The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1901  
Old 11-20-2020, 11:13 AM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,273
Oh Meghan, all the lies and half truths are slowly coming back to roost!
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1902  
Old 11-20-2020, 01:04 PM
HighGoalHighDreams's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 494
There is a very big difference between "Omid spoke to friends of the couple" and "Meghan authorized friends of hers to give specific information to the authors with the intent of having her 'side of the story' printed in the book." This is absolutely new information.

In fact, if you go back and read the book-specific thread, you will find that when people suggested that Meghan had done such a thing, her supporters responded with, "She has denied doing any such a thing! What more does she have to say? Why do people call her a liar?"
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1903  
Old 11-20-2020, 01:15 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,528
Its been pretty clear all along the DM has been happy to go along with the case because it knows it can get enough stories from it to make it worth while and now they have indeed hit gold with evidence Meghan appeared to lie about how involved with the book she was.

I really do wonder if anyone is advising Harry and Meghan , the lawyers will be rubbing their hands of course but if H&M had staff they could rely on they would or at least should be advising them to drop it now.
Reply With Quote
  #1904  
Old 11-20-2020, 01:53 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 3,352
Several posts have been deleted or edited as being off topic, insulting, or overly speculative.
Reply With Quote
  #1905  
Old 11-20-2020, 04:47 PM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I really do wonder if anyone is advising Harry and Meghan , the lawyers will be rubbing their hands of course but if H&M had staff they could rely on they would or at least should be advising them to drop it now.
They can have the best advisers around them, but at the end of the day, the responsibility for their actions rests squarely and exclusively with Harry and Meghan only. I am surprised at how they have, in the short while they have been married, and on numerous occassions, displayed spectacularly poor judgement. This lawsuit is a case an example; an ill-thought through adventure that will, no doubt, cause more harm to them than good.
Reply With Quote
  #1906  
Old 11-20-2020, 07:19 PM
rominet09's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LIEGE, Belgium
Posts: 4,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
They can have the best advisers around them, but at the end of the day, the responsibility for their actions rests squarely and exclusively with Harry and Meghan only. I am surprised at how they have, in the short while they have been married, and on numerous occassions, displayed spectacularly poor judgement. This lawsuit is a case an example; an ill-thought through adventure that will, no doubt, cause more harm to them than good.
... and will excite the tabloids press even more against them ! Dead end street in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #1907  
Old 11-20-2020, 07:49 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,273
Let's not pretend here that the British newspaper group being sued is some harmless lambkin innocently grazing in pastures, minding its own business and being stalked by a big bad wolf personified by Harry and Meghan.

British tabloids are the most ruthless in the world. They have defamed countless numbers of people, paid out huge sums to innocent people they have slandered over the decades and worse, engaged for years in egrarious behaviour like hacking the phones of royals, celebrities and ordinary people alike, even a person who turned out to be a murder victim.

Meghan was traduced constantly in tabloid stories during her years in Britain in countless stories that had no truth in them at all. In fact I've never seen persecution, and I deliberately use that word, like it in my (long) lifetime. Finally she had had enough, and has chosen to sue this newspaper group over their printing of a letter she wrote to her father.

Whatever you may think of Meghan, what possible excuse in the public interest, such as 'right to know' could be used by these tabloids to reproduce a private letter which was sent and received between two family members? That's the crux of the matter as far as I'm concerned.

It's Meghan that is suing this newspaper group, not the other way round, and IMO it's their actions that should ultimately be judged in court (and in the court of public opinion) not the person who has brought the action.
Reply With Quote
  #1908  
Old 11-21-2020, 01:57 AM
Lee-Z's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Heerlen, Netherlands
Posts: 3,202
Personally I'm fine with her sueing the gossip mags and I hope she wins that part.

But I can't deny that I'm very turned off by the fact that somehow this case got embellished with naming other royals like P.Beatrice and Eugenie and P.Michael of Kent, for reasons that have nothing to do with the media topic as such.

And as this is still not subtracted, I'm finding it harder and harder to give Meghan any "benefit of doubt" (and by extension Harry, because he is letting his own family members get dragged into it)
__________________
Wisdom begins in wonder - Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #1909  
Old 11-21-2020, 02:36 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Let's not pretend here that the British newspaper group being sued is some harmless lambkin innocently grazing in pastures, minding its own business and being stalked by a big bad wolf personified by Harry and Meghan.

