Duchess Meghan has the text messages to prove her dad is a pathological liar

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex visit Chichester

Yesterday, I got stuck on the Byline Investigates Twitter thread about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. BI has been on Team Sussex from the start, because they all have a common enemy: the British tabloids. The tabloids have not changed their ways since the Leveson Inquiry and the larger British tabloid hacking scandal circa 2011. Anyway, BI has been dropping exclusives at a steady pace ahead of the “strike out” hearing between Meghan and the Mail on Sunday regarding her handwritten letter to her father, and the larger reporting (for more than a year) around Meghan’s relationship with Thomas Markle. This hearing is where a judge will examine both sides of the case and see if it should proceed to trial.

As we all know, Toxic Tom gets paid a lot to sell out his daughter and spew all kinds of bullsh-t, most of it from a script. That’s how it always seemed to me, that there was a script written by the British tabloids and Toxic Tom was merely performing for money. Guess what? That’s how it seemed to Meghan and Harry as well. BI did a lengthy thread which is basically Meghan’s side of things, and she provided the court with the text message chains to prove her side. The BI thread is a good primer, but they simply had access to all of the material filed by Meghan’s lawyers. Harper’s Bazaar got their hands on it too, and here’s a good summary:

The 33-page document obtained by BAZAAR.com points out a number of mistruths published by the paper and details numerous moments that the duchess repeatedly tried to make contact with her dad, Thomas Markle, in the days leading up to her May 2018 wedding to Prince Harry. The messages include the Sussexes’ begging Thomas to reach out to them after he was admitted to the hospital with chest pains and unable fly to the United Kingdom and walk Meghan down the aisle.

“I’ve been reaching out to you all weekend but you’re not taking any of our calls or replying to any texts…,” Meghan wrote in one text. “Very concerned about your health and safety and have taken every measure to protect you but not sure what more we can do if you don’t respond…Do you need help? Can we send the security team down again? I’m very sorry to hear you’re in the hospital but need you to please get in touch with us… What hospital are you at?”

Thomas had previously refused any assistance offered by Kensington Palace aides and the couple, despite being repeatedly targeted at his Mexico home by the tabloids. Records show that about 10 minutes later, Meghan added, “Harry and I made a decision earlier today and are dispatching the same security guys you turned away this weekend to be a presence on the ground to make sure you’re safe… they will be there at your disposal as soon as you need them. Please please call as soon as you can.. all of this is incredibly concerning but your health is most important.”

The document goes on to state that Harry then sent a further message with details of the security guard, but Thomas declined. “While Mr Markle responded later that evening to say that he appreciated the offer but did not feel in danger and would instead recover at a motel, the Claimant [Meghan] responded 10 minutes later to make a further request for the hospital details so that she would know where he was.

In the days leading up to their Windsor ceremony, court documents show that Harry also repeatedly tried to make contact with Thomas, who had just been revealed by the Mail on Sunday to have colluded with a paparazzi photographer to stage photos of himself preparing for the wedding. “Tom, Harry again! Really need to speak to u,” he wrote in one text. “U do not need to apologize, we understand the circumstances but ‘going public’ will only make the situation worse. If u love Meg and want to make it right please call me as there are two other options which don’t involve u having to speak to the media, who incidentally created this whole situation. So please call me so I can explain. Meg and I are not angry, we just need to speak to u. Thanks.”

He added, “Oh any speaking to the press WILL backfire, trust me Tom. Only we can help u, as we have been trying from day 1.” Thomas didn’t reply to any of the messages and instead went to TMZ to share the news of his hospitalization. The court filing goes on to detail that Meghan’s last contact with Thomas was a missed call at 4:57 on the morning of her May 19, 2018, wedding and she has not had a missed call or text from him since.

[From Harper’s Bazaar]

This is all fascinating. It shows that Meghan and Harry were attempting to be in full communication with Thomas for months, only to see him fake a heart attack, refuse to speak to them in the days before his wedding, and lie to everyone repeatedly. Like a f–king psycho. Meghan apparently never bought that her father was actually sitting around, giving nine-hour interviews to outlets either – she believed that journalists (like Piers Morgan, etc) were writing scripts for Toxic Tom to say and then they were just falsifying the rest.

There’s only one minor-ish problem to Meghan’s case, and here’s how Bazaar covers it: “She also adds that she had no idea that five of her close friends had chosen to speak with People magazine in a February 2019 article defending her from press attacks. The Mail on Sunday had previously claimed that Meghan had given the revelations to People her blessing (and therefore, Thomas had “legitimate right to reply”), but Meghan says she was unaware and “distressed” when the information was made public.” Yeah, no. Meghan *did* authorize that People story. She had every right to, and her friends would not have spoken in such depth to People Magazine without her permission. And it’s fine. Meghan shouldn’t be attacked for going to a friendly American outlet and trying to get her side of the situation out, especially when that People cover story got the ball rolling on all of *waves hands around* this. She shouldn’t be punished for successfully pwning a group of liars, grifters and racists.

meghan people

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

213 Responses to “Duchess Meghan has the text messages to prove her dad is a pathological liar”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Ali says:

    The British tabloids are truly disgusting.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      indeed they are. question: why wouldn’t the royal family distance themselves from the tabloids? answer: because they have a symbiotic relationship!

      • amadea says:

        …or maybe they know that cou can’t win the game against the tabloids. You can only accept them, like the wather- not point fighting it. :-/

      • amadea says:

        Okay – had not read the M&H decicsion not to work with the British Press anymore. Good move!

      • Wrong-Ye says:

        British Tabloids in a mob
        What’s a mob to a king?
        What’s a king to a god?
        What’s a god to a British Tabloid?
        Who don’t believe in anything?

      • Mei says:

        Yes @Wrong-Ye, love it.

    • VS says:

      Truly disgusting

      I am a Meghan supporter but I can now say I love the woman. If I were a lesbian, I will be fighting Harry for her affection (not that I would have a chance)

      The grace and strength she has shown reminds me of Michelle Obama, Serena W and Beyonce. Strong women, they are

      • fluffybunny says:

        Usually Angelina is the only woman I would go lesbian for but you’ve made me add Meghan to my list.

    • Wrong-Ye says:

      It wasn’t until recently that I realized that in the UK, tabloid doesn’t mean Bat Boy Found In Cave! Or Hillary’s Gay Double Life! like it does in America. It means every day The Brits get swamped with 10 versions of Fox News/Brietbart printed on paper. Even the Grauniad is most aligned politically with The Atlantic in its style of occasionally sneaky alt-conservativeness. No wonder they think woke is a joke over there.

  2. Digital Unicorn says:

    I can’t wait for the hearing and I hope it goes to trial – I still don’t believe he had a heart attack or even went near a hospital and I think thats one of the things the tabloids have over him. The Fail has the receipts that he faked it and they are using that leverage to continue to make him perform for them. Don’t get me wrong he’s an awful excuse for a parent and a man but he also allowed himself to be played by the media for money and attention. You reap what you sow Thomas – you will never see your grandson or daughter again. I hope the 30 pieces of silver the Fail and others tabloid outlets gave you was worth it.

    I’ve read parts of the filing and she has a bigger heart than I – if that was my father who behaved like that, it would have been game over from the get go. What he did regardless of how vulnerable he is was cruel.

    • Belli says:

      The suspect nature of the heart attack is mentioned in the response!

      “…suggesting in [the Defendant's] reporting that his ‘heart attack’ was also fake (apparently contrary to the Defendant’s position in this litigation)…”

      So Meghan’s lawyers are basically saying “your newspaper stories were suggesting the heart attack was fake at the time it happened, but now you’re using the heart attack as part of your legal defence”.

      They seem to be going very much down the route of the case being against ANL and very much not against Thomas Markle, to the point of defending him. I can see the thinking behind that, seeing as he’s the one who sold the letter but that wasn’t actually illegal. It was the Mail who did the illegal part when they published it.

      Problem is, the Mail have tried to muddy the waters between the two in using him as a witness (perhaps trying to suggest to the public that Meghan is suing her dad), so I can see why she and her lawyers would emphasise the separation between her father and ANL here.

      • I agree Beli. I also think it is very smart legally to keep this about the papers and not about her father. I also, respectfully, disagree with you Kaiser. I’m going to take Meghan at her word that she did not authorize or encourage her five friends to talk to PEOPLE. Until someone reveals an email or a recorded phone call or a high ranking PEOPLE rep publishes some sort of prof to the contrary, I believe Meghan. Whether any of us believe her or not is just opinion as none of us has any proof. I think, however, Meghan is too smart, and her legal team too astute, to think she could lie about this (or any) issue related to her case at this juncture in her court case. Byline also has a great website where they publish ALL the court documents in full: bylineinvestigations.com.

      • Bregit says:

        The tabs, as most ppl with working brain cells , knew he faked the heartattack. DM published it already: a minute by minute release of his whereabouts in the days he claimed to have been in hosipital the first time. The had a reporter following him. Search for the story on the DM timeline.

      • Jamie says:

        I agree with you, JA. The Sussexes filed a court document stating that Meghan didn’t know. If that’s untrue, there would be real legal consequences to filing a false statement. The linked story is just a writer’s “belief” about the source of the People story. It’s not a fact.
        We now know that Meghan didn’t authorize her friends to speak to People. Period.

      • songbirds_thrive says:

        Right. I was surprised to see it revealed by Meghan that she was unaware of her friends going to People. I think it was popularly believed that she’d given her approval on the down-low.

        Apparently, her friends were so upset about the mistreatment of pregnanat Meghan, they decided on their own to speak out. But notice how they all decided to remain anonymous. On reflection, that may be because they didn’t ask her permission to speak out on her behalf.

      • Tessa says:

        The story of the alleged heart attack kept changing. It was at first an emergency then an angioplasty then a minor procedure. He was photographed soon after eating fast food (junk food).

    • Tessa says:

      It’s gross that Tom Markle is treated as a victim. He of his own volition went to the media to complain about Meghan. And he admitted he got some money for his appearances. Yet she’s to blame!!! Ridiculous.

    • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

      …and I bet that he’ll do many more interviews during and after the trial, and perhaps fake another heart attack. Probably when M&H announce their second pregnancy: he’s a narcissist, after all. Everything has to be about him.

  3. Aurora says:

    I feel like the Mail is trolling with its defense. For example, they claim Meghan wanted the letter published because she didn’t tell her dad NOT to publish it and her handwriting was really neat.

    I can’t believe a legitimate lawyer came up with that defense. I get the sense they know Meghan’s case is strong but want the spectacle of a trial for revenue. Any punitive damages need to be super high to discourage the press from behaving this way in the future.

    • Suze says:

      And that she had no misspelled words meant of course it was for publication!

      Then again, every Meghan hater that has responded to me on Twitter has had typos in their replies, poor grammar, or both. So maybe that’s just the level that the Mail is used to.

      • Marie says:

        I know! Apparently when we write letters to our parents we misspell a bunch of words and it must be messy. What a lame defense.

      • BUBS says:

        That’s just a stupid defense. By nature, I’m somewhat of a perfectionist. I try really hard not to misspell words. I know how often I edit my comments on here…it’s just me. I don’t like using abbreviations when I type even…it’s just me. Everyone is different. So saying Meghan knew her letter was going to be published and so avoided spelling words wrongly is just bullshit! I’m rooting for Meg so hard…these people have dragged her through the mud and she didn’t deserve any of it.

      • Amelie says:

        This is just her handwriting. I actually thought the letter could have been better written, to be honest.

        I would expect that most people would write without mistakes (unless perhaps you’re writing in a second language).

      • L4frimaire says:

        The handwriting thing is ridiculous. I remember having a falling out with my dad several years ago and wrote him a long letter with all my frustrations with him. He was acting really unstable, and not wanting to deal with it, as well as alienating all his children. Anyway, I started so many drafts and rewrote and corrected it before I sent it out. Just saying that when you write these long letters, you don’t just dash it off and drop it in the mail. It probably took a few drafts and several days to put in that letter what she wanted to say to her dad.

      • Prayer Warrior says:

        When writing a letter in long-hand, I still do a draft, then the ‘good copy’. My son does, too. If I’m thinking and writing at the same time, my handwriting is very messy. If I’m thinking and typing, my language can get very flowery. So I must edit myself, or I’m likely to not say what I mean, or else potentially spout nonsense. So yeah, a first draft, then a good copy is our norm…on the other hand, as a former, professional calligrapher, she might probably could be able to pull it off~

    • Ruby_Woo says:

      They are truly scraping the bottom of the barrel. If this is their first line of defence, then they are truly screwed.

    • Lara says:

      Isn’t she well known for her penmanship? She actually made money from it before she started acting? Such a stupid thing to go after.

      • Natalee says:

        Yes she used to work at Paper Source as a side job and did calligraphy for invitations and such. It was her literal job to have nice handwriting! (And an actual job)

      • Guest with Cat says:

        That’s exactly what her legal team is arguing.

    • Nina says:

      Thomas said that he had proof against Meghan.
      I didn’t realize he was talking about texts messages that incriminated him

    • Lara says:

      @Aurora
      Sometimes, you can give really really good legal counsel and tell your client exactly what they need to do in order to stop digging themselves into an even deeper hole, stress the importance of adhering to certain procedures, illustrate all the ways things can go badly if they continue their behavior… and the client will go against your advice anyway. It is INCREDIBLY frustrating. In some cases, I have seen stark internal disagreements within a company between the legal and PR departments on how to handle things, then whoever at the top might have their own ideas about how things should go. It gets messy very quickly.

      Lawyers have to work with what they have. I do not envy the firm and team who are tasked with representing the DM. At the end of the day, the client makes the decisions on what arguments and strategies they want to employ to aid (or self sabotage) their case. This is not to mention situations where you are just given a terrible set of facts and no redeeming evidence to support any kind of argument, at which point all you can really do is hold the client’s hand as you lead them to their doom (literally a characterization that one of the partners at the firm used to describe his job).

      • A Guest says:

        I know a law professor who tells his students that no matter how many times you prep your witnesses, there is always “going to be one gets on the stand and accidentally tells the truth”.

  4. Belli says:

    So many tabloid stories are coming undone. So Meghan had been in contact with her father, had offered him security, Harry had spoken to him, she had been calling him before the wedding… That whole narrative has gone *poof* into thin air.

    Of course, more people read it and now believe it than will read about the court case, which explains why the tabloids do what they do. A lie can make it around the world before the truth gets its boots on.

  5. Hirut says:

    But you actually don’t know that she did, and so far no evidence to prove she did and I assume they are going to drag the five friends in court to testify anyway so what would be the point of lying about it in court?

    • ABritGuest says:

      I can’t imagine how stressful the whole situation was before the wedding. And Harry was right- it will backfire on Markle Snr- they are about to throw him under the bus& he’s so conscious of how the public views him all of this will sting that much more. Fact he casually revealed he wouldn’t have done 9 hour chat for free..

      The Fail’s defence is a mess but I saw some legal experts saying a while ago that it was laughably imaginative. Part of their defence is that as she’s a wealthy individual who is part of the royal family she couldn’t have expectation of privacy under the Human Rights Act…what a joke. But wonder if they want this tested so they can break a certain story involving another royal where human rights was invoked…

      • Royalwatcher says:

        ABritGuest – oooohhhh your last point is intriguing! I have a feeling William’s dirty laundry may be coming out soon with the BM needing something new and scandalous! I’m also so curious to see if this case brings out anything about the connection of KP and/or other royals and their collusion with the media against the Sussexes.

      • Nic919 says:

        The EU law about human rights won’t hold much weight once the UK is out of the EU. It will considered to be law from a foreign jurisdiction once the UK is officially out. Besides the UK already has laws about human rights so they don’t need to use any from an outside jurisdiction.

      • Amy Too says:

        The same human rights privacy law that William is allowed to use to cover up any reporting on his affair is apparently not allowed to be used by Meghan because she’s wealthy and a member of the BRF. I found that part especially hilarious.

      • ABritGuest —— The papers can spin it anyway they want to their knuckle-dragging readers. However, the standards are a bit higher in a court of law and their lawyers know it.

    • Bella says:

      I agree, Hirut. We cannot assume that she knew anything about the People interview in advance and I can well believe that she was distressed about it because it would be more grist for the tabloid mill. It would be madness for her to lie about having authorised her friends to talk to People because there might be evidence that proved that she had. Lying would be fatal to her case in the court of public opinion which is almost as important. And it’s not central to her legal case – even if TM felt that he wanted to set the record straight, Meghan’s letter still could not be used because it was private and she owned the copyright and it was still misuse of private data.

      • Melissa says:

        It is interesting because at the time we had several articles and hundreds of comments here congratulating her on having friends reach out to People and how she ‘played’ everyone into showing exactly what a shit her Dad is.

        Her Dad is a shit and the media deserves every bit of this lawsuit — but apparently the tea reading was pretty off on this one.

      • Here, Here….Bella. Well said.

      • Beth says:

        The disclosure will shed more light on what each side will present as evidence in court. As per omids tweet yesterday disclosure hasn’t happened yet. If mail has evidence Meghan authorised her friends we would know in the mails disclosure documents as to what they have to support that theory.

      • Ed says:

        Not at all Beth

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Hirut – I really want to know if she did or did not give her friends permission to talk. I agree with Kaiser that if she did give permission for her friends to talk that she had every right to do so. However, I do want to know the complete truth.

      I hope Meghan & Harry win enough damage$ from the Mail on Sunday to pay for their security for the next 100 years.

      • Melissa says:

        @ Bay — I mentioned above. At the time we were all convinced and congratulatory at the way she orchestrated the People cover and outed her Dad as a liar (which he is). Yea, I know we are all gossiping, but so much of our speculation becomes ‘fact’ on later threads that I’d really like to know as well.

