Duchess Meghan’s security told peasants not to take her photo at Wimbledon


Last week, the Duchess of Sussex attended one match at Wimbledon. It was Serena Williams’ second round, and Meghan and Serena are friends and so that’s why Meghan attended. It just so happened that Serena played that match on Court 1, the second biggest court at the All-England Club, and Court 1 does not have a Royal Box, only Center Court has a Royal Box. Which meant that Meghan and her two friends were seated among the peasantry. Which means that the peasantry could conceivably… like, take photos of Meghan. And apparently the royal protection officers had a problem with that, at least according to one woman who was there.

Meghan Markle was branded ‘childish’ and a ‘control freak’ today after it emerged her security team warned tennis fans against taking pictures of her at Wimbledon – including one mystified VIP who had no idea the royal was in the crowd. The former Suits star, 37, made a surprise visit to Court 1 on Thursday to watch Serena Williams accompanied by her old friends Genevieve Hillis and Lindsay Roth, who could be among Archie’s secret godparents.

Sally Jones, 64, was seated in the same row as the Duchess of Sussex and during the match was ordered not to take photographs in her direction because the royal was there ‘in a private capacity’ – even though there were 12,000 people in Court 1 and millions watching on TV. The shocked PR consultant from Warwickshire, who worked as a sports broadcaster for the BBC and ITV for decades, said Meghan’s bodyguard looked ’embarrassed’ when she told him she was actually taking a picture of Serena and revealed she hadn’t spotted Meghan until he pointed her out.

Mrs Jones told MailOnline the Duchess was ‘clearly looking around looking to see who was looking at her’, adding: ‘Harry and Meghan see themselves more as A-list celebrities rather than royals carrying out their duties. It’s control-freakery. There were around 200 photographers snapping away at her but security were sent to warn an old biddy like me. It makes them look silly. It’s childish and takes us for fools’.

Another spectator took a selfie of himself and Court 1 near her – but Meghan’s bodyguard also warned him about taking pictures. Kensington Palace declined to comment on the row today – but a royal source told MailOnline: ‘It’s not uncommon for personal protection officers accompanying any members of the Royal Family to ask people not to take pictures so they can engage with people and events rather than camera phones’.

[From The Daily Mail]

For the love of God. Yeah, I watched this match and there was a definite buzz around the court and in all of the commentary boxes when Meghan went to her seat, and the ESPN commentators talked about Meghan’s presence several times during the match too. There were cutaways to Meghan and the commentators remarked that Serena – who was struggling during that match – likely wanted to play extra-hard knowing that her friend was there. My point is that… I think many people at the match knew Meghan was there, although it’s possible this woman didn’t know (it certainly sounds like this woman was watching Meghan like a hawk though, huh). And I think the RPOs just say that to everyone? But sure, Meghan is an awful person because she didn’t want people in the stands taking her photo while she was watching Serena play. Either that or she’s really an unhinged “uppity” bitch eating crackers who always does everything wrong, clearly.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Getty.

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

193 Responses to “Duchess Meghan’s security told peasants not to take her photo at Wimbledon”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Rojas says:

    There are pics of her getting photographs by people. What is that lady talking about.

    • PrincessK says:

      Well l was at the match and witnessed everything. I had a front row court side seat just behind the umpire. I noticed this photographer in the dug out pit in front of me, pointing his very long lense camera up into the crowd. Not once did he bother to take pictures of Serena and the other player. So we asked him what he was looking at, and he said Meghan Markle, we turned an looked and sure enough there she was. Meghan looked happy and relaxed and was chatting with her friends.

      Loads of people took photographs, including myself. Her bodyguard only stopped a couple of people who appeared to be in very close proximity to her from taking shots, for obvious safety reasons, and to avoid too much commotion during a tennis match. One man actually got up from his seat and stood in front of her to take a pic, and the bodyguard told him to stop.

      I asked the long lens photographer in front me if he was sending the pics to the Daily Mail and he said yes, l then said that Meghan makes a lot of money for him, and he said no he just gets paid the same for all jobs, and he pointed to the other side of the court and said that all the other long lens photographers were doing the same as he was, pointing their lenses at her throughout the match.

      When she got up to leave, loads of people took more pictures. Her bodyguard only told people who were sitting very close by to stop taking pictures, but of course that would not make good Daily Mail story, would it?

      • kerwood says:

        Thank you for your first-hand perspective.

      • Bella DuPont says:

        Chuurs for that, Princess K, it’s nice to hear an accurate account, rather than the bigotry laced lies of some frustrated Stan.

        Hope you enjoyed the match anyway!

      • Becks1 says:

        Thanks for the account! That all sounds reasonable and normal. hope you had a good day and enjoyed yourself. and LOL at your comment about the daily mail.

      • Nev says:

        wow amazing account

      • Tami says:

        @PrincessK, the DM also talked about how she didn’t have people sitting around her, and made it seem like she got this whole section to herself. They talked about lines outside the stadium of members who couldn’t get in because there weren’t enough seats, insinuating there weren’t enough seats because of Meghan’s actions. They then went on to say that Kate went to a match earlier in the week and sat among the other tennis-watchers, and didn’t seem to have a problem with people being in close proximity. The underlying tone there was that Meghan thinks she’s special and shouldn’t have to sit with the peasants, and Kate, everyone’s Princess, is happy to be around her people. I would love to hear your firsthand perspective; do you have any thoughts on the empty seats around Meghan?

      • Thank you for comments. I knew that the royal reporters were blowing this up way out of proportion to make Meghan look like a diva.

      • Hope says:

        Someone stood in front of her to take a picture?! Like she was an exhibit and not a person. What is wrong with people?

        Besides respecting her personsal space, I would be concerned about being tackled by her security if I did something like that.

        Thank you for your account. I hope you enjoyed the match.

        @Tami. I was looking at tv coverage today and saw lots of empty seats. Why would @Princess K know why there were empty seats around Meghan or assume it had something to do with Meghan?

        The Daily Mail is racist trash and is trying to insinuate that Meghan is uppity.

      • Moose says:

        @PrincessK, great summary there from an actual eye witness rather than a complete liar. Could you possibly send this truth to the Daily Fail and Piers Morgan? I really think the time has come for these types of tabloids and reporters (if that is what Piers thinks he is) to start publishing apologies when there is evidence they are making things up completely out of spite… Something Buckingham Palace should be pushing for?

        It seems that Kensington Palace has come out with some lame excuse now which doesn’t really help things…

      • Nahema says:

        I’m glad someone was able to clear that up, including from the perspective of the paparazzi.

      • Hope says:

        Kensington Palace? Because KP doesn’t speak for the Sussexes anymore and as multiple people hae pointed out the Cambridges also set these kinds of boundaries.

        This is so sad. They are going to keep hounding her because they resent that a WoC has the nerve to feel comfortable and enjoy herself in a white-majority institution. She can’t even watch a tennis match without being attacked.

      • Moose says:

        @Hope, I agree, I was confused as to why KP issued a statement rather than BP unless its another made-up story (it was in the daily Fail after all). All BP have to do is state that security decisions are matters for RPO not the royal members themselves…

      • Hope says:

        An unnamed source at BP has said something to the DM about royals in general wanting people to put the cameras away but @Moose, I wish they had gone with what you said. This is an RPO decision.

        And I saw the picture of the guy taking the “selfie.” That guy is a troll! He did that to get a reaction because there is no way he didn’t know what that looked like. At least I’m assuming he’s a troll because otherwise he’s a moron. But everyone one of us would assume that person had just walked up to take a picture of us at close proximity.

      • Lucy2 says:

        Thank you for sharing that, it is pretty much exactly what I expected. They did not want people around her approaching her and shoving their phone in her face, for security reasons.

        If this woman quoted in the article was taking picture of Serena, wouldn’t her phone have been pointed at the court, not down the aisle at Meghan? Sounds like she got busted, made up a lame excuse, and ran to the tabloids. Gross.

      • Tami says:

        @hope, I was wondering if she had a sense why the seats were empty. The insinuation from the report in the DM was that there were lines of people waiting to get in, and MM’s selfishness in wanting her own private area prevented other fans from seeing the match. If that were true, though, I imagine people at the match would be aware of this and there would be a buzz about the situation. If the reporting from the DM is accurate, I could see it being very frustrating for a member not to be able to attend the match, and it would be rather rude of MM to insist on her own private section. It very well could be that it was a low-attended match, and the empty seats would have been empty even if MM wasn’t there. We don’t know, and I don’t trust the DM reporting; I just thought first-person insight from @PrincessK would answer that question.

      • PrincessK says:

        Yes, there were some empty seats around her, but to suggest that people were expelled from their seats and not allowed to watch the match because she was there is rubbish. At Wimbledon there are often sections of that are often not full, especially in the early stages, and depending on the player, and this was Court One. People usually choose to have a lunch break before or after Federer plays, and Roger followed Serena. Court One was pretty full but there were clusters of empty seats, and not only where Meghan was sitting, which looked like an area reserved for VIPs and hospitality groups.

      • Sduff says:

        Club members entitled to sit in the vicinity of Meg were queuing outside the court. There were seats available that Club members were not allowed to sit in. Yes, I have attended Wimbledon.

      • Abby says:

        Thanks so much for weighing in!!

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        I knew it couldn’t be like the high story on DM or DE, didn’ make any sense. The security guard would not come out of thin air, flying on his broom like a witch, just to pick on a woman. Of course they have to do their job and be sure there are no threats. With all those lunatics around, not talking about terrorists and others of their type, the protection has to be tight.

    • PrincessK says:

      @SDuff…..it could well be that the pocket of empty seats around Meghan was in a section reserved for Members, however you have provided not one jot of firm evidence and also that they were definitely barred from those seats. Since you like me are very familiar with Wimbledon you will know that queues form for almost everything at Wimbledon. Once a match has started you cannot enter the court until about 3 or 4 games are played and the players take a break, during this period long queues can form to get back to seats. During the early stages of tournaments Members are usually found in the luxury lounges indulging in strawberries and cream, quaffing champagne, rather than desperately trying to watch a Round Two match, unless of course they were suddenly got wind that Meghan Markle was in the House.

      Anyway, l hope Serena makes the Final and sits with Kate in the Royal Box….no doubt her detractors will find fault if that happens too. But we don’t care because her popularity is growing by the day, despite what the press is trying to get us to believe.

  2. MrsBanjo says:

    Good lord, they’re grasping for any little bit they can use to criticise her.

    • MA says:

      It’s crazy because they try to make her out to be all these contradictory things. First Meghan was too friendly with staff, hugging them, too familiar… then she was a tyrant boss. They said she was too “huggsy wuggsy” whatever that means. She was being mentored by Kate and looked up to on her, but then was also domineering and making her cry. Then she got criticized for being too friendly and open with the public, now she’s allegedly too closed off from them? Also, she’s so HoLLyWoOd and loves the camera but now allegedly has a problem with people taking her picture. There’s this weird tendency by the media to make Meghan all things bad, at all times, even when the narratives are contradictory and stories illogical (the same way that the Cambridges are all things good, at all times, even when it doesn’t add up to prior stories) so long as it fits the current circumstance

      • AppleSnax says:

        Huggsy wuggsy means what it says. In the UK it’s viewed as an eye-roll inducing affectation to go around hugging people. Especially when Americans do it, they always say things like “Oh, I’m so sorry, I’m just going to hug, I’m a hugger!” as though no one’s personal space is really their own. I mean, clearly they’re not sorry while doing it.

        We do take the mick out of them for it but they clearly view it as something, I don’t know, charming about themselves so you just need to let them put their sweaty bodies against you for awhile.

      • Hermione says:

        @AppleSnax. Honest question here cause I’d like to know. If folks in the UK side eye Americans as violating personal space for being huggers, how do they view other cultures where violation of personal space is even greater?

      • Tina says:

        @Hermione, I honestly don’t know another culture that’s as “huggy” as Americans. Other cultures are more close talkers, or cheek kissers, and British people react by backing away (just as Americans do) but I don’t know any other culture where people hug each other like Americans do.

      • Becks1 says:

        @tina I am really laughing at that because I think of Americans as so cold and stand-offish. I have significantly more, um, physical interactions when I interact with people from different countries.

      • Kristin says:

        I’m an American and I have never, in 40 years, ever met anyone who told me they were just going to hug me because they were a hugger. That’s just weird. I have friends who are not American and are way more touchy- feely than I am.

      • AppleSnax says:

        Depends what you mean I suppose. I certainly don’t feel this way about a European double air kiss on each cheek, where the bodies are still at a distance and no one’s pressing themselves against you. Americans are the only ones I know of who will hug when being introduced, or hug when you haven’t seen them for awhile, or, like a former American colleague of mine, hug us all if she’d been out of the office on a long weekend (“Ohhhhh guyyyyyss, I missed you alllllll!” she’d squeak, which did remind me of female students in films about high schoolers).

        There are a times I’ve encountered people from certain cultures where strangers or newly introduced people will feel comfortable really getting close, touching your body, etc., which I don’t think is acceptable for me. My body does belong to me and just because it’s culturally acceptable where they are from, I don’t have to let someone touch me because they grew up doing it. However, to avoid being rude in this situation I tend to find the best thing to when it makes me uncomfortable is to gently remove their hand the first time, or back up a wee bit when they step in too close, and then perhaps after that make an excuse like “Oh, I feel like I’m coming down with something right now, I don’t want to get you ill!”

      • AppleSnax says:

        Splitting just to avoid a big block of text –
        Most people I know would do something similar to that; no one wants to say “Please get your hands off me”.

        I have friends who do just stand there for the hug, or when someone grabs their arm or prods their body, and complain after the person has left, which I don’t like doing. I also have friends who will jump, like they’ve had an electric shock, when someone touches them like that, or when someone goes in for a hug saying “I’m just a hugger! Ha, I like hugging!”, they’ll put one hand out and sort of push the person away with it, while extending the other and offering a handshake. Which is somewhat amusing but a bit cold.

        We teach children that they don’t get to touch another person’s body without their consent. Some people see a hug as no big deal, but others want to be asked for their consent before being touched like this.

        It’s hardly a defining part of my day-to-day life, but I would never tell my daughters to just accept it when someone wants to touch them. Why should I accept that if it makes me uncomfortable and I’ve expressed that to the huggsy wuggsy person?

      • Becks1 says:

        omg AppleSnax I am laughing so hard at your former colleague. I don’t think that’s normal. I would be so weirded out if one of my co workers did that to me, especially after just a long weekend. Like, wtf LOL. Don’t miss. Go have fun.

      • Tina says:

        AppleSnax, I’m with you. I think the best way to do it is the way someone like Michelle Obama does it, where she makes it clear that she’s a hugger, but she doesn’t impose it on anyone (this is from what I understand, I’ve never been lucky enough to meet her).

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I am an American. I lived a great deal of my life in The South. I only hug members of family. Most people I know only hug members of their own family which includes extended family such as aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins.

        I think the idea that the USA is nation of huggers is blown greatly out of proportion.

      • GM says:

        Terming all Americans as “huggers” seems like an over-generalization. I hug my friends and family, but i’m not over here hugging my colleagues and being obnoxious about it. I have always been an Anglophile and love the U.K. and its history; however, seeing some of the frankly xenophobic commentary directed towards Meghan has been very disappointing. I could generalize all people from the U.K. as uppity, cold snobs… but I’m not going to do that.

