Does the Thomas Markle revelation recontextualize the Sussexes’ UK exit?

The revelations about Thomas Markle have been a major storyline in the past week, and many of us have spent this time readjusting our understanding of why the Duchess of Sussex cut him out of her life. We’ve also questioned who knew what and when. One of the biggest pieces of the puzzle is the fact that Thomas Markle’s first wife Roslyn Loveless wrote to the Met Police and told them that Thomas was a predator of children, and Loveless’s letter was shared with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in January 2019. That alone recontextualizes so much of what Meghan was going through at the time. She was targeted in a high-level, palace-authorized smear campaign as members of the royal family expressed “concerns” about what her baby’s skin color would be. Well, according to the Daily Mail’s Clare Foges, Loveless’s letter is the golden key to understanding why Meghan wanted to leave the UK in the first place. This is such a massive cope by the British press.

‘We intend to step back as “senior” members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen.’ It was the bombshell to end all bombshells: the announcement made by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on January 8, 2020, that they were to leave the UK.

But why? Why give up the castles and the parades, the pomp and the pageantry, the status and the security? Why demote yourselves from the most influential family on the planet? What on earth drove Megxit? Several reasons were given. It was the intense media scrutiny. Friction with the Cambridges. The bossy ‘men in grey suits’ at Buckingham Palace. None of this seemed fully convincing at the time. Was it really such a torture to live as duke and duchess?

Now, I believe, we have come closer to the truth about what really led to Megxit: the cloud of suspicion surrounding Thomas Markle Snr, and the impact this must have had on Meghan. It was in early 2019 that the Met Police shared a letter with the duchess accusing Markle Snr of heinous crimes. She was around six months pregnant. Looking at pictures of her from that year – shaking hands, doing walkabouts, going on tours of Morocco and southern Africa – it seems remarkable that she kept a sunny smile plastered to her face at all times.

This was a woman not only adjusting to life as a full-time royal and new mother, but also to the news that her father was quite possibly a paedophile. What agonies lay behind the smile? Even for a professional actress it must have been an enormous strain.

Of course, Markle Snr has not been proven guilty of anything yet. But judging from their estrangement and the statement Meghan released last week saying that she had kept her children separate from their grandfather ‘to protect them’, she has clearly long believed he has a very dark side.

… In that famous Netflix documentary, the duchess said: ‘I was a daddy’s girl all my life.’ In his memoir, Spare, Prince Harry said that Meghan ‘still, even in her 30s, called him Daddy. She loved him, worried about him – his health, his habits – and often relied upon him.’ The shock of that letter in 2019 must have been sharpened by the fact that, within a few months, she had Archie. Many will remember the emotions unleashed by the birth of your first baby. The intense protectiveness, anxiety, even paranoia. To find out that her own protector may well be an abuser must have amplified these feelings. It would heighten the need to feel safe, insulated from the nastiness out there in the world.

It is not hard to imagine that by the end of 2019 this tumult of emotions – horror, sadness, new-mum vulnerability – led Meghan to a series of conclusions: I must protect my child; I must be near the only parent I can trust (mother Doria Ragland, who lives in the US); we must quit the UK. Perhaps the pressure of public life was the straw that broke the camel’s back, given she was already shouldering the weight of a dark secret that she could not share.

The Thomas Markle accusations reframe other aspects of Meghan’s behaviour in recent years, such as the perfect family image she has curated so carefully. Instagram images of the kids playing in the sun; picking fruit in their Montecito garden; frolicking with the dogs while Mum cooks up a batch of jam in the kitchen. In retrospect, these images seem less like bragging and more like a riposte to the darkness of her own family background. While the Sussex family snaps seemed like saccharine posturing to many of us, now I get it. What better antidote to the darkness than a wholesome, picture-perfect family life?

Let us hope that the family’s return to the UK signals a new lease of life for Meghan: freer, lighter, less burdened by the past. It’s been said that the ‘sins of the father should not be visited on the son’ – and nor should the alleged crimes of Thomas Markle Snr scar the life of his daughter.

[From The Daily Mail]

As I said, I believe all of the Thomas Markle stuff (including the existence of Loveless’s letter) absolutely reframes and recontextualizes a lot of what Meghan was going through specifically in 2019. But make no mistake, the Thomas revelations were just one more horror to add to the pile. Meghan was being attacked at every level, with the royals working hand-in-hand with the press to destroy her life and sanity. They wanted her OUT. Out of the family, out of the UK, out of her marriage. There was a wall of abusive, racist BS coming at Meghan from every direction. She had multiple reasons for wanting to get the f–k out of there. The press is now trying to use this Thomas Markle story as an excuse to absolve themselves from their role in this decade-long campaign against Meghan.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

14 Responses to “Does the Thomas Markle revelation recontextualize the Sussexes’ UK exit?”

  1. Brassy Rebel says:

    “Oh, I get it now.” Of course, she was traumatized by learning that her father is a pedophile. But, the trauma began long before that thanks to the palace and a compliant media ecosystem. And it still continues, as the media hordes try to pin the blame for her father’s behavior, somehow, someway, on Meghan herself. They’re not even slick about it anymore.