British tabloids are the most ruthless in the world. They have defamed countless numbers of people, paid out huge sums to innocent people they have slandered over the decades and worse, engaged for years in egrarious behaviour like hacking the phones of royals, celebrities and ordinary people alike, even a person who turned out to be a murder victim.

Meghan was traduced constantly in tabloid stories during her years in Britain in countless stories that had no truth in them at all. In fact I've never seen persecution, and I deliberately use that word, like it in my (long) lifetime. Finally she had had enough, and has chosen to sue this newspaper group over their printing of a letter she wrote to her father.

Whatever you may think of Meghan, what possible excuse in the public interest, such as 'right to know' could be used by these tabloids to reproduce a private letter which was sent and received between two family members? That's the crux of the matter as far as I'm concerned.

It's Meghan that is suing this newspaper group, not the other way round, and IMO it's their actions that should ultimately be judged in court (and in the court of public opinion) not the person who has brought the action.
There are more worthy victims of their actions. They published a load of nonsense about Meghan. Compared to what they have done that is nothing. And ultimately it was her friends who mentioned the letter to the media first. It's her who collaborated on a quite frankly juvenile book.

Whatever, the media have treated people appallingly. I don't even think Harry and Meghan had it that bad. They goaded them and it became toxic.
Reply With Quote
  #1910  
Old 11-21-2020, 04:27 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee-Z View Post
Personally I'm fine with her sueing the gossip mags and I hope she wins that part.

But I can't deny that I'm very turned off by the fact that somehow this case got embellished with naming other royals like P.Beatrice and Eugenie and P.Michael of Kent, for reasons that have nothing to do with the media topic as such.

And as this is still not subtracted, I'm finding it harder and harder to give Meghan any "benefit of doubt" (and by extension Harry, because he is letting his own family members get dragged into it)
Second that.

It's wrong for MoS to publish her letter without her consent, but on the other hand she should also stick to copyright issue instead of reacting to their (MoS) bait and dragged everyone else whom had nothing to do with it.
Somehow, at this point, ironically it seems like Meghan become the one who need to do the defence in this court battle while the reality she's the one who's sueing.

And all this claim that Meghan "instructed" her friends to the media makes me wonder, how much power does Meghan have over this so called "friends" that she can "order" them to do her bidding? I mean I've never heard about her pre-Harry, but some ppl keep saying she's a Z-list actress or something. Was/is she some sort of leader in her circle of friend with her status that she can "order" several adult women with their own mind to do what she said? Or if she was just a follower, did her short relationship with Harry back then (I'm talking about August 2018) was enough for her to usurp the "former leader" in that group? Because I have this feeling that back then, say JM for example, it's more likely than M was known as JM's friend than JM as M's friend (if you know what I mean). So in this case, could M really "order" JM to do anything (either to talk or not to talk to the media)?
Reply With Quote
  #1911  
Old 11-21-2020, 04:44 AM
lucien's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 7,113
Ignore them,totally.
Reply With Quote
  #1912  
Old 11-21-2020, 05:20 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
This lawsuit seems to be going on a long time. Is it getting near an end?
Reply With Quote
  #1913  
Old 11-21-2020, 06:55 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,176
Meghan requested a summary judgement, if she prevails then it will be over in January 2021.

She also requested the trial be delayed which the judge agreed to, so if she does not win the summary judgement, then the trial will take place in Fall 2021.
Reply With Quote
  #1914  
Old 11-21-2020, 09:25 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Let's not pretend here that the British newspaper group being sued is some harmless lambkin innocently grazing in pastures, minding its own business and being stalked by a big bad wolf personified by Harry and Meghan.

British tabloids are the most ruthless in the world. They have defamed countless numbers of people, paid out huge sums to innocent people they have slandered over the decades and worse, engaged for years in egrarious behaviour like hacking the phones of royals, celebrities and ordinary people alike, even a person who turned out to be a murder victim.