      • BeanieBean says:

        Such weirdness. We’ve always seen photos of the royals grabbing a person by the shoulder & giving that person a kiss on the cheek or even both cheeks. And Meghan’s the wacko for hugging?

      • KnowNothing says:

        Funny, my Scottish MIL is also a hugger. In fact, since moving to the UK, I’ve encountered lots of people who hug as a greeting or to say goodbye.

        Which coming from a country where you only hug family and very close friends, is always a bit odd to me, but I tend to not get upset about it, considering they are only trying to be friendly. 🙄

      • ernie says:

        A forced kiss or double kiss on the face is so much more intimate than a hug. Also ridiculous to generalize an entire nation as “huggers” because you met one idiot. It’s okay though, since it’s about Americans.

      • AppleSnax says:

        The double kiss on the cheeks isn’t meant to be a kiss – it’s an air kiss. If someone is forcing a kiss on you that’s bad. If someone is actually kissing your cheeks while doing the double kiss greeting, awww, bless their little hearts, that’s not the proper way.

        Also when I googled to see if Meghan Markle had said anything about hugging, the first link was an article where she’s quoted as saying “I’m an American. I hug” and the article starts off mentioning “After her first few visits to see her boyfriend in Kensington Palace, she began greeting the palace guards with hugs”.


        Feel free to direct your outrage at Markle for saying “I’m an American. I hug”, I guess.

    • Sam Louise says:

      I’m normally a fan and supporter of Meghan, but this time I see plenty of room for criticism. She doesn’t get to pick and choose whether photos are taken or not while at a highly public sporting event. She is a public person by way of marrying into the royal family and she is at Wimbledon for god’s sake. She even had several rows of seats kept empty in front and behind her. I’m sure it was obvious to anyone at the tennis match that someone “important” was sitting in that section.

      • liriel says:

        I agree.

      • MA says:

        @Sam Louise But who says SHE’s the one who did? IF this story is true and not embellished, it was the RPOs who made that call, and/or Wimbledon officials. She JUST went to a much more highly attended sporting event, the Yankees vs Red Socks, surrounded by way more people, with even more cameras shoved in her face. It also looked like there were no RPOs around her. In fact, she’s never openly protested anything of the sort before. The only time I can recall is their first engagement when Harry reprimanded a paparazzo for getting to close to her and Amy during their Oceania tour, when a paparazzo also got too close to her. We have the word of 1 person whose account is appears suspect and contradicted by photo and video. And we have 1 man who (I could see a RPO thinking) got way to close to her. I don’t see why these security calls and established procedures. are being blamed on her.

      • himmiefan says:

        The empty rows around them did look bad, and I’m a huge Meghan fan.

        As for the looking around her to see who was looking, maybe she was looking to see if there was anyone there she knew.

      • Original Jenns says:

        Please read the top description from someone who was at the match, or view the number of photos showing that photos were not a problem (large crowd behind her taking photos as she greets a young boy), until you believe the Daily Mail’s article.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Sam Louise, I could not agree with you more. If Meghan does not want to be photograph then she should cease attending public events as a private person.

        If any of this particular Daily Fail story is true then I feel it is just more bad optics for Meghan.

      • himmiefan says:

        Someone has posted a link showing more people in the seats around Meghan, so ultimately, she wasn’t isolated as being a VIP or too good to sit with others.

  3. Rojas says:

    Once they knew Andrew news was gonna come out, the hit piece was coming.

    I saw a lot of pictures of people taking pics of her.

    • MA says:

      It’s really something, huh? And how all of the RRs seized on it as if it’s the scandal of the century is telling.

    • Tami says:

      Great point. Wag the dog.

    • 10KTurtle says:

      It’s funny how they think we’ll be so much more outraged over a story about a royal family member politely asking not to be photographed than a story about a royal pedophile sex trafficker.

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        It’s not funny. It’s disgraceful. It shows the priorities in the wrong place. No matter how important, rich or powerful, nobody can be above answering for this abominable behavior.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Didn’t we once read about RPOs taking away the phones of people photographing Kate when she was pushing baby George in a pram through a park?
      Oops, I see the folks commenting next had the same thought.

  4. Josie says:

    People are regularly told by RPOs to delete photos of Kate taken on the public streets. I’ve always thought it was intrusive and rude foe the RPO to do that — people are allowed to take photos of everyone in public spaces, and the royals shouldn’t be exempt.

    Still, if the rule is good enough for Kate, it’s good enough for Meghan. It’s a stupid rule but they’re enforcing it for everyone.

    • Becks1 says:

      Yeah, this too. I think that people should be able to take pictures of the royals. I get that they are probably trying to draw a line between public and private time, and that they don’t want things to escalate to where crowds of people are chasing the royals with their phones. So, I kind of roll my eyes at it, but I get the overall concern, I think. But, if its the rule for William and Kate, it should be the rule for Meghan.

      • (TheOG)@Jan90067 says:

        I think the rule was put in place for two reasons:

        -One: the Public v Private parts of their (and the kids’)lives. They *are* entitled to some private time where they’re not on display like zoo animals. This goes for ALL the Royals. While personally, I don’t think it *should* be a big deal to snap a pic if you see them out and about, as long as you’re not bothering/intrusive (and NOT using a telephoto lens from a road a mile away!!), I can understand not wanting to be on public “display” 24/7 every single day of your existence.

        -Two: They don’t want this to turn into Diana’s existence, where she was literally hounded and chased to death. We all saw how that turned out.

        So yes, in this instance, I can see RPOs asking for no pics in their private time. However, going so far as to ask people to delete…can they force people to do this?? Seriously asking.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Jan – yeah, I get the distinction between private and public, and like I said I can completely see the overall security concern if there is no prevention of it. It’s a fine line to walk for the royals sometimes and I’m not sure what the overall right protocol should be.

        Re: the deleting, I think that has been reported several times with Will and Kate, that their RPO asks people to delete photos. That’s one of the reasons people figure when there are pictures of them released on “private time,” its been somewhat sanctioned.

      • Salvation says:

        One time when I went back home for a short vacay, my brother and I were walking down a pot hole filled street in the middle of down town . There was a street vendor sitting literally in the middle of the street because vehicles were being driven on the pavement to avoid the potholes while pedestrians used the middle of the street to avoid cars on the pavement. I asked my brother to take a picture of the street vendor and the potholes. A guy approached us and told us to not take pictures of him without his consent (he believed that while taking pics of the street vendor my brother had captured him as well). From there on it escalated to where I never intended it to. The vendor was upset because she had not consented to her pictures bring taken etc. Long story short, we ended up deleting all the pics. Now my question to @(TheOG)@Jan90067 and to @Becks1 is, does it necessarily give people the right to snap pics of unconsenting people just because said people are in a public space? I say no. These people are just making much ado about nothing. I’m sure if it had been this “old buddy” lady who had had someone at Wimbledon approach her and start taking pictures without her permission, the lady would have objected and demanded the pictures be deleted, non? Royals are just like us. This was Meghan’s private time, no one had any rights to take pictures without her consent. Even if some media were doing so, it doesn’t make it right. Now if it had been during a walk about, that’d have been a different story.

      • Becks1 says:

        @salvation – well, the argument (that I am not necessarily making, to be clear) is that the royals are public figures, and when they are in public, should their pictures be taken, even if they’re not working? They ARE in a different position than a normal private citizen. And people snap pictures of “regular” celebrities all the time.

        Like I said, I’m not sure what the answer is. If the answer is, “no pictures taken of the royals when they are not at work events” then that’s fine, I don’t blame them.

        But at the very least, if the RRs are going to write articles lambasting Meghan for this, they should be doing the same for W&K.

      • Salvation says:

        @Becks1, but even celebrities have been known on numerous occasions to smash cameras or phones etc when they learn that someone is taking pictures without their consent. I think, just because people do it to other public figures all the time doesn’t make it right. A lot of public people just let it drop just to avoid confrontation etc, at least that’s what I believe. Didn’t prince Charles recently succeed in having his Cuba beach bod pictures disapear because they’d been taken on his private time? But earlier in the day, media folks had taken pics on him on duty and he was okay with it? Royals or otherwise, they’re just like the rest of us.

      • (TheOG)@Jan90067 says:

        Salvation, my understanding is, if you’re in a public space, there cannot be any expectation of privacy, so a pic taken on the street, even if others are in it, is legal. HOWEVER (big point here) you MUST obtain consent of ANYONE in that pic if you put it out in the public domain (social media) or for sale.

      • AppleSnax says:

        @Salvation, when Royals succeed in getting photos like that “disappeared”, it’s usually threats from the Firm. No legal basis for them, just threats about how they don’t want them published. If it’s not a particularly juicy story, they’ll just drop it to avoid making them angry.

  5. minx says:

    Can they “order” people not to take pictures?
    I liked her blazer better when she was seated, seeing the whole thing…looks sort of 90s. Don’t care for the hat either. She looks beautiful though.

    • Citresse says:

      This is the thing: when Diana pleaded for more privacy for herself and her sons on vacation (private time) it just made the photographers want to take more photos.
      Same thing when Diana gave her time and space speech…the paps went into a frenzy to get photos.
      The only thing that works is legal action.

      • minx says:

        Right, but what I mean is, do bodyguards or whomever have the authority or legal standing to order people not to take pictures? I can see a request. But if people still want to take pictures, what happens? I would hope they wouldn’t have their phones confiscated. If I were in the stands, you better believe I’d take pictures of Meghan.

  6. Becks1 says:

    I saw a picture of the guy taking the selfie, he was VERY close to her. It’s unlikely her RPO knew whether it was a picture of Meghan or a selfie. Even though it WAS a selfie (you could see it on his phone), that still seemed very invasive to me and not the same as someone covertly snapping a picture of Meghan from a few rows away. My guess is this Mrs Brooks was not being as subtle as she thought, or was acting in such a way to draw the attention of the RPOs. I doubt they were going up to every person who took her picture and telling them to stop.

    But, the bit about them being celebrities and “Control freaks” is just typical at this point. Kate and William’s RPOs tell people not to take pictures, even when they are in public spaces. There’s a reason why, even at events like horse trials, very few pictures end up being released.

    • Eyfalia says:

      No, it was not a selfie, that is a photoshopped photo. This is a non-story. Nobody was sitting in her row. She sat there with her two friends and nobody else.

      • Becks1 says:

        Wait, really? Ha that just makes it worse. I didn’t see anything about that being photoshopped. So if he was that close taking a picture of her, I can absolutely see why the RPO stepped in (but like I said, even if it WAS a selfie, he was still being invasive.)

      • Kebbie says:

        Is there a photo that proves he was taking a picture of her and not a selfie?

        He was right up in her face, so I can see why the RPOs thought he was photographing her, but his phone is in selfie mode in the photo.

      • Enn says:

        It’s clearly a selfie. Maybe that was the best vantage point? It was center Court. Also I don’t know if they just let randoms on the court so maybe he was a VIP?

      • Eyfalia says:

        All photos are from shutterstock but the one with the clearly visible selfie is from getty images. Furthermore the cellphone is suddenly larger than on the other photos and the getty image logo is conveniently over the wrist and watch on his left arm, where I think the photoshopped failed slightly.

        This is a non-story and a distraction from a much bigger story and we all know which one that is.

      • Enn says:

        The one with the selfie is showing (on DM) as being credited to BPI/Rex, along with other photos from the match credited to the same agency. I Googled and it looks like they are with Shutterstock, but also a reputable sports photography agency.

        This is a conspiracy theory, come on.

      • Hope says:

        @Enn. How is it clearly a selfie when you have to zoom way in to see the image on his phone?

        And the RPO would have no idea and it would be his job to check.

        And if this happened to Kate, I would keep this same energy for anyone criticizing her for being difficult. People are crazy and the royals have recieved death threats. What was that man thinking behaving like that?

        That man is a troll and it is dismaying that it is the same collection of names trying to insist this is nothing but an overreaction. I’m a fan of Meghan’s but it doesn’t mean I wouldn’t feel discomfort for Kate if it happened to her.

      • Enn says:

        Hope, when you zoom in you see the guy’s face. Also, as to what he was thinking, I’m guessing it was “I have sweet seats to watch Serena Williams, let me take a selfie.”

        It’s not that deep.

      • Hope says:

        Right, you have to zoom in. That’s my point. Otherwise, it’s reasonable to assume that he’s taking a picture of Meghan while getting uncomfortably close to her to do so.

        And Meghan has recieved death threats. One of the loony Megxiters who wanted to grab her to prove her pregnancy wasn’t real was in NY and posted about it. I’m afraid it is “that deep,” even if you don’t care.

      • Enn says:

        He was literally in the seats in front of her. Sorry if you think that’s too close.

      • Hope says:

        Not just me but people who handle security for a living.

        I look at a few different sources for discussions about the royals and it has been gratifying to see that people who are usually very critical of Meghan also think that man got too close and it made sense that the RPO had a chat with him.

        And how is there a controversy that Meghan kept people away from her and at the same time that this poor gentleman had no other place to stand and take his photo?

    • MissM says:

      Exactly, if that man hadn’t been taking a selfie he would have been very intrusive. It wasnt a case of someone standing 100ft away taking a photo, it was someone literally standing 3ft in front of Meghan with his camera seemingly in her face. I’m sure he told the RPO that he wasnt taking a pic of Meghan and all was well but of course some random woman who didn’t actually know what happened had to run to the press.

      • Eliza says:

        But that’s where his seat was. He was in the players box first row. He stood up, turned around for a selfie and was told to turn away the phone. It’s not like he wandered and went strait up to Meghan. His seat was there. The RPOs were being a bit too aggressive. It’s a public event. If they were worried about security the men would have been removed. It’s not like taking a picture was revealing a secret location, she was on tv.

    • Megan says:

      William and Kate have been called control freaks many times for not allowing themselves or their children to be photographed during private time.

      • Becks1 says:

        Have they been called “a list celebrities” who are “constantly looking around to see who is looking at them” when they do this?

        ETA and I mean recently. We all know the narrative around Will and Kate shifted dramatically a few years ago (gee, wonder why.) They’re not control freaks, they’re “protective.” etc.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      The thing with the guy in the article was that he was right in her face and was looking at her so from her and her RPO’s POV it looked like he was in her face taking a photo. TBH he did not have to be that close to take his shot and if you look at the long shot of where he and Meghan were sat there was no real need for him to stand where he did to get his selfie of the game play behind him. He could have stood on the steps right next to him.

      As for the ‘old biddy’ ex BBC sports journalist, she clearly is a Fail reader given the rant about her labour announcement and keeping the godparents secret. As for the empty seats around her, there were quite a few areas where there were empty seats and if people leave their seat they cannot renter if game play has started. There are other photo’s where the area around her has people in the seats.


      Also if you look at the other images from Kate’s visit you will see that she is pretty much surrounded by ball boys when she was in the smaller court.


      • himmiefan says:

        Okay, so it wasn’t quite as bad as it looked before. In other words, there actually were more people around Meghan instead of being isolated as a VIP.

    • Lexa says:

      FWIW The man was sitting in the section where he was standing, just below Meghan, which is why he was so close. He literally just stood up from his seat to take the selfie.

  7. MsIam says:

    Wait, the “old biddy’s” statement doesn’t make sense. If she was taking a picture of Serena on the court, why would she be looking at Meghan in the stands?