  2. Amy Bee says:

    This piece is bonkers. As Kaiser says it is an attempt to absolve the press from their contribution to her poor mental health and the decision to leave the UK. No doubt the allegations against her father was a heavy burden to hold but it doesn’t deny the fact that the press and Palace made her life a living hell. Let’s not forget that press used Toxic Tom to attack Meghan. So no the press doesn’t get absolved from this situation.

  3. Tessa says:

    The royals are not the most powerful family.they really have no power yet the still get taxpayer money despite the billions they have. Why would they want to stay considering the treatment they got and scooter wanting to control harry and try to break up the sussexes

  4. SophieEster says:

    No. Tom Sykes, who authored this perspective, is doing so to push the narrative that Harry/Meghan were always after money, didnt actually suffer at the hands of the the Brit Media or Royal family – remember, William physically attacked Harry and Archie’s skin color was questioned, Meghan was denied mental health help AND the Palace said NOTHING when Archie was called a monkey, yet the spring into action when there are questions about Kate. Im glad the Oprah interview and the Netflix documentary exist. They are indelible marks just like Diana’s interview.

  5. Eurydice says:

    So, this will be the new DM narrative – just focus on the father. I can play that game. In that case, how do they think Meghan felt about them parading her father as a poor, neglected parent? How about the next 6 years of the DM continuously haranguing her about poor sad Tom? How about the DM paying for and colluding with this abuser to abuse his daughter publicly for almost a decade? Moving to the US didn’t make her safe from that. Sorry, DM – you don’t get to now use Tom for absolution.

  6. Tessa says:

    Scooter wanted harry to break up with meghan because he claimed harry was moving too fast. Scooter had no business giving any advice. The queen approved the marriage. And harry and meghan dated two years. And then harry describes scooters surprise attack.

  7. LadyE says:

    I have a different reaction to this piece. I don’t know anything about this lady, Clare Foges, or what she has written about Meghan before. I will caveat that. But, taken on its own, just what is written, I found this very moving and a very decent self-reflection and admission of having misjudged and misunderstood.

    • Amy Bee says:

      The press with approval of the Palace, used her father to attack Meghan. They don’t get pass for what they did to her.

    • Cassie says:

      Yes I actually thought it was one of the kinder stories about Meghan, noting that they are few and far between .

    • Eurydice says:

      I think Clare was once considered for a PR job with H&M? She’s been critical of both H&M for the typical BM reasons, but in a prim, pearl-wearing royalist kind of way. It’s nice that she realized Meghan is three-dimensional and maybe that’s a baby step to the larger realization of what the UK’s reaction to Meghan says about their system as a whole. Lots to unpack there.

  8. Jais says:

    I mean yes, it contributed. Along with all the other things. Like a staff that calling her names like the degree wife and me-gain and leaking them to the press. Like a sister in law who planted a lie in the press that she made her cry. And who questioned her baby’s skin color. A brother in law who wanted her husband to leave her and physically attacked him over it. And conversations about how her child would not get security.

  9. bisynaptic says:

    “Was it really such a torture to live as duke and duchess?“
    — Huh? They continue to live as duke and duchess.

  10. NoBS Please says:

    Yeah, whoever wrote this might think they’re being kind to Meghan, and joining the new wave of Meghan-sympathetic articles bla bla, but what they’re doing is gaslighting her and Harry all over again about the racism she endured.

    It’s amazing how they just can’t get themselves to accept that the racist attacks Meghan was facing on a daily basis, and that she continues to face, were intolerable and cause enough for her to want to leave the royal family. They are in such denial about it that they’ll use any argument to try to minimise the impact their own nastiness had on Meghan.

    Plus, she was so upset about the Thomas Markle allegations that she rushed to escape to… the very country Thomas Markle was living in ???????????????????????? (or next door or whatever, it was closer than the UK)

    Complete nonsense!

    Sure she’s back now, but I suspect her and Harry have understood that living outside the UK makes no difference to the level of vitriol she faces, as hating her has now become an industry of itself, contributing to global GDP.

  11. Mairzy Doats says:

    Maybe I am misremembering, but wasn’t one of Harry and Meghan’s earlier proposals was to simply take a sabbatical from royal duties for a period of time and then return? It was the RF that denied them that, which would have been a simple workplace request in a family business. The press, for sure, bears responsibility for their horrid treatment of Meghan, but they took their cues from RF.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment