Harry & Meghan: Legal Actions against the Media

[LadyGlendower]

The Sussexes really need to settle this out of court.

DM is preparing to fight this on the legal points and would probably love a trial that they could cover extensively.

There were other posters here that thought I was crazy for seeing the Sussexes position weakening due to factors that did not directly address the copyright infringement merits of their case.

But, having worked for lawyers, I've experienced settlement prep work and going to trial prep work. Settlement negotiations are a business deal; trial is more like going to all out war and it is both expensive and pretty ugly.

Mr. Markle testifying for the defense (DM) does not surprise me because legally he is potentially also on the hook for copyright infringement. I imagine Meghan's attorneys explained this to her but considering the bad blood between them it probably didn't make much difference in overall strategy.

But....wow. Settle. Do it now.

[MARG]

Why on earth would they "settle"? I doubt that is even on the table with the Mos as I think they believe they can ride the horrendous media drubbing they have and continue to heap on the Sussexes.

Neither his father (who also sued over correspondence) nor his brother took that route and I believe it would open the slimegates if they did. No royal would be safe.

[Jacknch]

Please note that several posts have been edited/deleted - this thread is about the Court case, not a platform to re-discuss how the Media treats members of the Royal Family.

[Tsarinya]

Maybe I’m being naive but I think if this People article didn’t go ahead with Meghan’s permission then this wouldn’t be happening. Because Thomas Markle was painted in a negative light due to them saying Meghan sent him a letter wanting to repair their relationship and was loving and Thomas disputes this and believes the letter shows that Meghan has lied and manipulated the Press for her own gain (have we seen the full letter? I say believes because I thought only a small section was published by the DM).
Could he have been forced to show those text messages legally?
As much as I dislike Meghan I’m not quite sure this is in the public interest to pursue?

[Madame Verseau]

@Tsarinya - Meghan's lawyers turned over the complete letter to the courts (she kept a copy). Two pages of the letter was published with redactions, the redactions are what was left out.

I remember a royal reporter saying at the time Markle only released parts of the letter because sections made him look bad. I also remembered a story that the palace was in crisis talks about paying Markle off but that was scuttled because others would demand money. Markle was going on TV demanding to see the queen, taking cheap shots of the Windsors, and demanding the queen to intervene to get Meghan to talk to him. Then Markle said on the last interview before the People story he'll keep running to the press until Meghan and Harry talk to him.

I'm not sure DM would settle at this point. Cutting a check to Meghan or the charity is admitting guilt.

[Tsarinya]

Will the courts be impartial, since they are the Queen's court and the case is against Her Majesty's granddaughter-in-law? I’m afraid I might be getting too cynical here! Could the Daily Mail go to the European Courts if it’s not found in their favour in the English courts, what with Brexit and everything happening at the end of the month?

[SLV]

Originally Posted by Tsarinya

Will the courts be impartial, since they are the Queen's court and the case is against Her Majesty's granddaughter-in-law? I’m afraid I might be getting too cynical here! Could the Daily Mail go to the European Courts if it’s not found in their favour in the English courts, what with Brexit and everything happening at the end of the month?

They are not chosen by the Queen. So I do not suspect them of being partial, they are professionals.

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by Zonk

I imagine they would try to get information regarding his heart attack...like...date of admittance...procedure performed, etc. He produced some documents before regarding his procedure...and if I recall...it did not appear that he had a heart attack. Of course, its not going to outright say...treated for a heart attack.

If he didn't have an actual heart attack, and yes that is a direct attack on his credibility. I mean, his story has already changed several times.

I do not know enough about legal or medical questions to debate any of this but just a little point re the ' heart attack'.
Non medical people like myself often refer to a heart attack for anything heart related when the technical medical name is something totally different .
I just think we should be cautious re saying he didn't have a heart attack when he could have had a heart related event / illness which considering a 12 hour flight to London might have been problematic.

I do not intend this to be an argument of whether or not he did or didn't have a heart attack just making the observation.

[ACO]

I had completely forgotten he asked for a photo op at the end of one of his letters to Meghan. I mean seriously? I think we have reached a point beyond settlement now. If Thomas and his ever changing stories want to go on the stand... have at it.