    • (TheOG)@Jan90067 says:

      Could be Meghan was a few rows down and to the side, and Serena was playing on that side? Conceivably, Meghan could’ve been “in the shot” that way…?

      • minx says:

        That’s what it sounds like to me.

      • She claimed that she was in the same row as Meghan but if you look at the photos, there was no one around them for several rows. I can’t imagine that an RPO is going to walk all the way over several rows away to tell someone not to take photos, especially if, as this woman claimed many people were taking photos. It makes no sense.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      The “old biddy” who is actually a former sports reporter and is a PR consultant… sigh.

  8. Digital Unicorn says:

    I think this is common practice with the security (not just royal security but with politicians I have heard of it when very famous celebrities in public places), esp when in public you will always get one moron who will always get in everyones way to get a selfie. I have seen this too many times. I have witnessed idiots try to get selfies of themselves with a play in progress in the background just because someone semi famous is in it and they want the social media attention.

    Like the whole influencer nonsense I would love the selfie obsession to die a quick death.

  9. anony83 says:

    Moving on from this incredibly petty “controversy” – Meghan looks SO GOOD right now. That little bit of remaining baby weight makes her look amazingly good – like she should just stay at this weight.

    Also I know it wasn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but I kind of love her Dick Tracy/mafia vibe that’s going on with the hat and the blazer. And I’m glad she wore jeans (which also reinforces the whole “I’m here as a private citizen” things) because no new mother should have to dress up just to go to a tennis match. They’ve got enough going on! (To be fair, I don’t really think anyone should have to dress up to watch tennis but I know it’s tradition and all that).

    • Coffeespotnyc says:

      I couldn’t resist lol.

      She has her hair done + makeup + heels, and you can suggest that she doesnt have time to dress as a new mom with a serious face?

      Sometimes i do wonder if you guys forget that she is a Royal and Isnt like regular folks who get up and walk out in jeans. A considerable amount of time AND money goes into making them appear ‘regular’. And they all have help. Shes not cleaning her home 3x a week lmao.

      She really, really doesnt need our defense. None of the Royala do. Theyll be fine either way.

  10. Surly Gale says:

    Wait, this is not one of those defensible moments. … she WASN’T interacting with the crowd, so that ‘excuse’ provided by the bodyguard obviously holds no ground. She was in public, and when in public she is a public figure. I’m supportive of every care being taken to protect their son from invasive, cruel commentary. But when she steps out, why can’t her picture be taken? If bodyguards (she?) didn’t make such a big deal of it, I don’t think anyone else would either. Never have I heard the Queen saying don’t take my picture when you’re six seats (or whatever) away from me. Is this a case of being royal whilst black, being oversensitive, or being a dick? I’m not sure, honestly, but as no one is perfect and as a huge Megan fan and defender, I’m kind of confused. On the one hand, sounds silly…don’t take my picture when I’m watching tennis in public and in a public, well-camera-ed place…….on the other hand….um, not sure what the other hand is, in truth. This does seem a little diva-ish…but then, can’t hardly blame her for being over-sensitive…but can for being over-reactive….not sure ……

    • Melissa says:

      I find this story hard to believe since it was strategically released a week after the match in order to maximize/incite more hate and outrage after the christening. This is just another hit piece on Meghan and payback from the media because she and Harry keep shutting them out.

      • Lady D says:

        Yup. Not to mention, the DM posters are so gd gullible all the paper has to do is put her name in the headlines. I mean, literally all they have to do is print her name and the bullies start salivating. It’s a Pavlov’s dogs type of situation.

      • Kebbie says:

        @Lady D The DM commenters are insane. Every single post about her gets thousands upon thousands of comments. How have these people not grown tired of bashing her yet?

      • himmiefan says:

        Yeah, the timing is suspicious.

      • Surly Gale says:

        @Melisssa ~ I hadn’t noticed the timing element…i see it now you’ve pointed it out. I thought this happened today (not a tennis fan), not a week ago. Harry and Megan are right to keep shutting out the rabid press, and keep private citizens who are their son’s godparents private. . As I’ve read more comments below, I’m beginning to understand there is no understanding where the DM is coming from; sensible folks are not conversing, small-minded, hateful folks are …they are a maddened crowd demanding she be sacrificed on their alter of selfish, hateful promotion. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction without being horrible about me not getting it right off the bat. Love Celebitches!

    • ADS says:

      As has been posted above, it is standard for Royals and high profile politicians protection officers to curtail the taking of pictures of their charges. Especially in their private time.

      Prince Charles said in his Vanity Fair interview last year that he gets irritated by people sticking their phones in his face and he draws the line at it. Princess Anne too has been very scathing about members of the public looking to take photos or selfies with her – even when she is ‘on duty’ as it were. And she outright tells them herself.

      It’s not just Meghan by any means

      • minx says:

        Selfies are one thing, pictures from a distance are another. “Royals” go into public spaces, they’re going to get photographed, and too bad if they don’t like it.

      • Evie says:

        A couple of things about Princess Anne: 1. Photos of her don’t sell newspapers or make money for the paps and 2. I strongly suspect that any pap who gets too close to Anne is going to be earning combat pay. That lady won’t wait for an RPO to politely tap intrusive people on the shoulders; she’d take them out herself, LOL!

    • MsIam says:

      @Surly Gale,, these protection officers all seem to be police officers too. They are not paid to be “nice”, they have a job to do. So if they feel someone is too close or being intrusive, they will tell them. They didn’t bash the people over the head or take anyone’s phone away. If someone gets in a snit because they can’t take a picture, then oh well, life is hard I guess.

  11. Betsy says:

    But she was a celebrity before she became a royal. She CHOSE a life of publicity and getting her picture taken. If there is any ounce of truth to her asking for her picture not to be taken (which I do believe there is) that is ridiculous.

    JayZ and Beyonce know when they go to a basketball game, half the people will be focused on them. The same is true for Megan. She chose her life. She chose to go.

    • MsIam says:

      And let me guess Betsy why you choose to believe this story is true?

      • Betsy says:

        Because this site and others will automatically just side with Megan. Honestly, she was a mediocre actress who dumped her adopted dogs when she moved to England. And for some reason, people think she walks on air? No. To me she is a pretty girl, chosen as a trophy wife. I’m actually soooo disappointed this is who he chose as his wife. Not a philantropist or scholar or doctor
        . An actress who wears nothing but designer $1,000 frocks and some defend her cause “Kate did too”.

        For heaven’s sake. She wore Dior to the christening. She doesn’t care about the people or what they think.

      • Hope says:

        @Betsy. I like that you’re honest about your contempt and don’t pretend that you’re trying to be helpful and actually like Meghan but…, like so many others do.
        You don’t respect Meghan and you don’t respect Harry for marrying her and you don’t respect the decisions they make and the boundaries they set and you assume the worst about them. It’s honest and I can respect that.

        I wish many other people could be like you because it’s more insulting to pretend that the person actually likes the Sussexes but …

    • kerwood says:

      @Betsy. Why does it bother you (and others) so much that Celebitchy is a ‘pro-Meghan’ site? I think the coverage of Meghan and Kate is pretty fair on Celebitchy but if a lot of people here like and support Meghan more than Kate, what’s wrong with that? I’ve noticed several comments lately that seem to think that there’s something wrong with Celebitchy because it has so many Meghan supporters. Is it because we support Meghan or is it something else?

      There are LOTS of pro-Kate sites. I’m personally attacked on one particular site (that has close ties to Celebitchy) if I so much as criticize what Kate is wearing. I’ve been told by other posters that I’m not welcome there and been called names with no intervention from the moderators.

      Is it such a crime for one place to like Meghan better?