      • Not all of us were convinced Melissa that Meghan orchestrated that PEOPLE article. I believed her then and I believe her still, that this was her friends deciding amongst themselves to do it. Not only would Meghan have to be a liar, but all 5 of her friends would be liars as well. When some commentators and articles started claiming that Meghan masterminded this, several of those 5 friends, like Serena Williams, publicly stated that Meghan had no knowledge they were doing this for her as they were so upset no one in Britain was defending her.

      • Person3514 says:

        I think she gave permission. I don’t think 5 of her friends would go into detail like that without her permission. It was a boss move, but it might backfire because if the papers can prove she allowed it then they can say she did it knowing her father would turn in that letter to be published and they can then make the argument that she intended for it to be published. That’s why she has to say she didn’t give permission. She set her dad and the paper up. Don’t blame her though, I’d have pulled worse in her situation.

    • Jamie says:

      Exactly.

  6. Aurora says:

    I can actually buy that Meghan’s friends got together and took matters into their hands with People. Meghan and Harry seem to inspire the protectiveness of their friends. Also I’m sure Meghan’s attorneys would have advised her that records could be subpoenaed to prove or disprove her involvement with the people interview.

    • Sofia says:

      I think that if Meghan didn’t ask like she says (and I doubt she’ll lie in official court documents) then I think she probably at the very minimum got a “heads up”. Sort of like “Hey Megs. Me and 4 other people defended you in People and it’s being published tomorrow. We know we should have asked but we hate seeing you like this so we had to act.”

      Or she could have found out like the rest of us but I think her friends probably did give a bit of a heads up instead of outright asking her permission then going to People

      • Becks1 says:

        I can see it being like you said or even a step further; maybe she didn’t “authorize” it but her friends said “soooo…..we’re not asking for you to give us the okay, we’re just letting you know we’re going to talk to someone at People…..blink twice if you don’t want us to do that…..”

      • Marie says:

        I agree. I don’t think Meghan ever asked. I think her friends just gave her a heads up about it afterwards.

      • Erinn says:

        I think you guys have a pretty good idea here. Honestly? If I had one of my friends getting attacked the way Meghan has been, I’d probably do just that. “I’m giving you a heads up, but not giving you details. If this goes south you knew nothing this was all me” kind of move.

      • Sofia says:

        @Erinn sort of like a “plausible deniability” situation I guess

      • Becks1 says:

        @Sofia plausible deniability is exactly what I was thinking of, the phrase just left my head for a minute lol.

    • Eyfalia says:

      Is this not besides the point? Even if she allowed her friends to talk about the letter and if they had told every newspaper on this planet about the letter, that does not give the Mail on Sunday the right to publish it. They are just trying to sidetrack the whole case. Gaslighting.

      • STRIPE says:

        Generally speaking I don’t think any of us would care. But as Kaiser mentions the problem is she stated in legal documents that she didn’t know, and that’s most likely not true.

      • Royalwatcher says:

        Right, Stripe. Do you really think she’d lie in court documents or under oath? I don’t.

      • Nic919 says:

        I agree it’s besides the point. The papers need explicit permission from Meghan to publish the letter and they never got it. They can’t win on this issue.

      • Mary says:

        it is relevant because the publication of the letter could fall under a privacy exception of newsworthiness, because Meghan, allegedly, condoned her friends discussing the letter. I.e., Meghan can’t keep something private if she herself piqued the public’s interest in it, making it newsworthy. She could lose her case on that issue

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “Gaslighting” and Waterboarding

        @Eyfalia – The best lawyers always buy the gas company and waterworks when they play Monopoly!

      • panda says:

        @Mary, I agree that this is the monkey-wrench. It would have been better for her case if her friends never mentioned the letter. Instead, they put its existence out to the public and only a select and favorable part of it.

      • ABritGuest says:

        Though I’d share a legal analysis I saw a while ago on the Fail’s defence. Also apparently part of the problem with the Fail’s newsworthy/public interest defence or wanting to let Thomas get his side across is that they allegedly edited Meghan’s letter

        https://inforrm.org/2020/01/23/the-mail-on-sundays-markle-defence-a-study-in-poverty-part-2-paul-wragg/. Link to part 1 is included.

        The bigger damages would be on the data protection claims and that’s probably what the Fail are applying to have struck out.

      • Olenna says:

        @ABritGuest,
        Thanks for the link. This quote seems to get to the heart of the matter regarding the “friends”: “The idea that one can waive the right to privacy, as they [ANL] suggest, by knowing of a friend’s involvement in a story – or even encouragement or direction – is a stretch. Such actions are not sufficiently unequivocal to constitute the required standard. Indeed, as a matter of principle, the waiver claim cannot succeed simply by demonstrating the fact of selective disclosure for that is the basis of privacy.”
        @Mary,
        Here also is a quote regarding your comment about newsworthiness: “An ‘official’ statement that a Royal is pregnant, for example, does not generate any right to more information about, say, the circumstances of conception or, later on, the specifics of delivery (How dilated was she? What position was she in? Were stitches required?), no matter how ‘naturally interested’ the public might be.”

      • Lara says:

        @ABritGuest
        Would like to echo thanks for the link you provided. Made for a good read. I especially enjoyed:

        “Barristers speak euphemistically when they say ‘unusual’, ‘novel’, and ‘interesting’. This is all three.

        “I realise that ANL had to submit SOMETHING in its defence. It could hardly file one that said ‘we’re sorry, who do we write the cheque out to?’ But unless it can persuade Alec Guinness to reprise his role (‘There is no claim here. These aren’t the Droids you’re looking for. ANL can go about its business’), the prospects are bleak.”

        Seems like ANL is doing the best they can with the very shitty set of facts they were given.

      • Nic919 says:

        There is no privacy exception regarding the publication of the letter. Meghan never gave her explicit permission and even if her friends made a vague reference to a letter in a different article, it is not explicit consent. They are going to lose. Any reference to Meghan’s friends talking to People is simply a distraction that will be laughed out of court.

      • Thanks for the link, ABritGuest —- that was an excellent brief!

    • STRIPE says:

      I disagree, because this isn’t being asked about a friend by another friend and standing up for them. It’s making comments to a nation wide magazine. They would have told her “hey I’m being asked for comment, do you want me to respond or not?”

      • Sofia says:

        Stripe, I doubt she would lie in legal documents. And it says she didn’t give permission. That’s different from not knowing about it. To me it says it wasn’t Meghan’s idea nor was she the “architect” of it but she could have (and most likely) did get a heads up about it.

      • ABritGuest says:

        The document was pretty empathetic to say she didn’t know, authorise or procure her friends’ interview. Would think her lawyers would might gone with another angle if there was proof otherwise, knowing that the Sussexes seem quite determined not to back down& this could be tested at trial- but we’ll see.

    • MrsBump says:

      i agree with Kaiser. One friend talking to people without her knowledge, i can believe, two at a stretch but FIVE beggars belief.

      No matter how incensed they were at the negative coverage, how much they were desperate to defend her, not checking with Meghan first before revealing hitherto private information about her communications with her father is an enormous breach of confidentiality.

      I think Meghan’s lawyers are going with this story to completely block the daily mail’s ridiculous defense that because the letter was mentioned, that it gave them the right to publish it.

      If anything, Meghan is banking on the fact that those 5 friends will deny that they had told her about it.

      • HMC says:

        The entire article wasn’t just about bad dad and the letter. She easily could have said she was fine with her friends saying she was a good friend, a considerate spiritual person while the BM was calling her a diva and a social climber, destructive to relationships etc and during the interview bad dad came up. I can see Meghan venting to her closest friends “I wrote him a letter begging him not to talk to the media, he was breaking my heart with this and what does her do? He goes and tells the media I haven’t contacted him at all! I only have one dad! WTF!” Then People asks them if she’s had contact with bad dad because he’s spewing his vileness all over Good Morning Britain and her friends defended her.

      • panda says:

        But she wouldn’t put her friends in the position of having to lie under oath, would she?

      • Thirtynine says:

        I don’t believe Meghan would lie, especially in this situation. If she says she didn’t authorise her friends to speak, I believe her. I guess we’ll find out.

      • MrsBump says:

        if FIVE of Meghan’s closest friends breached her confidentiality and spoke to a national paper without her knowledge and inadvertently got her father to publish a personal letter that she wrote at her height of her distress, then she needs a completely new set of friends because that leak was worse than any from Kensington. It is simply unimaginable that any friend let alone friends would do something this huge without even concerting her.

        I think Meghan’s lawyers have advised her to deny knowledge of the interview and for good reason.

      • Sofia says:

        @MrsBump: Like I’ve said above there’s a difference between authorising something and knowing about it. It could be Meghan was told of the gameplan by somebody and they said “This is the plan. If you don’t want us to proceed let us know”. And Meghan said nothing.

        Like I said: authorising and masterminding it and just simply knowing it are two different things – and I think that’s what Meghan’s lawyers will emphasise should the Mail give a defence like what you’re thinking

      • Beth says:

        This is lame….look at it from this angle, do you know Her lawyers can argue that Meghan could’ve sold her side of the story to the press, but she didn’t. All because she values her privacy unlike the mail who made a circus and commercialised her private life for monetary gains. She could’ve done that to clear her name against all the bad stories the Mail printed that she had ignored her dad. This goes in her favour in terms of privacy.

      • BabsORIG says:

        @mrsBump, you are arguing apples and oranges. Friends breaching confidentiality has absolutely nothing to do with the case. Meghan is not upset with her friends and therefore claiming she needs to change them because they breached confidentiality is just silly. What is being argued is the MOS published her letter without her consent, confidentiality has absolutely nothing to do with it. And I believe Meghan when she says she never authorized anyone to speak to People on her behalf.

      • MrsBump says:

        How on earth is it apples to oranges?
        Either she knew about the interview or she didnt. Im responding to the other commenters assertions that meghan would never lie under oath which frankly none of us know anything about. You hope and presume she wouldn’t based on your opinion of her character that it is all.
        Whether she masterminded it or simply had knowledge of it is irrelevant to my comment.

      • Ed says:

        You are wrong prove it

    • RoyalBlue says:

      hoping that’s the case and that it was orchestrated by Amal Clooney. she knows her legal shit and would have kept it clean

  7. Royalwatcher says:

    I saw that the paper’s defense is that Meghan’s handwriting is too fancy and there were no typos or mistakes so this was her way of giving permission and knowing it would be published. I couldn’t stop laughing! If that’s the best they’ve got, they are in deep poop and they know it.

    And for everyone in yesterday’s article’s comments crying about “why now?! Don’t be so inappropriate, Meghan!” This is why!! The courtcase hearing is for Friday and they are getting all their ducks in a row.

    • Bella says:

      + 1.

      Risible. That’s how I would describe their “defence”.

    • panda says:

      It could be a problem for her if she didn’t normally write letters to her father using calligraphy.

      • So, Panda, do you really think calligraphy versus non-calligraphy is a legal defense? God forbid, it’s not block printing versus cursive or scented stationary versus ruled tablet paper.

      • Mtec says:

        @Panda
        But he wasn’t responding to calls or texts, and perhaps they were afraid Tom was gonna record the calls to later sell them. So writing a letter to him to an estranged father, wether an usual thing she did or not, was probably her last resort. And maybe she writes all her letters, to anyone, very neatly and with calligraphy, so that would show a pattern in her favour as well.

      • Sofia says:

        @Mtec: she does in fact write like that. Matt Haig shared a postcard Meghan gave him after she featured his poem in Vogue. Same handwriting and calligraphy.

      • HMC says:

        Apparently she does. Bad Dad Thomas Markle sold her Christmas cards to the Daily Mail. I hate to link it, shudder, but here it is. Just go to the pictures, #5, dated 2015.
        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6475167/Meghans-father-Thomas-Markle-reveals-sweet-cards-proof-did-wedding.html

      • Beth says:

        Have you seen Previous letters Meghan has written to fans. They’re all in the same format. Wish I could attach one here for you to take a glance.

      • ennie says:

        Here is a copy of a letter to a fan, hope it goes through.

        https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjWCKYMUUAAg_2g.jpg

        My father actually wrote like that, and he did only study old time middle school. None of his children inherited or worked on our penmanship. It was great to see him write either letters or numbers, and his signature was just beautiful, and he was a simple working man. I laugh at the press justifications.

  8. Aang says:

    Why did he fake the heart attack? That seems so bizarre. I wasn’t following this story as it happened.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      The story is he faked it as a way out of attending the wedding as he was embarrassed about the pap shots.

      • Bren says:

        He never intended to attend the wedding from the start. Not attending meant he could continue to profit off of Meghan with the help of the tabloids.

      • panda says:

        Hopefully this will be easy to prove in court. The lack of heart attack, I mean.

      • Lady D says:

        He wasn’t going to attend until he was made the center of attention. He wanted limo’s, suits, an entourage, fancy palace rooms, the right to make a speech at the wedding (why?) He expected to be treated equal to the Queen and when he realized they weren’t going to allow that to happen, he threw his pacifier out of the crib. He wanted to be seen as more important than Harry to everyone and his ego took over when he realized he would now be second best to the daughter he (like Piers) had fixated on.
        I’m impressed daily with Meghan’s smarts. She’s brilliant.

      • Yoyo says:

        @Lady D, he told Harry he wanted to make a speech, Harry said speak to Meghan, who flat out told him no.
        He was livid saying they had time to allow Elton John to sing three songs.
        He wanted to bring the whole Markle clan, and was making demands for them to get their flights and lodgings paid for. It got a hell to the no, they didn’t even send him a formal invite, they knew he would sell it.
        Thomas thought he could hijack the wedding with his demands and he was so important that they would give in to his threats, keeping then on tenterhooks, coming or not coming.
        They missed him so much, that he was not mentioned at the wedding or reception, scammy and toxic Tom were so livid when they found out.

    • Natalee says:

      He’s a psycho. There is no why.

    • Jamie says:

      Attention.
      The narcissist always needs to be the center of attention, the one around whom everything revolves.

    • Emmitt says:

      In my opinion he was colluding with the British Royal Family via the tabloids as a proxy to stop the Harry/Meghan wedding. If he’s sick in Mexico, then she would postpone the wedding and rush to his side in Mexico. Harry’s family would then work on him to cancel it altogether. The tabloids would shame her into not coming back by branding her the runaway bride.

      The purpose was to stop the wedding.

  9. Talie says:

    The one glaring thing that stood out is that they did send people to protect him which was the main criticism by a lot of royal commentators. That Buckingham Palace didn’t send anyone to look after him. He just refused their help. Also, not telling what hospital he was in?! Makes sense why they believed he was faking.

    • Emmitt says:

      If you look back at the articles at the time, Toxic Tom said in interviews:

      He refused Harry & Meghan’s security team (Doria had accepted)

      Meghan had called him but he didn’t answer her calls or texts

      Harry called him but he hung up on Harry

      The Sussexes’ legal filings are only confirming what Toxic Tom himself said to the tabloids in the Spring of 2018.

  10. aquarius64 says:

    Two problems: Meghan claims Daddy was manipulated by the media but she would have to prove he was blackmailed or not of sound mind for that to stick. The Fail will have to prove Meghan told her friends to go to People and that is with emails and texts and a friend confessing under oath.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I firmly believe the tabloids have evidence he faked the heart attack – if this goes to court it will come out then. Am not sure I buy that she didn’t know her friends gave an anon interview to the US tabloids mentioning the letter – it was the opening she needed to start this action against them.

      • aquarius64 says:

        Even it that is true Markle is done because he lied and took money. The Fail better have threatened his life for Toxic Tom to get sympathy now.

    • Belli says:

      The case isn’t against her father, it’s against the Mail’s publishing group He was able to legally sell the physical letter, but it couldn’t legally be published without her consent. So I don’t think she necessarily needs to prove he was blackmailed.

    • Amy Too says:

      I think it’s obvious he was manipulated by the media. He’s still an awful person and a narcissist, but the media used those exact flaws to manipulate him. A narcissist is very very much worried about how they look and come off to the world. So when the tabloids were camped outside his house immediately as soon as the engagement was reported, taking pictures of him looking schlubby and gross and posting articles about what a degenerate, poor, gross man he was, and then they approached him to start working with them to change that narrative, they were purposely manipulating him into staging new pap pics and starting to give interviews about how he’s actually a really great person and this is all someone else’s fault (like Meghan, or Harry, or the media, or the BRF, or Doria, or literally anyone else). Then they’d report incorrectly on what he said, or maybe they’d report correctly on his quotes but twist them and editorialize them to make him come off horribly and would then approach him to “set the record straight,” and try again. And because he’s a narcissist, he has huge belief in his powers of persuasion and his power to control every situation to his advantage, so he would give more interviews, which would be twisted again, and the process repeats itself.

      And he would also have a very hard time telling the difference between people trying to help him and people trying to hurt him. So any time that Meghan or Harry would say something like “please don’t work with the media, they’re twisting everything, it’s going to backfire,” he would read that as “you’re not smart enough to handle this situation on your own, we don’t believe that you’re intelligent enough to take care of yourself. Plus, some of the stuff you say is wrong and inappropriate,” and he would become incensed. Especially if he has the media texting him and calling him 24/7 to placate him and agree with whatever twisted way his mind was moving. I can imagine him being very mad at one reporter for twisting his words, so they’d send a new reporter who would tell him “oh yeah that other reporter is an asshole. But I just want to help you. And also, you don’t want to be Harry and Meghan’s little whipping boy, right? If you go quiet now and start working with the palace it’s going to look like you’re ashamed of yourself and frankly weak and stupid and need a rich playboy aristo like Harry to protect you. You could make so much money just setting the record straight, being yourself, and instead they want you to accept hand outs from them and then they’ll talk about how you’re weak and sad and they’ve finally gotten control of you…” And the cycle continues.

