Meghan Markle: Family and Background - November 2017-May 2018

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by Osipi

I really don't see that there is something nefarious about these pictures or receiving payment for posing for them. For all we know, Harry and Meghan may decide to have copies of them to put in their own personal photo album from their wedding. I had a pre-wedding photo take with my dog that I still cherish. Tom Sr. did not dishonor his daughter in my eyes. He posed for pictures preparing for his daughter's wedding and all it does is make him come across as the proud papa.

It sounds like a lovely keepsake Osipi.



However apparently Mr. Markle had written to IPSO asking that his privacy be respectedj, he was suffering due to the media and stated that he didn't want to be interviewed or to participate in any photocalls. KP was backing his request for privacy and now it's been revealed that he was cooperating with a photographer.

Last night, just hours ahead of our exposé, represenatives of Mr Markle wrote to editors around the world and to British newspaper watchdog the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Editors were told that he was suffering as a result of media intrusion and did not want to participate in photocalls or interviews.

[Madame Verseau]

I read the DM article and I feel so badly for Meghan and Harry. To say this was bad judgment on Sr's part is being generous. What's worse , the palace reached out to the press to ask it to back off Dad. He can forget the family coat of arms; and I don't think the queen will let him stay on royal property after this. Sr earned £100000 ($135460 USD) for this stunt. He can afford a round trip plane ticket, his accommodations, and clothes - if he's still welcome.

[ACO]

All these pictures were taken in March.

I don't think Tom Sr did anything out of intention to hurt Meghan unlike her siblings. He could have made a deal to give them a few shots in exchange to leave him alone. The issue is that Harry went to bat for this man and in turn made him look silly. He has never met Harry and the days before he does this is all over the papers.

I would have massive issues with trusting him.

Also Tom Sr asking for privacy after this stunt is eye rolling.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Yup. The Times and DM have the proof. People were feeling sorry for him but in fact he’s been encouraging this behaviour all along from the paparazzi.

Speculation here but if someone was following me around taking photos and offered to quit following me around if I posed for some innocuous photos of only me, I might take them up on it, especially if they paid me as well.

I haven't read an interview or seen family photos from Mr Markle.

[King of the Jungle]

The fact that Mr Markle co-operated with one photographer is no big crime to me. It was probably out of sheer despiration and he is a private citizen and allowed to make financial agreements with anyone of his choice. That is the thing - of his choice. He should not be harrassed nor followed about. It is surprising but he did not give out any information, opinions or slander..

[FashionMaven]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Mike and Carole have never sold photos to paparazzi or the tabloids.

Mr Markle will be meeting the senior royal family. If he’s willing to play ball with the press over pics, who’s to say he won’t talk about George and Charlotte.

I didn’t say it’s Meghan’s fault but this kind of behaviour does nothing to ingratiate himself with the royals. I doubt Meghan is happy with it.

There is no doubt that none of this is Meghan's fault. She can't help who her family is. And she's done nothing but work super hard to prove she's going to be an asset to the BRF.

But because of what her father has done, I do agree that this calls into question his judgment at the very least. Even if he did this to get the Paparazzi off his back, it wasn't the right decision. And Meghan isn't exactly hurting for money - if he needed help, all he'd have to do is ask.

I feel badly that Meghan and Harry may have to grapple with this at all. Maybe they already knew about it?

[TLLK]

The issue is that Harry went to bat for this man and in turn made him look silly. He has never met Harry and the days before he does this is all over the papers.

I would have massive issues with trusting him.

Also Tom Sr asking for privacy after this stunt is eye rolling.

I agree and wouldn't be surprised if his daughter and future son-in-law will also have trust issues with him as well especially in light of Harry's past issues with the media and their intrusive behavior.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by ACO

So according to the paper they discovered that the pictures of him working out, at the Internet cafe, with the book, and getting measured were all taken the same day and staged. This all happened last month. KP had no idea and issued a letter after the 1st set published seeking privacy for her parents. Now Tom Sr has representation seeking privacy and KP refuses to speak. My guess is those flowers to Doria were peace offerings.

Well, that was pretty clear from the pictures themselves, so no surprise there. I feel sorry for Meghan that even her father should be kept at a distance as he might work with paparazzi and forgot to inform the palace who spoke up for him.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Mike and Carole have never sold photos to paparazzi or the tabloids.

Mr Markle will be meeting the senior royal family. If he’s willing to play ball with the press over pics, who’s to say he won’t talk about George and Charlotte.

I didn’t say it’s Meghan’s fault but this kind of behaviour does nothing to ingratiate himself with the royals. I doubt Meghan is happy with it.

There’s a royal press journalist that would probably disagree with parts of your statement about the Middleton’s.

[AlowVera]

This was not just Tom Sr. working with a pap, it was also in cahoots with The Sun who wrote the narrative to go along with the photos.

[Marlo]

Very distasteful. I think Thomas Sr shouldn't go to the wedding out of respect for Meghan's sake.

[Rudolph]

Originally Posted by Dman

There’s a royal press journalist that would probably disagree with parts of your statement about the Middleton’s.