      • Hope says:

        If it’s the site I’m thinking about, the moderators only intervene when the pro-Kate people are responded to in an insulting or condescending manner but turn a blind eye to how the Kate stans go after anyone who doesn’t treat her like she’s the second coming, or when the criticism goes from racist subtext to explicit text. Jokes on them because now their comment section is an echo chamber of white feminism and barely contained racism.

    • Guest says:

      Betsy – here’s where you tipped your hand: It’s NOT true that she left both of her dogs behind when she moved to the UK. She and her vet made the (difficult) decision to leave one in Toronto with a friend because the move (as is often true of animals) would have been too traumatic for that particular animal. She didn’t leave it in a shelter or on the street – she left it with someone familiar with the dog – somewhere where it would be safe, cared for and untraumatized. You CHOOSE to believe the tabloid lies (when there is a CLEAR agenda) and think the worst of this woman. Why?
      As far as being disappointed in Harry’s choice of wife (as if it was any of your stinking business who makes the man happy), be of good cheer – he did marry a philanthropist.

      • kerwood says:

        @Guest. Well said. Th downfall of most people who have an agenda is that they usually aren’t able to conceal it.

        As for that ‘Harry’s choice of wife’ line, you handled much more politely than I would have been able to. Harry chose a woman who earned her own bread and made her own way in the world. He’s a pretty lucky man and you can tell he KNOWS IT.

      • Becks1 says:

        What is this “choice of wife” nonsense? Betsy alludes to it (being so disappointed in his choice) and someone below uses similar phrasing.

      • Coffeespotnyc says:

        Ever Hollywood cele is a ‘philanthropist’.

        They all have charties they are associated with and work with to bring more recognition to the causes they care about.
        JA does it, Jennifer Lawrance does it AJ does it, Brad Pitt does it. Every single one of them do it. Meghans philanthropy work wasnt even close to many hollywood celebs. She wasnt well know. It helps the firm and Meghan stans to promote this image, i get that. But she really wasnt any different from any other celeb.

      • Betsy says:

        With all due respect. There was no diagnosis the dog couldnt travel. And she left it with an assistant. It got old, it would’ve required more care and she didn’t want to deal with it.

        She could’ve flown it private for Christ’s sake. You guys have no proof that this is the story, you just read it somewhere and agree with it. Ask any vet or dog person, that makes no sense.. . .

      • Olenna says:

        @Betsy, unless you got the information direct from the vet (who probably signed an NDA), you do not know what the diagnosis was. Meghan’s dogs were rescues, so they both could have emotional and/or physical issues that pre-dated their adoption. You don’t like Meghan, that’s OK. But, to profess you know more about her pets than even the RRs, tabloids and MS media is some serious reaching on your part to defend your animosity towards her.

    • Betsy, Meghan didn’t dump her adopted dogs. She moved her younger dog Guy with her. Her older dog, she left with friends, because he couldn’t travel.

  12. Maddie23 says:

    I think the bigger issue is her sitting with about 40 empty seats around her. That’s ridiculous for Wimbledon. If you don’t want people around you, stay home. But you can’t clear out an entire section because you think you are “important”.

    I’m so done with her

    • Britt says:

      The Wimbledon staff led her there and gave her those seats 😂. You actually believe this? I’m sorry but after all the public places she’s been and people have taken videos and photos and she’s allowed them but suddenly a journalist that claims to be sitting next to her, who isn’t in any of the pictures, says that they suddenly can’t?

      • Kittycat says:


        Dont bother. This person clearly wants to believe every negative story about Meghan.

      • Maddie says:

        She makes it rather easy to be negative about her. I used to love Harry but his choice of wife makes Kate and William look like saints. I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other member of the Royal Family show up at Wimbledon and clear out an entire section for themselves.

        Also I can’t believe that no one wanted to see Serena Williams play, even an easy match. She’s one of the top and most popular tennis players. I’d see her play against a 10 year old in an easy match if I was given the chance, let alone a game at Wimbledon.

      • Becks1 says:

        But there are people sitting around them. They didn’t clear out an entire section for her.

      • Megan says:

        @Maddie – Meghan has no control over what tickets are or are notissued by the All England Club. You are making up reasons to criticize her.

    • Lene malan says:

      @maddie23 – agreed!

    • Marigold says:

      I could be very wrong but I’ve read it was an under attended match because it was meant to be an easy win for SW. In other photos, you can see other regular spectators (not just RPO folks behind her) around.

      • Britt says:

        There was a picture of man who was close to Meghan and it looked like he was taking a picture and the RPO thought he was taking close pictures of her. It was nothing considering there were people taking pictures later and we see her meeting a little boy. This is Press trying to get revenge for the birth and christening.

    • kerwood says:

      @Maddie23 You think she walked in and told all the people sitting in those seats to clear off?

      • Lady D says:

        People paid a lot of money to sit in those seats. Can you imagine the outcry had she really displaced 60+ paying customers? Each patron would have their own story on the DM.

      • kerwood says:

        @Lady D. It’s a combination of malice and not really knowing what they’re talking about that trips these folks up. EVERY TIME.

    • Olenna says:

      @Maddie23 (and @Lene malan, who agrees with you),
      Well, peace out and all that jazz as I surmise from your declaration, “I’m so done with her”, that you won’t be coming back.

  13. Britt says:

    They’re still pissed about the birth and christening and now it’s just blatant harassment. These people are also desperate for access and are doing everything in their power to make it happen. The problem is that most people don’t care and after that christening mess, Harry and Meghan didn’t budge. This is new for them, hence the public tantrums. Piers really needs a restraining order or something because the man is unhinged. The desperation and anger is so palpable that I’m a little worried.

    • Moose says:

      @Britt, I agree that Piers is unhinged, sucking up to trump whilst harassing Meghan….? Good Morning Britain need to sack him…

  14. TheHeat says:

    The different British (and some American & Canadian) news outlets are either 100% pro Meghan, or 100% against. This is true of most royals/celebrities/etc.
    But, for now, the Duchess of Sussex is the pap’s shiny new toy. And, as long as people keep buying into it/commenting/clicking (the irony that I am posting here is not lost on me), the pap’s are not going to leave her alone. She is a great business transaction, pure and simple.
    I remember the huge hit that the tabloids took after Diana died, because Prince Harry & William blamed the press. I’m sure all of the press for Meghan is a huge stress on Harry.

    • Britt says:

      That’s why he’s so protective and I’m sure there are things going on behind the scenes that we don’t know about. She’s the meal ticket that’s not playing the game.

      • TheHeat says:

        @Britt – exactly.
        But she’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t. Since she’s not playing the game, the tabloids make things up (or call her father), either in her favour or against it. That’s what they do to all of them.

  15. Yoko_ohno says:

    It seems like some of the people who are most mad about Meghan’s ascent are other “lower level” celebrities (esp self-important british ones, like piers). I think maybe they can’t stand that she was in around their celebrity level, but is now “too good” for them. Add in all the racism and they are BIG MAD. Well, she was always too good for those racist assholes, now she just has the position to match. Stay mad Mrs. Brooks. Also, who??

    • MA says:

      @Yoko_Ohno I’ve noticed that too! A lot of the ones being snarky about her are reality stars or people who were lower on the “list” than her. Hardly people who have standing to be such snobs. Whereas people secure in their fame and standing like Gwyneth Paltrow, Patricia Arquette, Blake Lively, etc have been supportive.

    • kerwood says:

      Thank you. I’m sure that Meghan didn’t even notice that Jones was there. And it seems that Jones reached out to the Daily Mail so she’s got lots of free time on her hands.

      The British media must be feeling a little desperate. The christening went off without any drama, other than William’s sour face and Kate’s VERY unfortunate frock. Master Archie is light enough to pass, which must have disappointed A LOT OF PEOPLE.