      • And don’t forget, he had Sammykins to encourage him in his narcissistic belief that he was in charge. And, perhaps this was the scenario in the beginning Amy Too, but the last year of interviews and that video interview show he is totally in to bashing Meghan and is not being manipulated but is 100% colluding with the tabloids.

  11. Mellie says:

    Just imagine if your own father was this unethical and it was played out in the media…how embarrassing and sad. How in the world did this girl turn out to be so charitable and giving? Her mother must be an absolute Saint.

    • Chaine says:

      One of my parents was an alcoholic and a cheater and some of their antics played out in front of a few neighbors in our small town. I was mortified then, and still am now, decades later, that people outside of the family know about the behavior. I can’t even begin to imagine what it was like for Meghan to have her father do this in front of the entire world. I remember how thin and tired she looked on her wedding day and it makes me so sad for her all over again.

      • Lady D says:

        Interesting, Chaine. Both my parents were alcoholics and my dad cheated constantly. He had affairs with the police sgt’s wife, the ex-mayor’s wife, his best friends wives…It never occurred to me that I should be mortified that others knew of his indiscretions. He was the louse, not me.

      • Thirtynine says:

        Chaine, it certainly puts a new perspective on Charles walking with her on the wedding day, with all this going on over and over behind the scenes, as well as in the media, right up till the ceremony. She and Harry must have felt so grateful and supported at that moment.

      • Chaine says:

        @Lady D I guess every kid deals with their parents’ faults differently. For me, it was very difficult to have other children making fun of my family to my face on the school bus, not being able to bring friends home because there might be some kind of drunken rage going on, etc.

      • Lady D says:

        I was going home every single day of high school to be tortured by my stepmother in new, inventive, and for her, exciting ways. If I was made fun of at school, I barely remembered it. My whole universe, literally every minute of my childhood was focused on staying alive while being hurt, burnt and injured. I’m really sorry you had to be bullied like that, Chaine. It just made your days a living hell, a seemingly endless toxic stew of fear, anger, shame and confusion. Nothing fucks you up like your parents. I wish I could ban booze forever, it would help thousands if not millions of children to have a better life.

  12. S808 says:

    I doubt Meghan would lie in court so I believe her when she said she didn’t know what her friends had done. I wouldn’t wish a Thomas on anybody. Man, what a horrible father. Those texts were really hard to read. I’m glad Meghan hasn’t been in contact with him since the wedding. It’ll be interesting if MOS throws Thomas under the bus but my guess is no. He’s a loose end that knows too much.

    • Ruby_Woo says:

      Of course they will throw him under the bus!

      • Beth says:

        The ANL’s defence is all sophistry. child’s play at best. I highly doubt they’ll will throw him under the bus. He’s their sole witness. Without him they’ve nothing to rely on. I learnt someone from ANL’ team is coaching him 24/7. But has anyone thought of how interesting this will be if Thomas Markle does a 360 and end up defending Meghan in court and disappointing ANL . The world would be a beautiful place that day.

      • Lara says:

        @Beth
        Coaching Thomas Markle- good lord. I cannot imagine what kind of disaster those sessions are.

      • Ruby_Woo says:

        @Beth: what’s ANL? Apparently Daily Mail has a ‘minder’ in Mexico to ‘chaperone’ him. It would be interesting if he changes his tune. He is very unreliable.

      • Beth says:

        @Ruby ANL -Associated Newspapers Limited.They own MoS and daily mail. He definitely is unreliable. Theres that degree of probability that TM might disappoint them or mess up.

        @Lara: yep, that rumour of him being coached was circulating on twitter. TM is not clever/intelligent enough for such high profile/level court case. Remember ANL /MoS is going against Schillings/5RB Chambers not some corner office law firm. Schillings and 5RB have an impeccable history in libel and defamation cases. If they’re presenting TM as their witness then he will need more than 24/7 cross examining coaching. Even ANL’ lawyers couldn’t put together a good defence, how much more TM, schillings will suck the life out of him in the witness box.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      If this goes to court and if it looks like they will lose the case and have to pay out millions then yeah, they will throw him under the bus. As I said above am convinced they have receipts that he faked the heart attack.

      • Lady D says:

        So? I don’t understand the big deal with the press telling everyone he faked his heart attack? It doesn’t mean Meghan is going to lose her case right? How does one affect the other?

      • Sofia says:

        @Lady D: I think Digital Unicorn was referring to the DM

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        @Lady D – It doesn’t and I was talking about the tabloids. If they think they will have to fork out a sh!t load of money and be made to admit they lied they will do more than produce the receipts about his alleged heart attack – Toxic Tom has a lot of skeletons in his closet that they will throw out to get at Meghan, they’ve been using him (and the rest of the family on both sides) to hurt her and will continue to do so for as long as they can.

        I remember the stories in the press about how it was alleged that when Thomas was married to Doria he used to go on sex holidays to the Philippines or Thailand (this came from Tom Jr who said Daddy used to brag about it to him saying that he’d be shocked as what the women would to/for him for very little money). Then there is his alleged drug use when he still worked, his financial problems, why his first wife hates him and why he has no relationship with his first 2 children and grandchildren. The 1st wife has said that she has stories to tell about him and how he treated her and their children.

      • Lady D says:

        Thanks, I misunderstood. More ammo for the press to think they can hurt her with.

    • Spikey says:

      Emotionally I can get my head around how a group of friends is banding together to protect one of their own. Circle the wagons. If MEghan’s claim is true, that ist. I’m not saying it was wise or respectful not to talk to her first, but I can absolutely understand how this was a situation where they’d rather as for forgiveness than for permission. I couldn’t claim with sincerity that I wouldn’t run to People and get my friend’s side out, too. It must be very difficult to stand by and do nothing while your friend is being hammered every day.

      • Thirtynine says:

        I can see this too, Spikey. Especially if they thought she might try to stop them if they asked, but were so infuriated and protective they took matters into their own hands.

  13. Becks1 says:

    The actual quote that I saw from BI on twitter seemed to be more about the actual letter than the People story itself – it seems a fine line but I think she knew her friends were going to People, but didn’t know they would mention the letter.

    But even if she did know they were going to mention the letter – isn’t part of the issue that the MoS didn’t publish the entire letter? They purposely edited it to support their narrative. I don’t see how that changes even if she knew her friends were going to mention it.

    Anyway this whole thing is so ugly, it makes you realize how far the tabloids will go to fake a story, and I cant believe Piers Morgan still is able to go on reputable programs and talk about this.

    • Nic919 says:

      That’s what I read too. That Meghan didn’t know her friends would talk about the letter. I still think it’s irrelevant because it doesn’t give anyone permission to publish it. The papers don’t have a defence on this one.

  14. Ruby_Woo says:

    Apparently, Daily Mail has installed a ‘minder’ in Mexico to keep an eye on Tom. I don’t know how this will all play out but Meghan is not stupid. She would not have taken this so far unless there is very good chance of wining.

    The fact their go-to defence line is ‘she has nice hand-writing and well, she didn’t tell her dad NOT to sell it to us’ and the fact that Thomas was clearly lying means their defence is very poor (unless they have something hidden up their sleeves).

    I don’t know what they expected. Did they think they could get away with it on someone so high profile?

    Also, did the father think it was worth it? The money and attention to bash his daughter? I don’t think he skipped the wedding just because he was embarrassed about the pap photos. I think he made a calculated decision that pretending to be the hurt party could make a lot of money, and Meghan would forgive him sometime later because she’s his daughter.

    • Bren says:

      I don’t think the defense has anything hidden up its sleeve other than hoping the royal family would’ve convinced Meghan (and Harry) to drop the lawsuit by now. If the text messages are any indication the fallout from the lawsuit should be good. Let’s see what and who it will expose.

      • Thirtynine says:

        I agree. I think they’ve kept up the pressure and hinted at explosive revelations that will damage the family in order to get Meghan to feel intimidated enough to back down. I don’t think they have anything else either. I don’t think they’ll win, but they will make it as humiliating an experience as possible.

    • S808 says:

      The fact that he felt comfortable doing something so horrible tells me this isn’t the first time he’s hurt her like this or manipulated her to get whatever he wanted (probably money) out of her.

      • Guest with Cat says:

        Definitely, we kind of know that from the video sold by her ex best friend Neka Priddy (not sure I got the name spelled right) The video shows Meghan being rather resigned to not being able to stop by her dad’s house because they were on the outs again. Even this backstabbing viper of an ex friend said that Tom was a piece of work and Meghan was always covering for and protecting him, but from what, nobody knew.

        Also notice how very detailed and precise Meghan’s texts are compared to Harry’s. And how reserved and formal the tone is. That would not be how I would talk to my dad. I also wouldn’t go into precise details we already both know about that essentially rehash what we’ve already done and discussed.

        I mean there would be jokes and more gushy expressions of affection and some insulting pet names and a “Answer your damned phone you old fart, im worried sick!”

        Harry is less formal and less reserved and does oddly enough sound like family. Meghan could be talking to her accountant.

        This is NOT a slam on Meghan. She knows what a piece of excrement her father is and you can tell she smells a rat. So she is putting in writing all the details so he can’t screw her over later and claim she didn’t offer help or express concern or try to reach him. Also she is being very formal while expressing her concern so Tom can’t put a spin on it, as he has done with the excerpts from her letter,, even when the spin doesn’t fit at all. If he were my dad, for example, he could have twisted my example text to claim I am brusque and rude and bossy and disrespectful. My actual dad, on the other hand, would know I was worried sick and desperate to hear from him and missed him terribly.

        This poor woman knew there was a chance he was going to go full blown narcissist on her and that she would need the receipts. I don’t think at that point before her wedding she was necessarily suspecting he was going to join with the tabloids and that she would need receipts for the purpose she is using them now.

        I think she was just used to him revising history as narcissists always do and would claim nobody is doing anything for him. I know a narcissist who conveniently forgets everything her worn out family has done for her and retells her personal history as that of her striving alone against all odds while her family leaves her to rot. This is classic narcissism and something Meghan has probably always dealt with.

        She’s been painted by Samantha and Tom as the princess Tom slaved away to raise in style above all his other children. In reality, the picture emerges of a very young woman who not only took care of her grandmother but also sent money to her ungrateful traitorous father.

        So she’s always loaded for bear when it comes to her dad. She always dots the i and crosses the t. It may even explain why she got into calligraphy, as the precision and neatness of it counters the chaos of growing up with someone who constantly revises history to weaponize it.

        Even Tom’s first wife and Samantha’s children have only good things to say about Meghan and harsh words for Tom and Samantha about their lack of character. If that isn’t a good character reference from family for Meghan, I don’t know what is. They have nothing to gain or lose by speaking out this truth for Meghan.

        Meghan is that ridiculously good child we all want and that her horrible father doesn’t deserve.

      • Amy Too says:

        Guest with a cat, yes! Great points. I take this same kind of tact when communicating with my borderline mother. Writing very formally, no jokes or anything that could be taken as an insult if she decides to randomly read an angry or sarcastic tone into any and all communications, sticking to the facts, repeating them often, writing things out completely in full sentences so that it’s all very clear and explicit, leaving out any hint of my own emotions, acknowledging her emotions in the most polite way possible, making sure that every text I send could not be taken out of context as a jab at her and could also be used by me again in the future as a reminder of what was actually said/agreed to. So Meghan’s texts to her dad seemed almost normal to me, but I realize that I’m looking at them through my own lens.

        I actually originally found Harry’s texts to be verging on inappropriate because they contain lots of emotion, pleas to Markle’s better nature “if you love meg…,” shorthand, and short and to the point instructions for what needs to happen now “I need you to call me now,” but I am so used to translating everything in my head into “narcissist speak,” or “how could this possibly be misinterpreted to be read as demanding, angry, overly emotional, too familiar, etc,” that I see those interpretations more readily than the actual, normal, everyday family members speaking to each other interpretation that is intended. Harry isn’t being “brusque” or “demanding,” he’s relating information quickly and in short hand because it’s a text message. He’s not being disrespectful, he’s speaking informally and he’s leaving out all the “cushioning language” and caveats that I and Meghan have learned to put into our texts, because he’s talking to a family member as a family member.

    • Ruby_Woo says:

      @Bren: I think initially the press thought that they could make Harry leave her; a scandalous divorce sells even more copies than a royal wedding.

      Then when the law suits came, they probably thought they could bully them down and use the RF to persuade them to drop the suits.

      Now, the only thing they may have up their sleeve is throwing the RF under the bus. If the RF had anything, literally the tiniest bit in this whole mess, I bet the papers would use it as a last resort. There was a Times article about a year ago which claimed that William wanted to ‘exile’ them to Africa. The article (written by Tim Shipman, who’s a pretty serious journalist) it claimed that William actively encourage the press to focus on Meghan’s dad. It’s odd how that is never mentioned by the RRs.

      I cannot wait either.

      @S808: I know. Meghan must be incredibly strong to deal with a father like that.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      @ Bren

      Never, ever, ever underestimate the malice and underhandedness of the Daily Mail. I suspect they’ve got a few silencer bullets up their sleeves that they hope to shoot at Meghan at the last minute (before any damage limitation can be done).

      They are absolutely determined to destroy her character definitively and I suspect they know they don’t have to win the the case to do it. All they need is to get into close hand to hand combat with her, (eg via a lawsuit), to do irreparable damage. I hope she understands the nature of the beast she’s dealing with.

      She’s very much the underdog in this fight, despite being on the right side of the law and propriety on this……and despite being a duchess and married into the royal family, she will enjoy none of the advantages that status would normally benefit her. As we are seeing, they are already weaponising those facts against her.

      Expect much more from the Daily Mail, it’s personal for them and they WILL fight very dirty.

      Not trying to say she can’t win (I desperately hope she annihilates them!), but she has to understand the nature of the beast she’s dealing with.

      • Bella says:

        Hi again, Bella du pont!

        Agreed. It is a huge risk for her, despite being completely in the right.

        But if Meghan wins comprehensively, which she really should, it might act as a deterrent to other tabloids, and be a stick which can always be used to beat the Mail with, like Hillsborough is a permanent stain on the Sun.

      • Bella DuPont says:

        @ Bella

        Her winning comprehensively…..that would be the hope wouldn’t it? (🎉🎉🎉😁😁😁🎈🎈💪💪🖕🖕🖕🍾🍾🥂🥂 in advance!)

        Having said that, the DM knows their case (as presented so far) is weak. So why press ahead? To me, this suggests they’re using the case as an asymmetrical pathway to achieving something else. Something that will take them further along their long term goal of completely destroying the Sussexes…..

        In the meantime, I so wish there was something we could do to help them. Let’s just continue to pray that the universe/karma delivers some real justice for once. It’ll be amazing.

      • Lady D says:

        Karma delivered when Weinstein was sentenced.

      • Bella says:

        @Bella du pont
        Again, agreed. But I think that the MoS were not expecting legal action in this case so their game at the moment is no more than their usual modus operandi – drag out the case with requests for extensions in an attempt to exhaust the plaintiff, then offer to settle at the last minute, sometimes on the morning of the trial date.
        Afterwards, who knows. I do fear for H&M. It’s frightening to think about the forces ranged against Meghan in particular. To the end of her days, she will be a “marked woman” and they will never stop looking for revenge for having got the better of them. I have some hope that, like in Star Wars movies, just when the forces of evil look most powerful, victory for the good is around the corner. Maybe false hope, but I’m clinging to it.
        And whatever happens, it is always right to stand up to bullies.

  15. Deanne says:

    Having to deal with this toxic crap before her wedding must have been a complete nightmare.

    • Bella says:

      I know!
      I had no idea about any of this at the time, but on the day, I thought she looked very tense walking up the aisle. Then as soon as H said “You look amazing, I’m so lucky,” she seemed to relax and they were both back in their love bubble.

      • Sara says:

        I thought that at the wedding she seemed…..perhaps just really aware of all the cameras on her, feeling like she needed to have the right expression of calm serenity at all times. It’s understandable to an extent, but it was disappointing if she felt like she needed to perform to an extent, when Harry was so obviously excited, nervous, wanting to make eye contact, etc.

      • ennie says:

        We cannot imagine what she/they was dealing with privately. She had to appear calm and collected.

  16. Amy says:

    This is so sad, and I feel really bad they made her private conversations public. I totally get why its in court filings but I think it is gross People and various magazines are reporting the text messages. I mean I would hate to have my text messages public.

    Reading the texts made me sad for her.

  17. BUBS says:

    As sad as this situation is, many of us have fathers who would do this to us…the only difference is that we’re not that famous. My own father told lies about my brother at his place of work. Being a military personnel, my brother was drilled extensively due to the nature of the lies told. Thankfully, he was vindicated…but not before he was transferred to a different base where he sadly met his death. My dad did not attend the funeral! I can relate to Meg a whole lot because I know what it feels like to be sold out by those who should protect you. I don’t speak to my father today. He has also told lies about me. I just pray for his soul. My mum died 18 years ago. I know it would have broken her heart if she were alive to see what our father put us through. But we survived. It was sad that our brother died, but we know he’s watching over us. I can only imagine how Mama Doria feels. I really hope Meghan wins!

    • Bella DuPont says:

      @ BUBS

      Wow. Can’t believe you guys had to go through that. I’m delighted you’ve decided to cut him off, hopefully permanently.

      I pray you have an amazing time the rest of your life, to make up for such a turd of a father.

  18. Yoyo says:

    The Tabloids stole a married Princess Anne’s love letters to Tim Lawrence, but didn’t publish them, they knew they would be sued, because she owns the copyright.
    So why publish Meghan’s? they were so cocky with all the help they were getting from all the Palaces.
    I know I should not laugh, but Thomas saying he would not do a 9 hour interview for free.
    Meghan knew her father was getting used by the tabloids, in her letter, she said he was being led down a rabbit hole.
    I wouldn’t want Thomas to be a witness for me, a first year lawyer could get him to crack.

    • Sofia says:

      And the media got hold of Charles’ letters in 2006 or something which they then published. Charles then sued and he won.

    • As always, Yo-yo, when it comes to trashing Meghan, the tabloids operate as if they have been given permission from the Firm to trash her. I truly believe they were given permission to do exactly what they’ve done, because — as you point out re Anne’s love letters —- it’s different rules when it comes to other royals. I think Meghan is incredibly brave to stay the course on this lawsuit. The pressure and the punishment from the senior royals (the Queen, Charles, and William) has been unrelenting towards both she and Harry. I always go back to that line in Harry’s Sentabale speech about their Sussexit in January, when he said….”If you knew what I know…..!

      • Bren says:

        Yep, agreed. The British tabloids lost their collective minds because they were given permission from the firm to attack Meghan which explains why there was no defense of Meghan by the royal family during her pregnancy. It still blows my mind to this day that after the daily attacks during her pregnancy, the tabloids and royal rota still got a major attitude about Meghan & Harry not agreeing to do the photocall two hours after giving birth.

    • kellebelle says:

      She also said he was being puppeteered in this, so she knew. Of course she knew. I’m sure she also knows all about her father’s love of easy money, too.

  19. Lisa says:

    Thomas is truly horrible.

  20. CidyKitty(CidySmiley) says:

    This is just so heartbreaking for her. I had a toxic relationship with my father on and off for years, he passed away in October and it was a battle, because you dont ever want something sour to last forever and it’s hard because you love them. You love them and you just want them to be there for you.

    All I can think is how painful this must be for her, I could not imagine having to basically strip bare for the world to see for my own freedom – because that is what this comes down to, she is fighting for her freedom, her right to exist as a black woman and live her life without the vultures.

  21. KellyRyan says:

    I’d love to see those contracts between media and Terrible Tom.

  22. Aurora says:

    I like Meghan’s teams’s approach. She isn’t going to openly trash her dad but the truth about him will certainly be revealed when the Mail throws him under the bus. No one will be able to talk about how horrible Meghan treated her dad because she’s actually defending him.

  23. JaneDoesWerk says:

    They make Meghan sound like some diabolical master manipulator. If that were my friend being thrown under the bus I would do exactly what Meghan’s friends did. No one would have to ask me to do it, it would simply be done because that’s the kind of friend that I am. I’m cringing so hard over those texts. So obvious that Thomas was lying and its awkward AF.

  24. starryfish29 says:

    I still get shocked by how much insane hate and harassment this woman has had to deal with just for trying to live her life. Between her insanely awful family, the media barrage, and all of the people revelling in the vitriol, it’s kind of a miracle that she seems not to have turned into a majorly bitter and emotionally traumatized person. It’s literally coming at her from everywhere, and I would stay in bed sobbing every single day if I had to deal with anything that was even remotely this overwhelming. The way that she manages to leave the house & put on a brave face is academy award level stuff, I could never.

    • Bella says:

      100%.

      As Archbishop Justin Welby said the other day, she is a remarkable woman.

      • Agree StarryFish29 and Bella —- Meghan is amazing! Her mama raised a strong woman. It takes so much courage to stand against abuse or evil. The arguments are always: your voice doesn’t matter, what difference can one person make, or it won’t change anything. So, just let them shit on your life or burn crosses in your yard or lynch you or shove you into ovens. Just be quiet and don’t stand up. Well, F**k them! You go girl!

    • Bella DuPont says:

      I’ve said this from the start: I hope she and Harry are in indefinitely ongoing counseling and therapy to deal with all the bullshit the right wing is throwing at them. Also, I hope Meghan specifically understands that this is a way, isn’t about HER, it’s about what she represents. So she really shouldn’t take it personally at all. (Very hard to do, I know).

      So many black and poc’s are targeted with almost as much ferocity as soon as they reach a certain level of (aspirational) fame. The Obama’s, Lewis Hamilton et al, were all shredded globally on a minute by minute basis, just for daring to not be white in traditionally white only spaces.

      Things eventually settle down, and so they will for her as well. In the meantime, she just needs to maintain her dignity by engaging as little as possible with the hate and *smiling* as much as possible. That million $$$ smile is a weapon, baby, use it mercilessly!

      • S808 says:

        YES! I’ve said this from the start too. Couple’s therapy and individual therapy. They haven’t even gotten to their 2nd wedding anniversary yet and have dealt with so much, Meghan especially. There’s A LOT to unpack.

    • L4frimaire says:

      All good points in this thread. What seems to get lost in all this is that this is not a fight the Sussexes started or ever wanted. This is still very raw for them.The press came out hard, hostile, and aggressive against them from the beginning. They were trying to defend and protect themselves from the press, and a Harry was, and I think still, taking the lead on this. Another thing rarely mentioned is they were getting constant criticism of trying to upstage and outshine the other Royals, be too Hollywood. So to respond to that, they tried to withdraw a bit. I think back to the furor around where she was going to give birth. There was all this “how dare she, she’s not Diana or Kate” fuss about the Lindo wing, that she would make it all about her, so they decide to make it private and not do that, which of course made the press even angrier. I think first and foremost they should focus on the lawsuits and then establishing their endeavors. Any beef they have with the greater press culture, they can add their voice to the collective, but not be the lead crusader in it. They don’t need to.

  25. Bella says:

    It sounds as if TM had a minder from the MoS with him the whole time, hence not replying to texts and calls, fobbing them off, not telling them where he was supposedly hospitalised, refusing the protection of the security detail despite being besieged by paparazzi and reporters, the suspicious-sounding text…

  26. SkaraBrae says:

    A friend of mine used to work for a tabloid years and years ago.

    Setup is massively cynical- they have a HUGE libel budget and they gamble on the rentability of stories.
    They know this case is going to attract massive publicity and give them a platform.
    In the midst of the corona mess public opinion is likely to be less sympathetic to H&M, more details will be revealed which they can them write about more etc
    So all benefit to them!

    I suspect they might not have published the Princess Anne letters because people didn’t care about her love life THAT much, so not worth the money and hassle of legal action.

    • Bella says:

      This is generally v accurate (I also had tabloid journalist friends/acquaintances at one stage) but in this case, I don’t think they thought she would actually sue. (PC and BP discouraged this but Harry was determined.)
      I say that because the potential size of the fine/damages on the misuse of data claim is enormous, far bigger than the usual damages awarded. Combined with the other claims this could blow a massive hole in their libel budget if the Duchess is successful on all claims.

      • SkaraBrae says:

        You are right. They probably didn’t think she would sue but I suspect in the current climate they might be secretly about it.
        They’re going to get publicity and they definitely won’t lose readership.

        I can imagine most of their readers will probably think H & M are ‘courting publicity’ by proceeding with the court case.

    • Sofia says:

      @Skara: You have a point. If Meghan wins I doubt it’ll cause a blow financially. It’ll be an embarrassment yes but they’ll be okay financially.

      It could explain their laughable defence of “Well the nice handwriting means she wanted it published!”

      • Lady D says:

        From what I read, under British law she is entitled to 25% of what they made in the past year. The Fail made a billion last year, and Meghan will be entitled to $250 million from them if/when she wins. She who laughs last…. Should cover their security bill nicely.

      • Bella says:

        Skara, Sofia
        Lady D is in the right ballpark – but I believe the maximum figure is 20% – of *turnover*, though. Not profit.

      • Lady D says:

        Turnover certainly makes more sense and even 20% is nothing to sneeze at. Thanks, Bella.

  27. Andrew’s Nemesis says:

    I’m a complete and utter fool.
    I went BTL on the Wail article which printed the majority of the messages in full (including the very telling one from Toxic Markle – to paraphrase, ‘I would have spoken for nine hours without getting PAID’). Considering the amount of vitriol they levelled at that lovely woman over the lies originally told, I would have thought, naively, that the truth might have changed their perspective. But no – of course not. It was like trying to find logic at a Trump convention. One of the highest rated comments was ‘he’s your father, life’s to short’ [sic]. I despair of my fellow countrymen and -women. I’m so ashamed to share DNA with these people.

  28. aquarius64 says:

    I still think Toxic Tom is going to be forced to tell it to the judge. That is what the Fail and the BRF fear.

