanding that Mr. Markle made the letter available to the MoS for the purpose of making its contents, in whole or in part, public by publishing the contents. I think he shares culpability. But I'm not an attorney and I'm certainly not a judge. Interesting!