The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 10-03-2019, 10:03 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,639
What better time then to be able to show and amplify the double standards that Harry has pointed out? I don't actually believe it was up to Harry and Meghan to decide just when to release Harry's statement but were advised by their lawyers. One to amplify the point I've just made and another point is getting the word out first before the MoS, themselves, let fly with the information about the lawsuit. Perhaps the purpose of Harry's statement was along the lines of a "I'd rather you hear it from me first"perspective.

I actually applaud Harry for the emotional statement that he's made. It reads and sounds like it came from the heart rather than worded as an "official notice" to the public.
__________________

__________________
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
  #142  
Old 10-03-2019, 10:34 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 4,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post

Thank you for sharing this article Dman. IMO this is the best explanation of the Sussexes' legal suit.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 10-03-2019, 10:42 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaira View Post
Some missing facts though, ACO. Meghan's dad and mother released a joint statement for the engagement through KP. KP confirmed that he would be walking her down the aisle early on (but the media loved the drama of doing the will he or won't he, again deciding that settled fact didn't fit their agenda). Meghan has credited her father with a great deal and talked about him articles and interviews. Moreover, her first initial statement when all the wedding drama hit was very, very emotional. Her second statement, what you referenced, was more distant.

Now, I personally think they had a very on/off relationship fraught with difficulties. I tend to think Thomas was perhaps not always the best dad emotionally from tidbits we have gleaned and perhaps even played the siblings off each other. I have detailed my thoughts about their relationship on threads before and I am wary about what the moderating boundaries are on discussing him in this thread. But at the time of the engagement, they seemed to be "on" and Thomas must have been on a prolonged period of decent behavior. Alas, it didn't last.

Valentine Low's article in the Times (an article that lays out a lot of information but somehow comes to some puzzling conclusions) heavily implies that Meghan and Harry blame the media for her father's antics, not her father necessarily. Low claims that reporters literally rented the houses next to Thomas and found ways to manipulate him and continued to do so for months---despite the pleas and actions taken by Harry and Meghan to stop the press. This lawsuit is really in response to the lines the media crossed with using Markle Sr that upset Meghan and Harry.

I expect, unfortunately, this lawsuit will bring Thomas Sr out of whatever hole he is currently hiding in. The DM may even call him as a witness should it go to trial just to cause further pain to Meghan.

All in all, as Harry himself said, this wasn't the safest action even if it was the right one :(
Not much missing IMHO. I know about the joint statement but as many children of divorced or fractured families know, that doesn't mean he actually issued it. Adding him to it isn't very hard. And Thomas himself has implied more than once he was barely involved. He has went on record and claimed he wasn't even invited when we know he was because he also confirmed it.

I agree Meghan spoke of her father in glowing terms about her childhood. She admired him and based on how his other kids treat Meghan it seems he favored her over them until she was old enough to maybe see him in a different light. We have footage of her right before heading off to college confirming their relationship was strained. The ex BFF who sold everything under the sun about them said it as well. Meghan called herself an only child. None of the Markles are close. They are all estranged with each other in some way. This family has been damaged a long time.

I do think the with the magnitude of the wedding that she was trying to keep everything simple and hoped Thomas would be decent enough to be a father to her on the biggest day of her life and instead he did what he did. The TMZ communications. The ignoring her by his own words. I mentioned this before but we all had access to her public social media accounts. Where was Thomas Markle on them? He clearly wasn't that active in her life.

People thought he was some recluse but he clearly has no issue with the spotlight whatsoever. How many interviews has this man done? As for Valentine's article... we shall see. I do suspect this will get messy and Thomas might come out the woodwork. Though I get the feeling that it will not serve him or The Mail on Sunday well as he tends to put his foot in his mouth each time he speaks.

This all is happening because he sent them a personal ad private letter to clear his name because he claimed that he hasn't had any contact with Meghan. All that letter did was prove how much this man has lied over and over again. He created this mess and I am sure there is more to come.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 10-03-2019, 11:02 AM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 3,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
What better time then to be able to show and amplify the double standards that Harry has pointed out? I don't actually believe it was up to Harry and Meghan to decide just when to release Harry's statement but were advised by their lawyers. One to amplify the point I've just made and another point is getting the word out first before the MoS, themselves, let fly with the information about the lawsuit. Perhaps the purpose of Harry's statement was along the lines of a "I'd rather you hear it from me first"perspective.