Tanna? He was sued and lost. Next?

[FashionMaven]

Originally Posted by Marlo

Very distasteful. I think Thomas Sr shouldn't go to the wedding out of respect for Meghan's sake.

Actually that would probably hurt Meghan, who clearly wants her father there. He's walking her down the aisle.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

He was sued and lost. Next?

Just saying that some stuff can happen. Who’s gonna win a battle like that against the royals?

No excuses, just saying that the Markles weren’t prepared to deal with this massive amount of media attention. Families have to be prepared to know how to deal with it all.

Meghan is marrying Prince Harry. Charles and Diana’s son. If you’re family, you’re gonna find some cameras in your face and stories written about you. You find yourself engaging and the rest is history.

[O-H Anglophile]

Here is a 70 something year old retired man, living alone, (over 5,000 miles from his daughter) who suddenly is known all over the world because of his daughter's fiance, with the press highly motivated to dig dirt up, but he's being judged because he may have cooperated a couple months ago with a photographer taking some staged photos of him and him alone? Wow.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by FashionMaven

There is no doubt that none of this is Meghan's fault. She can't help who her family is. And she's done nothing but work super hard to prove she's going to be an asset to the BRF.

But because of what her father has done, I do agree that this calls into question his judgment at the very least. Even if he did this to get the Paparazzi off his back, it wasn't the right decision. And Meghan isn't exactly hurting for money - if he needed help, all he'd have to do is ask.

I feel badly that Meghan and Harry may have to grapple with this at all. Maybe they already knew about it?

I'm also looking at two totally different kinds of pictures here. Tom did consent to staging a few photographs, and if I'm not mistaken, they were taken a while back ago. These were consensual photos and a contract between Tom Sr. and the photographer was reached. The photos were innocuous and showed a proud father getting prepared for his daughter's wedding. To me, its a photo op and all of the BRF know the importance of photo ops and I don't think these photos are really anything that Tom did to discredit his daughter or to betray her trust or anyone's trust for that matter.

Then, on the other flip side of the photo album, we have the intrusive pictures of Tom being followed crossing the Mexico/US border, the "cheap" motel (actually a well reputed chain rather than a no tell motel) he checked into and photos of each and every item he purchased at a 7-11 right down to letting the world know he uses Gas-X. These are the types of photos that make the demand for privacy have substance. Not the ones that Tom Sr. agreed to.

The demand for privacy stands to be valid. Its the intrusion into someone's life that is not warranted that is the issue. Not the posing. Not the money. The intrusion where one has their privacy invaded without their permission is the prime issue here.

[Zaira]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

Here is a 70 something year old retired man, living alone, who suddenly is known all over the world because of his daugher's fiance, with the press highly motivated to dig dirt up, but he's being judged because he may have cooperated a couple months ago with a photographer taking some staged photos of him and him alone? Wow.

I think what concerns me is that these seemed more than just randomly staged...they were staged to fit a narrative about him, the wedding and his daughter.


And if he did profit from these pictures, he literally gained money off of his daughter which is very dubious IMO.

[AlowVera]

I don't see Mr. Markle as the mastermind, he is dealing with tabloids and the paps who know what they are doing. The fact is the pap had to know the photos looked staged and made no attempt to hide that. I do think that Mr. Markle might have been taken advantage, something similar to how the tabloids set Sophie Wessex up.

[Rudolph]

But the ‘consensual’ photos of Meghan’s dad we’re never presented as such. There was no indication that he was cooperating with the paparazzi. He no doubt received a few coins for the pics. Paparazzi are a definite no-no within KP.

The thing is it’s a slippery slope. Play ball with paparazzi one day and the next you’re selling stories to a tabloid. To me there’s no moral difference between what Meghan’s siblings are doing and her dad.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Osipi

I'm also looking at two totally different kinds of pictures here. Tom did consent to staging a few photographs, and if I'm not mistaken, they were taken a while back ago. These were consensual photos and a contract between Tom Sr. and the photographer was reached. The photos were innocuous and showed a proud father getting prepared for his daughter's wedding. To me, its a photo op and all of the BRF know the importance of photo ops and I don't think these photos are really anything that Tom did to discredit his daughter or to betray her trust or anyone's trust for that matter.

Then, on the other flip side of the photo album, we have the intrusive pictures of Tom being followed crossing the Mexico/US border, the "cheap" motel (actually a well reputed chain rather than a no tell motel) he checked into and photos of each and every item he purchased at a 7-11 right down to letting the world know he uses Gas-X. These are the types of photos that make the demand for privacy have substance. Not the ones that Tom Sr. agreed to.

The demand for privacy stands to be valid. Its the intrusion into someone's life that is not warranted that is the issue. Not the posing. Not the money. The intrusion where one has their privacy invaded without their permission is the prime issue here.

Thank you Osipi, you stated the differences very clearly. The internet cafe photo and the photo reading the book definitely felt more like a photo op or photos for an article ("Dad preparing for the big wedding")
The photos at the 7/11 seemed very intrusive.