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by Tsarinya

Maybe I’m being naive but I think if this People article didn’t go ahead with Meghan’s permission then this wouldn’t be happening. Because Thomas Markle was painted in a negative light due to them saying Meghan sent him a letter wanting to repair their relationship and was loving and Thomas disputes this and believes the letter shows that Meghan has lied and manipulated the Press for her own gain (have we seen the full letter? I say believes because I thought only a small section was published by the DM).
Could he have been forced to show those text messages legally?
As much as I dislike Meghan I’m not quite sure this is in the public interest to pursue?

I didn't read anything re the letter other than they had published a section of it, surely they would have seen the full letter before deciding what part to publish.
What a mess, commentators on tv this morning were suggesting it might not come to court, this is almost like the newspaper throwing down the gauntlet and who will blink first.

[Katymcwaity]

Originally Posted by Tsarinya

Will the courts be impartial, since they are the Queen's court and the case is against Her Majesty's granddaughter-in-law? I’m afraid I might be getting too cynical here! Could the Daily Mail go to the European Courts if it’s not found in their favour in the English courts, what with Brexit and everything happening at the end of the month?

Yes, of course. Hence why the supreme court found against the government re closing down parliament. If the court did find against the Daily Mail, they could appeal but there has to be a good reason like the judge has wrongly applied the law. Europe doesn’t come into it unless Meghan decides to go to European Court of Humans Rights(this is nothing to do with been in or out of EU or brexit) if she doesn’t win. I don’t think I would want to drag it out but I guess if you want to make a point, then you keep going.

[LadyGlendower]

Settling with a NDA saves face and money for both sides but we're talking high profile businesses and personalities so who knows what will happen.

[Eskimo]

This is a mess and I am sure they are trying to settle it out of court.... The DM is willing for it to go to trail because the media will generate tons of sales out of all the information that will come out. There is no way the Sussexes win this, PR wise.

[Pranter]

I saw a clip earlier that said the DM could be fined up to 4 percent (20 million pounds) of their earnings in the European market.


LaRae

[LadyGlendower]

Originally Posted by Pranter

I saw a clip earlier that said the DM could be fined up to 4 percent (20 million pounds) of their earnings in the European market.


LaRae

Fined for what? Were they trying to say that's how big a settlement can be or there is another law or regulation under copyright law that carries that penalty? hmmmm---thanks for the info

[Pranter]

I think the context was the fine by the court as a settlement.


LaRae

[HereditaryPrincess]

Originally Posted by Zonk

I really don't understand Thomas Markle.

I think in the begining things where said and done by both sides that got them to this point.

But how does he not see that giving the Mail on Sunday copies of his text are not going to improve his relationship with his daughter? There are a lot of things I can say about Meghan (especially after the last week) buts its interesting to note that she states that Thomas Markle was laid astray by the Mail on Sunday (and doesn't blame him for the situation) and he assists them with this lawsuit! Just like he talks to Piers Morgan who has nothing nice to say about her.

I would love to understand how his mind works.

The public interest things is a legit defense...but know about personal and family relationships with people who are not public individuals...that's dicey.

Absolutely agree. I've seen some people on Twitter say that when you hear that Meghan is estranged from her father it's inevitable she and Harry have moved to Canada, but I think if Thomas Markle was my father I wouldn't want to be involved with him either...!

[Madame Verseau]

Up to a 20 million pound fine that can take a bite out of the earnings? Meghan's case must be strong for DM to be so desperate to bring in Markle to make this go away.

[Eskimo]

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau

Up to a 20 million pound fine that can take a bite out of the earnings? Meghan's case must be strong for DM to be so desperate to bring in Markle to make this go away.

It is not a big chunk if they can recoup those monies from writing about the trail and whatever information comes out inn n n it

[Osipi]

Personally, I think its a low blow to even think of using a family member, no matter how distasteful that family member has treated his daughter, to further their case in court.

I'm definitely in agreement with Madame Verseau that the MoS is sinking to low depths. If they believe their case has merits to win in court in the first place, they wouldn't have to be dragging Mr. Markle into this as the "monkey in the middle" so to speak. Using Mr. Markle, to me, reeks of psychological warfare tactics.