Meghan was traduced constantly in tabloid stories during her years in Britain in countless stories that had no truth in them at all. In fact I've never seen persecution, and I deliberately use that word, like it in my (long) lifetime. Finally she had had enough, and has chosen to sue this newspaper group over their printing of a letter she wrote to her father.

Whatever you may think of Meghan, what possible excuse in the public interest, such as 'right to know' could be used by these tabloids to reproduce a private letter which was sent and received between two family members? That's the crux of the matter as far as I'm concerned.

It's Meghan that is suing this newspaper group, not the other way round, and IMO it's their actions that should ultimately be judged in court (and in the court of public opinion) not the person who has brought the action.
So Amen to that. Excellent post.
I hope the Sussexes will be able to hurt the disgusting vultures of the "tabloids" .
Reply With Quote
  #1915  
Old 11-23-2020, 05:13 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighGoalHighDreams View Post
There is a very big difference between "Omid spoke to friends of the couple" and "Meghan authorized friends of hers to give specific information to the authors with the intent of having her 'side of the story' printed in the book." This is absolutely new information.

In fact, if you go back and read the book-specific thread, you will find that when people suggested that Meghan had done such a thing, her supporters responded with, "She has denied doing any such a thing! What more does she have to say? Why do people call her a liar?"

With the amount of law suits they raised I thought they would have sued Omid Scobie for stuff in that book, but they cannot sue if it is all true, which raises the question how did he know some of that personal stuff.
If it all came from their friends without permission then they need to re evaluate their friendships. Just my opinion of course.
Reply With Quote
  #1916  
Old 11-24-2020, 05:10 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
With the amount of law suits they raised I thought they would have sued Omid Scobie for stuff in that book, but they cannot sue if it is all true, which raises the question how did he know some of that personal stuff.
If it all came from their friends without permission then they need to re evaluate their friendships. Just my opinion of course.
Its unlikely that their friends talked without an Ok from Meg and harry.. but once you OK people to talk you can't always control what they say...
Reply With Quote
  #1917  
Old 11-25-2020, 10:13 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Florida, United States
Posts: 226
They can't sue Omid because Meghan is a direct source that gave him information and if she sued him, he'd expose her but she exposed herself already. They don't want privacy, but they want to pick and choose what comes out from Team Sussex.
Reply With Quote
  #1918  
Old 12-07-2020, 10:38 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 5,107
According to this article the Duke has filed a lawsuit against the Mail on Sunday.


https://www.newsweek.com/prince-harr...sunday-1552754


Quote:
Prince Harry is suing the same U.K. tabloid publisher as Meghan Markle—in the couple's sixth lawsuit in just more than a year, Newsweek can reveal.
The Duke of Sussex has launched a libel case against Associated Newspapers, which owns the Daily Mail, the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online.
Papers were filed at the High Court in London on November 27, though little additional information is available as the lawsuit is still in its infancy.
The prince's legal team at Schillings threatened the Mail on Sunday with legal action in October over claims he had not kept in touch with the Royal Marines since March, when he moved to America.
Reply With Quote
  #1919  
Old 12-07-2020, 10:44 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 576
Whelp, TLLK beat me to it.


So this lawsuit number 6 in one year?

[...]
Reply With Quote
  #1920  
Old 12-07-2020, 11:18 AM
Fem's Avatar
Fem Fem is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK, Poland
Posts: 709
And the award for the best reason to sue someone goes to...
Quote:
The prince's legal team at Schillings threatened the Mail on Sunday with legal action in October over claims he had not kept in touch with the Royal Marines since March, when he moved to America.
I do want to point out that it's still not confirmed that the lawsuit is about this story, but even the fact their legal team was threatening with legal actions over it is laughable enough on its own. Well, that, or just sad.

[...]
__________________

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
abu dhabi america american archie mountbatten-windsor baby names background story biography british british royal family buckingham palace camilla's family camilla parker bowles china chinese clarence house cpr daisy doge of venice duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex earl of snowdon elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style george vi harry and meghan hello! hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hochberg hypothetical monarchs jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king willem-alexander książ castle list of rulers mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family plantinum jubilee pless prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn princess dita princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange queen louise queen maxima queen victoria resusci anne royal ancestry royal jewels royalty of taiwan spain speech suthida taiwan thailand thai royal family unfinished portrait united states welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:07 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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