Harry & Meghan: Legal Actions against the Media

[poppy7]

Meghan gave the names of the friends through confidential filing as required. Identities if part of the process are revealed at trial. Revealing before a trial date reeks of witness intimidation by DM: drop the suit Meghan or we'll destroy your friends. By stating the friends are private citizens which may means it's not Serena Williams or Jessica Mulroney. I thought Dad was DM's star witness...or did DM found him wanting and a problem in the witness box?

That is not at all what has happened. The mail have refused to settle out of court. They are gung ho for this.

This is not about their names being released early but about their names being released as a part of the court case, and the very real possibility they will be required to give evidence.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

A couple people have used the phrase witness intimidation, which is a legal term of art. That is one bold and, given what we know, frankly bizarre claim.

Private citizen is, again, a legal term of art. Serena Williams and Jessica Mulroney are both private citizens.

 

[angieuk]

If she did/did not give the 5 friends permission to speak to People Magazine; is that highly important?

Also if Jessica M refuses to give evidence; can the court may her do so?

And if Jessica M refuses to give evidence how does this affect the outcome?

I thought the problem was with Meghan and her father?

 

[Eskimo]

Interesting development...

The original twitter "reporting" seems to indicate that MoS told Meghan that they would publish the names unless she took this action. So, it seems that they are just goading her at this point.

Meghan filed the lawsuit in the expectation that this would be quickly settled for a large sum and generate oodles of positive PR for her. The MoS, having played this rodeo many a times, knew that win or loose that could make a boatload of money off this. So, they went to court. It seems that Meghan tried to drop the case but the MoS would not let her. So, now she's stuck in this mess of her own making with no way out.

This case, along with other factors, is having a negative impact on her "brand". That is why she is listing out all of her grievances, hoping that some of the "woe is me" resonates with public in a positive manner-- helping her "brand".

At this point, I seriously think that Harry is not the only one with mental health issues.

 

[Eskimo]

A couple people have used the phrase witness intimidation, which is a legal term of art. That is one bold and, given what we know, frankly bizarre claim.

Private citizen is, again, a legal term of art. Serena Williams and Jessica Mulroney are both private citizens.

This implies that Meghan and her team expect the 5 to be called as witnesses

 

[Madame Verseau]

On Omid Scobie's Twitter. DM lawyers went to Meghan's lawyers about the five friends, wanting to publish their names, although those names were given under seal. Meghan's lawyers were given three days to respond in court. It's 50-50 at this point and I think her lawyers are going to take down her father.

 

[acdc1]

Interesting development...

The original twitter "reporting" seems to indicate that MoS told Meghan that they would publish the names unless she took this action. So, it seems that they are just goading her at this point.

Meghan filed the lawsuit in the expectation that this would be quickly settled for a large sum and generate oodles of positive PR for her. The MoS, having played this rodeo many a times, knew that win or loose that could make a boatload of money off this. So, they went to court. It seems that Meghan tried to drop the case but the MoS would not let her. So, now she's stuck in this mess of her own making with no way out.

This case, along with other factors, is having a negative impact on her "brand". That is why she is listing out all of her grievances, hoping that some of the "woe is me" resonates with public in a positive manner-- helping her "brand".

At this point, I seriously think that Harry is not the only one with mental health issues.

I feel like that's how most of the things they've done in the past 9 months or so have turned out for them. They try to present the "woe is me/look how difficult I have it" angle (the Africa interview immediately comes to mind) hoping to garner sympathy, but instead they make themselves come off as whiny and entitled and/or, as in this case, embroil themselves further into the mess. I feel like it's nothing but consistent drama with them and their friends and associates.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

On Omid Scobie's Twitter. DM lawyers went to Meghan's lawyers about the five friends, wanting to publish their names, although those names were given under seal. Meghan's lawyers were given three days to respond in court. It's 50-50 at this point and I think her lawyers are going to take down her father.

What you're implying here- that the DM is attempting to publish information it obtained under seal- is just not accurate.

The DM- and the rest of the watching world- already had this information. In addition to the DM, and anyone else who cared to piece it together, already knowing the identifies of these individuals, they were recently named under seal.

When the DM saw that they were named under seal rather than named openly, this signaled to the DM that Meghan's lawyers were proceeding under the assumption that the names were going to remain private, an assumption it did not share. DM approached Meghan's lawyers and said, "We consider these names fair game and, because you filed them under seal, we see you do not. This is a warning that we see this as a public information. If you don't respond in three days, we're assuming you agree it's public and we have a right to print at any time. If you do respond, we will let the court decide whether we can print if and when we choose."

 

[Eskimo]

I feel like that's how most of the things they've done in the past 9 months or so have turned out for them. They try to present the "woe is me/look how difficult I have it" angle (the Africa interview immediately comes to mind) hoping to garner sympathy, but instead they make themselves come off as whiny and entitled and/or, as in this case, embroil themselves further into the mess. I feel like it's nothing but consistent drama with them and their friends and associates.

TBH, that is what they were hoping for. They need the consistent drama to stay in the news for their "brand". It's just they expected a lot of sympathy/positive press that has not yet materialized.

 

[Claire]

Very sad - I am worried about who these friends are. Meghan is very adamant to defend these friends - with not announcing the godparent list and with this. Make me wonder if there is something they don't want getting out here.
It would really be funny if there were members of the royal family on the list.

 

[Eskimo]

Very sad - I am worried about who these friends are. Meghan is very adamant to defend these friends - with not announcing the godparent list and with this. Make me wonder if there is something they don't want getting out here.
It would really be funny if there were members of the royal family on the list.