      Prince Andrew’s buddy is in court and certain people must be feeling VERY pressed. So what can they throw at Meghan? This story is proof that they’ve GOT NOTHING.

      • AppleSnax says:

        “light enough to pass”, talk about outdated language. Yeesh.

      • kerwood says:

        Outdated language for outdated thinking.

      • Hermione says:

        @Kerwood. Yeah, you know the media, RRs and Meghan haters were disappointed when they saw Archie’s complexion.

      • kerwood says:

        @Hermione. Apparently the Daily Mail posted closeups of Archie. What for? All newborns look alike. But they were looking for something else and didn’t get what they were looking for. So now they’re digging up this self-proclaimed ‘old biddy’.

  16. Melissa says:

    How can people not see that this is a smear campaign orchestrated by the British press? They are super salty about the lack of access to the Sussexes, and now they are trying to destroy their reputation.

    Why is this story being reported a week after it supposedly happened? The journalist is trying to connect this with the christening drama.

    I’m tired of Meghan being the scapegoat of the royal family.

    • Britt says:

      100% agree. This is about about destroying them and pressuring them into access. An embarrassing tantrum is on display.

  17. MA says:

    Oh look, right on time…. Meghan bashing season 2.0 has begun. Time to blow up every single perceived slight or hair out of place as the Downfall of the Monarchy and No Royal Has EVER!! And in an oddly almost coordinated way with a seeming dogged determination to ignore the international scandal blowing up rn. Never mind that if Meghan had even a passing acquaintance with Epstein she’d be in the headlines every day for the rest of her life. Nah, let’s let an accused rapist and exploiter slide, along with an allegedly complicit BP. We have the brave royal reporters holding the real power to account over here. I smell Pulitzer!

    I wonder if any of her haters or detractors ever reflect honestly on the fact that she has never done ANYTHING right in the media’s eyes. Her actions, words, accent, body language, hair, body, skin tone, subconscious ticks, handwriting, pregnancy, singlehood, first marriage, divorce, second marriage, career, parenthood. At some point, surely those honest with themselves can at least acknowledge something very wrong with that? That it’s just not possible for anyone to be in the wrong for Every. Single. Thing. … at least outside of being a murderous dictator or warlord. How sobering…

    • Melissa says:

      Hateful people don’t care about facts. They are bullies, and Meghan is an easy, attractive target. Look at how people love to viciously attack powerful women (AOC, Michelle Obama, US women’s soccer team, etc.) Meghan is doing exactly what the other royal family members are doing, but she gets treated harshly and unfairly because those bigots can’t stand a biracial American having any kind of power.

  18. kerwood says:

    This story is less about the Duchess of Sussex and more about Sally Jones, who seems to have some issues with her.

    Bodyguards do this all the time. Do people really think that Meghan’s scanning the crowd and the second someone takes a picture, sends her bodyguard over. Meghan is living her life, having fun with her girls. The bodyguard is doing his JOB. If people don’t like it, take it up with the police.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      Exactly, this is between the Wimbledon officials (seating) and the bodyguards.

    • Skylark says:

      @kerwood – In a perfectly simple nutshell.

      The fact some (sour) people are so ready to believe the ‘Diva Meghan’ narrative is very telling.

  19. DS9 says:

    The shocked PR consultant?

    Thank you, next

    • Lowrider says:

      Lol…….someone is advertising that they are a PR Consultant. Hmmmmm, I wonder who could use a new PR consultant right about now?? I wonder…

  20. MA says:

    Can we at least keep the narrative straight? I’m confused… is Meghan a fame hungry, camera loving, attention seeking diva or is she a privacy guarding diva who is somehow also attention-seeking for demanding more privacy? All I know is that she’s somehow in the wrong again and has total control over royal protection protocol and RPO’s actions and is not facing an unprecedented wave of racial abuse and violent threats necessitating strict security measures.

    • Hope says:

      So this is the insane reasoning I keep reading:

      Meghan demands privacy in a thirsty, attention-seeking way -That is the actual criticism I keep reading. She’s private in an attention-seeking way. If she could only be private in a private way then she wouldn’t deserve so much criticism.

      She can’t win. That’s the way this whole thing has been set up.

      There is no room for sympathy for a WoC. She will be blamed for others abusing her by saying she didn’t ask them to stop in the correct way. She provoked people to hurt her. It’s heartbreaking.

      • MA says:

        Yeah, I saw that too…SHE’S the one creating the ruckus, as if the media are passive participants who can’t help but manufacture all this outrage and fan the hate that she’s somehow responsible for. The bar keeps moving for her, as it does for black women in our society. She’ll never win.

  21. Mylene - Montreal says:

    This is terrible all the news about her. I read the comment on the dailymail and people are very mean. The dailymail don’t help and talk about her all the time. Me, i think will and kate ARE the problem. They are not happy to share the spotlight. Before Meghan Kate have William AND Harry by her side. I don’t understand the hate. It’s out of control.

    • Lady D says:

      Once she gets off maternity leave, they won’t be sharing the spotlight. It’s going to be the Sussex show.

  22. mk says:

    check out the picture in the daily mail of the guy who got really close to Meghan and friends to take his pic. It looks rude, I wouldn’t want that behavior around me and I’m not even a celebrity.

    • Lexa says:

      He stood up from his seat to take the photo. He was sitting in the section below her. Nothing rude about it, but I can see why the RPO stepped in.

  23. perplexed says:

    If that lady is in her 60s and is a PR consultant, I can’t really picture her being interested in Meghan. I feel PR people would be more immune to seeing celebrities. I also think a spectator at Wimbledon would be more interested in Serena Williams than the royals. You’re going there to see athletes do their thing, not royalty, so I can see why the bodyguard was embarrassed.

    • kerwood says:

      She SAYS she’s a PR consultant. She can’t be a very good one if she doesn’t know what the duties of a RPO are.

  24. Mego says:

    This story, yet another negative Meghan story, is suspicious to me. How many days has it been now since she was at Wimbledon? Piers Morgan’s rant about it was completely unhinged – he kept going on about the royal box and she wasn’t sitting there.

    Also if this is true and it were me in the situation I would have simply replied sure no problem and moved on with my life.

  25. Sam says:

    They are making a big deal out of this?Absoultely ridiculous. There are pics of people taking pics of Meghan and the RPOs didnt say anything,why was she the only told not to?

    • Sam Louise says:

      She wasn’t the only one. There is a pic of a man taking a pic of Meghan with his phone and being told off my her security guard.

      • kerwood says:

        Any pics of MEGHAN telling somebody not to take her picture? Any pics of Meghan telling her bodyguard to tell people not to take her picture?

        I didn’t think so.

      • Sam says:

        The man was way too close and Meghan herself wasnt bothered by the man as seen in the pics,it was her RPO that was. Its the job of the RPOs to protect the royals they are assigned to.

  26. Myra says:

    She roll to the back of my head. Brits will not give her peace!

  27. TheOriginalMia says:

    All this manufactured outrage coming on the heels of the christening manufactured outrage seems a tad too coincidental to me. Most people going to a tennis match aren’t falling over themselves to take pics of celebs or royals. There’s protocol at these things. The Fail has accomplished what it set out to do. People on Wimbledon hashtag were up in arms about the uppity, paid for Duchess demanding private time. It’s all a bunch of bull when most folks could have snapped a picture of her without getting so close as to garner attention from her RPO.

  28. GM says:

    The RR are fueling the narrative that the Duchess said no to photos. Rather her RPO made the security decision to do so. There are many pics of Meghan taking photos that day. This story was not vetted and is simply just another hit piece. RPO are not Meghan’s staff. They work for the police. They make decisions based on a threat assessment. Why is Meghan responsible for their actions?