I actually applaud Harry for the emotional statement that he's made. It reads and sounds like it came from the heart rather than worded as an "official notice" to the public.
There is a difference between the release of the statement about the pending lawsuit, and Harry's personal letter. The release of the statement about the lawsuit was apparently done when it was due to a deadline. That is not the issue. The issue I am pointing out is Harry's letter. My opinion is that it would have been better if the official notification of the lawsuit had stood on its own without Harry's letter. I don't think it did much but stimulate a lot of speculation, especially since he dragged in Diana, Meghan's pregnancy, and a lot of very emotional language. I'm not saying he's not entitled to feel all of those things. I just don't think the timing or the overly emotional tone was a good idea.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 10-03-2019, 11:28 AM
Zaira's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: A, United States
Posts: 1,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
There is a difference between the release of the statement about the pending lawsuit, and Harry's personal letter. The release of the statement about the lawsuit was apparently done when it was due to a deadline. That is not the issue. The issue I am pointing out is Harry's letter. My opinion is that it would have been better if the official notification of the lawsuit had stood on its own without Harry's letter. I don't think it did much but stimulate a lot of speculation, especially since he dragged in Diana, Meghan's pregnancy, and a lot of very emotional language. I'm not saying he's not entitled to feel all of those things. I just don't think the timing or the overly emotional tone was a good idea.
I think the counter to that, though, is that it gave the public an emotional connection to the issue. I've seen a LOT of people applauding Harry for sticking up for his wife with that statement.

I think we need to always be aware that there are those of us in the royal watcher bubble who see things in a certain way because we are so entrenched in this understanding, but that doesn't equal what may work with the general public. A lot of people feel the media in the UK, specifically, the tabloid press, have gotten out of control over all. And there is polling and anecdotal evidence to show that many in the general public in the UK felt Meghan's treatment by the press was wrong and unfair.

Harry's statement, timing being ill-advised as I think it may have been, put a very human face on the issue that a lot of people can connect with and I believe did. I perhaps would have changed some wording and such, but people also respect and respond to authentic emotion more too.

The press, of course, will run with their belief that the statement was "not the done thing" but well they have a clear agenda too.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 10-03-2019, 11:34 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
To be fair to her father he didn't say anything until some time after the wedding when she still hadn't bothered to visit him and it became clear she wasn't going to. Most children would have gone to visit a sick parent ASAP after the wedding. If her gripe was him getting those pics taken then it was a weak excuse to cut a man who had cared for her and raised her out of her life forever. Lets not forget that the royals themselves have not been strangers to tipping off photographers when it's suited them either and in his case he really was new to the situation. As I said before though I think a lot of the details about this will come out in court.
It was exactly one month after the wedding that Thomas gave a paid interview with GMB, this after they forgave him for the pre-wedding media colluding. Who knows if they had contact during that month because Thomas, the only one talking keeps changing his story.

At first he said they offered to come visit him and he said no, he also said that he didn't answer Meghan's calls/texts right away then in subsequent interviews said that they hadn't reached out to him since the wedding, when in fact Meghan had sent a letter in August outlining what would need to be done to help repair the relationship...he even responded but continued on in interviews saying that he had no communication with her. He also said at first he was offered help and that they sent someone to help him get to London and then later he said he was offered no help at all.

I don't think it was the one set of pictures alone that caused him to be cut off but the continued interviews after he apologized for the original mistake (the other media interactions were definitely not a mistake) and then often lying about them that caused the long term rift.

It all boils down to the fact that they can't trust him, anything they say or do with him and he will go to the media, who would want that behavior in their lives which are already complicated enough.