I do not think she has any "friends" in the BRF. If she did, she would not have tried to throw some of the members under the bus with her filing last week

 

[poppy7]

Very sad - I am worried about who these friends are. Meghan is very adamant to defend these friends - with not announcing the godparent list and with this. Make me wonder if there is something they don't want getting out here.
It would really be funny if there were members of the royal family on the list.

She doesn't really have any friends in the royal family. Amd no one would do this.

The Mail are basically just dangling string at them now.

 

[poppy7]

TBH, that is what they were hoping for. They need the consistent drama to stay in the news for their "brand". It's just they expected a lot of sympathy/positive press that has not yet materialized.

Well they vastly overestimated their popularity. And really by that I mean his. He should have gotten a clue that the only one in that family who now has independent effection is the Queen.

Maybe because he saw the response to Diana's death that he thought there was an eternal love there for people like him. There isn't.

Sad for him really.

 

[Eskimo]

Some other message boards are suggesting that 1 of these 5 women is Oprah and she’s the one who does not want to identified. If true, I can imagine there’s immense pressure on Meghan to keep the names private

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

Meghan has stated that all of the five friends are young mothers, which eliminates Oprah. Of course, it also does far more to identify them them the DM and company has ever done.

 

[Curryong]

The tabloids have speculated on the identity of the friends. One suggested a while ago that Meghan's male makeup artist was one. Several tabloids have recently speculated that Jessica Malroney was among them.

Meghan had to mention that several were young mums in her submission in an effort to keep the court papers containing the names sealed. Where potential witnesses are concerned protection of minors is considered paramount by judges.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

In this case, there are no minors to protect. "Protection of minors" refers to minors who are party to a case... not whatever minors happen to be related to adults involved in the case.

The idea that Meghan "had to mention" anything so that the judge could consider protecting these minors is baseless.

 

[Leopoldine]

Everyone has already to a great extent figured out who they are. Cringeworthy move by Meghan's team. MOS may just have them on the ropes in this legal battle.

I don't think most people who are following this story care about which gals are in the Five. Meghan's control-freak Nerf Bat actions are in the fore. She is playing Whack-a-mole now.

 

[Curryong]

Oh the tabloids are vitally interested. If those names are announced they can go digging for dirt on each of them.

The Sun/Dan Wootton has been speculating once more today about the identity of the five friends.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12080855/meghan-markle-5-pals-story-defending-privacy/

In the public interest of course!

 

[poppy7]

In this case, there are no minors to protect. "Protection of minors" refers to minors who are party to a case... not whatever minors happen to be related to adults involved in the case.

The idea that Meghan "had to mention" anything so that the judge could consider protecting these minors is baseless.

No that is not true. Injunctions are imposed because of the potential to harm the children of those in the stories: affairs, sexually unorthodox behaviour, explicit photographs. That is why she mentioned 'young mothers.' As in the children are young. Won't fly with this one or else nothing would
do ever be published about anyone with children.

 

[Claire]

Hmm - it is very possible that some of the 5 friends are no longer friends and might go off script.

 

[muriel]

Hmm - it is very possible that some of the 5 friends are no longer friends and might go off script.

That may possibly be the case for at least one of the rumoured five!

 

[poppy7]

I mean of they did. Whoozers. However, a good barrister will be able to make a case. And if they can show that these friends would never have gone to the press about Meghan well then game over. Why would they go on that one occasion.

 

[Claire]

I mean of they did. Whoozers. However, a good barrister will be able to make a case. And if they can show that these friends would never have gone to the press about Meghan well then game over. Why would they go on that one occasion.

Is this what happens when your only understanding on the legal system comes from bad legal sitcoms?

 

[poppy7]

Is this what happens when your only understanding on the legal system comes from bad legal sitcoms?

Wouldn't know never seen one. It shouldn't be difficult for a legal team if there is any truth she asked them to do this. But in the process they will destroy Meghan's character whether they manage to win or not.

 

[tommy100]

Hmm - it is very possible that some of the 5 friends are no longer friends and might go off script.

I think this is a huge part of why there is a determination to keep their names private.

TBH as the friends talking to the People is a huge component of this I think it is fair to have some of these friends answer about whether or not there was involvement from Meghan in talking to People. Whether than means their identities needs to be made public, I'm not so sure and less fussed about to be honest.

I find the whole case rather odd, as it seems Meghan's side are saying her father shouldn't have talked to DM about the letter when defending himself as it breaches her privacy but it was okay for her friends to go to the media to defend her. I don't see how that argument can be won which is why thought it would focus much more on the simple copyright element.

 

[Denville]

Well they vastly overestimated their popularity. And really by that I mean his. He should have gotten a clue that the only one in that family who now has independent effection is the Queen.

Maybe because he saw the response to Diana's death that he thought there was an eternal love there for people like him. There isn't.

Sad for him really.

what do you mean by people like him? Royals? Or Diana's sons? I agree that they seem to have over estimated thier popularity. If they had stuck the royal job for a few more years, its possible that if they sitill chose to leave they would be better liked

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

Is this what happens when your only understanding on the legal system comes from bad legal sitcoms?

I am personally learning all sorts... just last night and this morning, about a legal theory allowing for the protection of witnesses under the premise that it will upset their children. I think that came less from a sitcom, though, and more from the idea that if such a theory existed it would justify Meghan all but identifying her five secret friends to the world.

And voila, it was spoken into existence.

 

[Alison H]

This is just getting sillier and sillier!


The press are now talking about The Five Friends as if they're a gang from a Enid Blyton book or something.

 

[Osipi]

As information about this lawsuit comes to our ears from one of the actual parties involved, I'm taking everything with a double dosage of salt and will sit here patiently waiting for a decision to be handed down by a judge.

You have clowns (figuratively) as defenders in this case and they're aiming to make a joker out of the prosecution. I'm going to focus on the judge. ?