  29. Vanessa says:

    once again here another article to trashing Meghan for doing nothing but existing the baptism stories about the godparents didn’t make a enough of wave. So here’s a another story about how uppity Meghan is she won’t allowed her pictures taken by people at this point the daily mail Is just making things up and the people who have a problem with Meghan are believing this because it fits their narrative about Meghan .

  30. Myra says:

    Apparently the woman that said she was sitting next to Meghan isn’t in any of the photos. If she lied, the British are playing a dangerous game

    • TheOriginalMia says:

      Now she’s saying she was in the member’s section. But many are questioning why there are pictures of the man and the RPO, but not this woman. She’s being exposed for being a lying liar.

  31. Guest says:

    With Jeffrey Epstein back in the news I expect Andrews name to be drugged back up. The royal family and uk media are going to be working overtime. I really hope the British people arent that stupid to not see what the real story is. 🤷‍♀️

    • What??? says:

      Clearly she didn’t have several rows in front and behind her unavailable, considering there is a picture here showing people sitting directly behind her…. 🙄

  32. blunt talker says:

    Prince Andrew’s name is going to dropped on the news outlets with the Epstein story. I saw and heard his name on MSNBC yesterday. They can stop trying to smear Meghan because once the reporters in the USA start mentioning Andrew then all news outlets will mention him. This is called bait and switch. Trump does this all the time when trying to direct your attention from somewhere else. Piers Morgan better be careful one day he might found in a ditch somewhere stanking.

    • Lady D says:

      I’d rather see him suffer country-wide humiliation. Something that will keep him indoors for a few years.

  33. KEEKS says:

    It will all come out in the wash. All. Of. It.

  34. kerwood says:

    I finally checked out what Piers Morgan said and that man is reaching Markle-levels of hatefulness and insanity. He must have had a crush on Meghan because he sounds like a scorned lover. He’s probably also bitter because his career in America ended badly, so now he’s taking it out on Meghan.

    What a sick, sad man. I can’t believe that he’s gainfully employed.

    • Britt says:

      The man is demented and was clearly pissed because he expected another Diana like access. He tortured her until she reached out and then he stopped. He’s angry because that was another opprotunity to relive his Royal glory days and Meghan and even Harry dashed those dreams. The more he does this, the more he’s embarrassing himself because he can’t move on. The man is digusting.

      • Moose says:

        Piers is completely deranged, even his wife and mother have called him out over his obsession with Meghan, he really ought to be put into a white jacket in a padded room with no windows for a long long time…

  35. A says:

    The fact that this lady chose to add a completely unnecessary comment about how it’s “control freakery” is just beyond ghastly. Some people do go out into the world with a bone to pick, don’t they.

  36. Hope says:

    OMG. I just saw the picture of that guy with the camera and he’s a troll. How would he not know what that looks like.

    He did that on purpose. Unless he’s an absolute idiot, he was trolling to get a reaction and some attention.

    Anyone coming for Meghan over this would not bother if it were a different royal. (And it’s always the same collection of names). This is not at all a sign of her being difficult.

    Someone should start a blog where they photoshop in other royals or wap out the names and ask people who think Meghan deserves the criticism if they now want to criticize the other royal.

  37. deb says:

    Asking people around her not to take photos is totally fine. Keeping ~40 seats free is not. If the Duchess of Cambridge can sit among the peasants so too can the Duchess of Sussex.

    • Nic919 says:

      If you look at the photo noted Kate is not sitting with the peasants but is with two tennis UK reps and the ballboys. She’s nowhere near regular people. RPOs apply the same rules to all the royals even if some people wish it were otherwise.

      • deb says:

        Professional tennis players are regular people. The point is that ~40 seats were left cleared for the DOS but the DOC permitted people around her. Presumably both were in the members box. Members are regular people usually without a security detail and assistants.

      • Eyfalia says:

        The Royal Box is only on the Center Court. Serenas Match was on Court No. 1, so Meghan was also sitting there.

  38. RoyalBlue says:

    Another day another fabrication. Ignore them Meghan. Enjoy your time bonding with archie and then come out with guns blazing and hit the ground like you said. That is what scares them. Exposing the laziness and undeserved entitlement of the royal family.

  39. Well-Wisher says:

    How is this news? At best it is antidotial. It does not answer the five questions but seeks to define the Duchess of Sussex. More pressing is the fact that it reinforces the Fail’s biases towards the duchess but an editor defined it as such.
    Further details include the whinge about the godparents of Master Archie, a point of contention, should he be allowed to have the necessary privacy to grow and mature to have a self defined autonomy or should he be subjected to the rules of brand economy and become a commodified celebrity instead of being a part of the royal family?
    Even Beyonce whose fame as catapulted her to celebrity status beyond her singer/performer career has used the opportunity to set boundaries. She has a well defined customer base that can sustain her from media attacks.
    The Duke and Duchess have a civic responsibility not an economic imperative for media types.
    They should stand their ground.
    Fair minded people will always support the reasonable need for their privacy. As a matter of fact one of the recent polls were in their favour 82% / 18 % for them to have a private baptism.
    Interesting to note that Morgan has moved from behaving as a bitter,rejected suitor who harassed the Sussexes verbally and in written form to outright xenophobia as he demanded that “Meghan go back to America ” if she does not allow them to sell her.
    Interesting indeed!

  40. Coffeespotnyc says:

    The empty seats around her are for security reasons. Likely planned ahead, maybe. But maybe she couldve sat in the back like Kate?
    That way, the guards only have to worry about whats in front of her and maybe the rest of the seats couldve gone to folks in line.

    Also, arent all the Meghan haters bots online? Theres a handful of people behind them, so this widespread hate is a myth.
    Daily Fail (which gets quoted extensively so everyone here is a consumer of it) just found a new toy to bash. Before it was Kate.

  41. Dark and Stormy says:

    Meghan is good for clicks and distraction if nothing else. It’s interesting to see just how fast everyone drops sorted stories about royal family members (Andrew for example) opting instead to keep Meghan front and center on tedious drama. She’s almost like a beard for the whole family.

  42. liriel says:

    Actually I have a theory as to why she doesn’t want to get papped. She loved it before but she still hasn’t lost the baby weight and in the crazy celebs world when you get papped from all angles, camera adds pounds she didn’t want to deal with it.
    For me it’s reasonable, isn’t it? (it’s no hate by any means but there is a reason us common folks know we’d get pictures our wedding and other occasion and trying to lose weight..)

    • Olenna says:

      Are there reliable sources that say Meghan states she doesn’t like to be photographed? From all appearances at this event, it’s apparent her RPO was doing his security job by checking that guy. Doesn’t matter if he was taking a selfie; the RPO determined he was too close. Her weight is a non-issue, IMO. If she was that concerned about it as you seem to think, she would avoid being seen in public.

      • liriel says:

        No, you’re right. I feel like strangers taking pictures of you on their phone very close to you would be worse than paparazzi with at least better cameras. Don’t we all have that strange bad-quality selfie/group pic? Frankly, maybe it was a win win, for her to have some privacy and at least a bit relief from having phone in front of your face.

  43. Mignionette says:

    I cannot wait for Trump, Epstein, Prince Andrew et al to all get taken down becuase Meghan will be shown to have been on the right side of history for criticizing Trump as a private citizen and never having met him.

    The RF will never recover from the humiliation of what Andrew is about to bring on them and I am glad for it. I now begin to wonder if this is why Andrew has kept Fergie close all these years and continually bailed him out. Essentially outside the RF Fergie is a weakened sitting duck who could essentially bring them all down by her association to Andrew so as a compromise they have kept her close.

  44. Pamela Cartier says:

    I’m a 53 year old American. And the last 3 girlfriends of my sons that I met for the first time “I’m a hugger.” I was very put off. Americans are definitely more touchy feely.