As for the court case, I'm guessing that Thomas, if called on to testify, will have another heart problem that will prevent him from going or being interviewed until the case is over.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 10-03-2019, 11:47 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
There is a difference between the release of the statement about the pending lawsuit, and Harry's personal letter. The release of the statement about the lawsuit was apparently done when it was due to a deadline. That is not the issue. The issue I am pointing out is Harry's letter. My opinion is that it would have been better if the official notification of the lawsuit had stood on its own without Harry's letter. I don't think it did much but stimulate a lot of speculation, especially since he dragged in Diana, Meghan's pregnancy, and a lot of very emotional language. I'm not saying he's not entitled to feel all of those things. I just don't think the timing or the overly emotional tone was a good idea.
Well, Harry had to take a extremely serious tone in his statement. The outside forces think they can kick Meghan around for months on end and get away with it. Harry stepped in and made very clear...that ain’t gonna happen. He won’t let it happen. They didn’t get the point in the first statement, so it was a must for him to release another statement and it was done with the lawsuit. So those forces noses are out of joint because Harry knocked them that way.

Harry is just one step away from literally cussing a lot of folks out. That’ll be in the third statement, if this craziness continues. I’m just giving everyone on the forums a heads up before it happens.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 10-03-2019, 11:50 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
@HighDreamsHighGoals
I agree I also cringed a little when he brought up Diana. I feel what is going on with Meghan and what happened to Kate (in France) can stand on their own without having to mention Diana. WnH probably do take these things more serious because of their mom but Everytime they push back against the press they don't need to drop Diana's name. This newest pushback from Harry makes me think the stories of both WnH being overprotective were not exaggerated.
I don't mind them bringing up Diana because it is clear the media hasn't truly learned from that situation and is still hounding royal wives to a determent, especially Meghan. While they aren't chasing her in cars there are still a lot of parallels, they are still writing vitriol stories (often based on untruths or half-truths) as a way to turn the public against Meghan. That is a very dangerous thing to do.

I'm also in support of the lawsuit and the letter Harry wrote and even the time (it is ALWAYS the right time to stand up against bullying). The letter gives some background information as to what they have been facing for the past year and explains exactly why they are taking the actions they are.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 10-03-2019, 12:07 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 282
it is funny some here are toeing the media line about bring Diana into it. For Christ sake she was his mother, and if there are people in this world who saw first hand what she went through it is her children. Right now, he also has a front row seat to witness what his wife is going through. If there are people qualify to draw comparaison it is he, and if he feel the need to do it, he has he raisons so be it.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 10-03-2019, 12:25 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: L'angolo, Vatican City
Posts: 247
I hope Harry has carefully assessed the likelehood of winning and the risks involved if not successful. Also there might be risks about appearing in court - this might incude Thomas Markle?
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 10-03-2019, 12:27 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,192
William has made some strong statements in the past about the media and his family. He's drawn some clear lines. They've both invoked their mother as reference to media misbehavior/extremes.

How can these situations with the press not call up those awful memories?



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 10-03-2019, 12:40 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Nottingham, United Kingdom
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I'm trying to remember and perhaps someone here does remember if Buckingham Palace issued a statement when either the Cambridges or Charles filed their lawsuits. As I see it, this lawsuit is a personal matter between Harry and Meghan and the Mail on Sunday and there's no need for statements to come from anyone else.

Just my thoughts.

Lawsuits are usually announced by St. James's Palace.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 10-03-2019, 12:40 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob2008 View Post
I hope Harry has carefully assessed the likelehood of winning and the risks involved if not successful. Also there might be risks about appearing in court - this might incude Thomas Markle?
As Mr. Markle isn't named in the lawsuit, its possible that either side or both (the defendants and the prosecutors) may wish to invoke, what is called in the UK, pre-litigation discovery process to determine his part in all this. I believe this can be done privately without Mr. Markle appearing in court.

Don't quote me on this as I am no where near being a lawyer.
__________________
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
  #154  
Old 10-03-2019, 01:06 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,699
I do not believe in fact that Thomas Markle will leave his Mexico retreat to travel to England to give testimony in this civil case. I don't think he is obliged to by law and IMO he won't.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 10-03-2019, 01:28 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
I very much doubt the complainant would want Mr Markle to be called to give evidence, since that would take ALL attention, and give the Tabloids endless scurrilous fodder.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 10-03-2019, 01:34 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,192
I am not as familiar with U.K. laws...I know the claim is the media violated the law because they released/printed the letter ....according to U.K. law is Thomas Markle in violation for showing them the letter or giving them a copy of the letter?



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 10-03-2019, 01:36 PM
LadyGlendower's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: City of Light, France
Posts: 251
Interesting thread here. Meghan is given very favorable coverage on the whole by the American press, especially the fashion press.

However, I agree with the posters that think that some major pr errors have been made, and continue to be made by what I think should have become a very appealing powerhouse couple by now. The old adage of never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel is true----unless you want to use their coverage of your fight as an opportunity to rectify some pr mistakes.

If this is part of their strategy, I hope they have also hired a crisis management professional in addition to their legal team.

H&M are in a tough business but then they are both public life veterans so I tend not to view them as victims of bullying but rather partners trying to establish a template for press coverage for their lives going forward and taking a number of blows along the way.

The publishers are wealthy and tough; the royal couple are privileged. This action will be newsworthy on both sides of the pond when they go to court .
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 10-03-2019, 01:59 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Peterborough, Canada
Posts: 145
Re: "do they forget that the actual cause of the problem is that meghan's dad released the letter in the first place? maybe they should work on their own family problems before blaming the media. for the daily mail, if they get their hands on such things they will publish them. why don't they clean their dirty laundry privately and address that meghan's family are the ones who are actually harrassing -or as they put it 'bullying' - meghan, before blaming the media? her family are hardly irreproachable - but it is easier to blame the media."


The letter was made public by the media. There is such a thing as journalistic standards. The decision to publish this letter demonstrates that this particular media organization has very low standards. Meghan's family situation has been exploited for commercial gain. The idea that one should "clean their dirty laundry privately" before asking that it not be laundered in public by the press doesn't make any sense to me.

Laineygossip.com has called this Harry's "Love Shield 2019" (a reference to the previous "Love Shield" letter in 2017. (This site is very supportive of Megan and Harry). It's clear Harry is motivated by love for his wife and has a strong sense of what is just and fair. He also suffers from the trauma of the circumstances around his mother's death. I say "Bravo, Harry!".

The Sussex's make some missteps but I don't believe that this is one of them.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 10-03-2019, 01:59 PM
Jacknch's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
As Mr. Markle isn't named in the lawsuit, its possible that either side or both (the defendants and the prosecutors) may wish to invoke, what is called in the UK, pre-litigation discovery process to determine his part in all this. I believe this can be done privately without Mr. Markle appearing in court.

Don't quote me on this as I am no where near being a lawyer.
I'm not sure that Mr Markle needs to get involved in the Court Case - unless there was a dispute surrounding how the Mail on Sunday obtained the letter (or a copy).

Saying that, the main part of the case relates to the publication of a letter the MoS had no business being in the possession of and as background information, a Judge may wish details of how it was obtained.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
I am not as familiar with U.K. laws...I know the claim is the media violated the law because they released/printed the letter ....according to U.K. law is Thomas Markle in violation for showing them the letter or giving them a copy of the letter?



LaRae
On the face of it, no it's not illegal to show a letter one receives to a third party - otherwise most of us would have fallen foul of that at one time or another.

Intent to cause harm - vis-a-vis the other elements to the Court case - would have to be proven, in which case he would be liable for damages. However, as Mr Markle is not a party to the case this is not the case.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 10-03-2019, 02:12 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,639
It could be also that the MoS was given (or sold) a copy by Mr. Markle and with comparing the letter Mr. Markle has (or even Meghan's copy if she has one) with what was printed by the MoS, it may determine the altering of words and sentences to alter the meaning of the letter as published.

This is what the lawsuit is about. MoS infringed on Meghan's intellectual property by printing her words without her permission and perhaps altering them. Mr. Markle actually doesn't hold the right to give permission to publish that letter.

I'm sure H&M's lawyers have thoroughly gone over all implications in this matter and feel they have a good case. We'll see what happens.
__________________

__________________
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
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 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 anastasia archie mountbatten-windsor background story baptism bridal gown british royal family british royals chittagong commonwealth countries countess of snowdon customs daisy dna doge of venice doll dubai duke of sussex facts family life fantasy movie gustaf vi adolf hill historical drama history intro italian royal family jack brooksbank japan jewellery king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers mail mary: crown princess of denmark meghan markle nepalese royal jewels northern ireland norway plantinum jubilee prince charles of luxembourg prince constantijn prince dimitri princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak queen consort queen mathilde queen maxima random facts royal court royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown serbian royal family snowdon speech suthida taiwan tips tracts tradition uae customs united states of america unsubscribe wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:29 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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