    • Mary says:

      I think Tom may not testify in the end when he realizes that the entire contents of the letter will need to be divulged at trial. The unpublished portions of the letter are said to be very damaging to Tom. It is clear that he does not want those parts of the letter discussed but from his last interview I got the impression that he did not understand that he cannot keep those parts of the letter private, as they are an integral part of the lawsuit. I think that once Tom understands that he could be grilled about the unpublished portions of the letter at trial he will arrange another “heart attack”and just not show up.

      • Yoyo says:

        Meghan had a copy of the letter, that the lawyers are going to use to prove the MOS used parts of it to portray her in a negative light.

      • Mary says:

        Of course Meghan has a copy of the letter. My point was that I don’t think Tom realized that!

    • Mia says:

      I remember when he said “The Royal Family owes me.” Wonder what he meant by that.

      • S808 says:

        I wholeheartedly believe he, the tabloids and the RF came together to stop the marriage. they ALL stood to gain from it. The family couldn’t openly deny the marriage without looking like fools so they tried to undercut Meghan using her loose cannon father. This is drama for the tabloids so revenue and money and attention for Thomas. I have other theories about why he wanted to stop Harry and Meghan from getting married but I’ll keep them to myself.

      • Marie says:

        @Mia, I fully believe Tom and KP ( especially William) didn’t want this marriage to happen. Maybe they thought if her Dad doesn’t walk her down the aisle she will postpone the wedding and they will try and talk Harry out of it. It’s far fetched I know, but I wouldn’t put anything past the RF. I go back to what Tom Bradby said that something horrible happened before the wedding.

  29. Chrissyms says:

    What a horrible father. That’s all .

  30. MA says:

    I believed Meghan had some knowledge of it until this latest statement. Do people not understand what a big deal perjury is? Not only would Meghan put herself in legal trouble she would also jeopardize her case.

    Also you wound have to believe that she is okay with her friends getting into legal trouble and ruining their personal and professional reputations. And you’d have to believe the friends would be willing to sacrifice themselves and their families to do that. That’s too big a stretch.

    Yeah I can believe they did it without her knowledge or consent. That’s what happened with George Clooney, he couldn’t stand her press treatment and has only known her for a few years. How muchi harder would it have been for her close friends? Meghan probably refused to do anything about the abuse and was following the BRF fake policy to not comment so I can totally see her friends doing it behind her back

    • Beth says:

      The law and the truth are two different things. its all about what you can prove at trial and proving it beyond reasonable doubt. Guessing or thinking Meghan had knowledge about it is not proof that’s just your guessing game and in court their lawyer cannot just say I’m very sure Meghan had knowledge of it without presenting any evidence to corroborate that. where’s the proof she had knowledge about it and it has to be hard evidence , eg text, letter, email.

  31. lanne says:

    Why isn’t anyone in the UK thinking about what this is all doing to Prince Harry? I’ve said this before–how must Prince Harry feel, knowing that people are trying to destroy the life of the woman he loves, just because of her relationship with him? He must feel like he’s poison! He must despise his position in the Royal Family so much, to learn how utterly conditional the love of his own family is. We will love you so long as you do exactly what we say. If you don’t, we will stand by and let the public and the media destroy your life. What a bitter, bitter revelation for Harry, who seemed to genuinely thing that the RF “would be the family Meghan never had.” They should have had the guts to tell Harry straight up, “It’s Meghan or us, choose.” That’s what this all comes down to. Does no one writing for a UK paper see that? Or are they completely incapable of seeing Harry as a real person?

    • Bella DuPont says:

      Sociopathy seems to be a strong pre-requisite to work for these papers, so no.

      They are incapable of feeling even the slightest sliver of sympathy and don’t care if he’s human or not.

      • Bella says:

        Exactly, lanne and Bella dupont

        They utterly misread Harry’s character.

        Sociopaths the lot of them. Their relationships are transactional and they were unable to comprehend true, selfless love.

  32. Emmitt says:

    The friends going to People and whether Meghan knew about it or not is irrelevant. The Mail on Sunday did not have the copyright holder’s (Meghan) permission to publish the letter, whether Toxic Tom sold it to them or not. It doesn’t matter if if the friends/Meghan piqued interest in the letter; the letter was private correspondence and the letter writer holds the copyright, whether the letter is sold or not. MOS didn’t have Meghan’s permission to publish the letter and furthermore, they edited the letter to give it a whole new meaning. I think Prince Charles won a similar case. Anything about Toxic Tom, People Magazine & Meghan’s friends is just to muddy the waters.

  33. L4frimaire says:

    I definitely believe Tom was paid off to sabotage the wedding, he had a handler, and was manipulated by the other daughter and the tabloids. Why that is, and why he did it is another matter and hope we get to that.It will be interesting to unpack that whole thing. As for the People thing, I thought the assumption already was she gave her friends the go ahead, but what exactly it was is up for debate. They may have given her a heads up. However, at the same time, her speaking to other media outlets does not give tabloids carte blanche to publish her personal letters if she hasn’t given permission to do that. Regarding the tabloid statement to the editors, I would really like to know why it came about, even with the hearing on Friday? Someone said it is the same as announcing to someone “ I’m not talking to you” instead of just stop talking. That’s a valid criticism, especially after they had so much good press, tabloid spin not withstanding. I do think funneling things through their lawyers is a good strategy, but why tell all the media about it. What I would like to know in the court case is what was the tabloids motivation behind the relentless smears and stories. This is not typical reporting on a public figure outside of something major. I hope they really delve into it. The dad is only one angle of this case against the tabloids, and other information will come out.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Have to add though that the media does the same thing, i.e., say they’re not going to talk about the Sussexes or report on them, then proceed to talk about them and report on them, so….they can’t resist getting their jabs in. Also further reiterate that this case isn’t against Tom Markle, stupid and craven as he is. The press will try to make it that to emphasize the “ feud”, but the focus should remain on the tabloids and who was seeding them in this. No way would they be this malicious and deliberately dishonest, on such a nuclear level, without the tacit approval of the palaces. This is what I don’t get, even if you are a tabloid, these are still national newspapers over there with wide circulation. Surely they have some truth and fact checking standards to adhere to. How can they just print falsehoods and distortions legally, no clarification, no follow up, just make up details? Why does no one ever check them or make them more accountable to basic standards of accuracy, because the Sussexes won’t be able to do that’s even if they win this judgment.

      • Bella says:

        A proper response would require an article, but here is the short version.

        There is no effective press regulation for printed newspapers. Broadcast news has to adhere to standards set by an independent body, but the power of the press barons is such that they have been able to prevent the creation of any independent watchdog. There was a public inquiry many years ago after a scandal involving the tabloids, and a two-part reform package was proposed. Only the first part was acted on; the second part would have created a proper regulatory body with teeth and the ability to impose meaningful penalties. The aforementioned press barons nobbled the Prime Minister at the time. They created a faux regulator (IPSO) which they fund and sit on the panel of, hence police themselves. They have never fined any newspaper. The only recourse members of the public realistically have is the courts, which of course means no recourse at all for most people because of the expense.
        MPs will not stand up to Fleet Street because they fear dirty secrets being revealed or simply being exposed to the kind of daily vilification which Meghan endures. And the influence that the tabloids currently wield means that no-one can become Prime Minister without cosying up to them.

        I feel so depressed after writing that.

      • Shelley says:

        The reason H and M put out that statement is b/c tabloid writers like rebecca english was constantly contacting their PR firm for statements! My understanding is, now that H and M said the only way those tabloids will be hearing from them is from their lawyers, any copywrite pics of Archie and etc. , the tabloids can’t post them. I might be wrong.

  34. Izzy says:

    There is an exchange between MM and her asshat of a father in which he ADMITS that he would not do interviews unless he was paid. So yeah, he is complete trash.

  35. Oliviajoy1995 says:

    That whole Markle side of the family is trash. However, was it proven he lied about having a heart attack right before her wedding? I know there has always been speculation but I never knew if they actually had proven it or not.

    • kellebelle says:

      It was obvious from the beginning that there was never a heart attack. The “proof” he came yo with confirmed it, and the lies told around it were just too flimsy. Samantha took what she read in the tabloids and ran with it to make money. “Several heart attacks,” “back-to-back heart attacks” and “two heart attacks?” Pick a story and stick to it. He needed an excuse “big” enough disqualify him from flying. Enter the heart attack stories. And he was never near a hospital either.

    • Mary says:

      I don’t think anything has been proven but one tabloid, I think it was the Star, referred to Tom’s heart problems as “palpitations.” I do look forward to the truth coming out.

    • Lady D says:

      TMZ has pictures of him collecting food from a drive-thru the day after his so-called stent operation.

      • Mary says:

        If you mean the Frappuccino picture, ithe photo was taken about two days after the wedding and I think the wedding was about three days after the stent procedure. It is not a stretch to think that he could have been at a drive-thru five days after the procedure. Or, were you referencing another photo?

      • ennie says:

        …buying greasy beverages just after a cardiac/artery procedure. He is an idiot for either one thing or the other.

  36. Vanessa says:

    If the daily mail had any sort of poof that Meghan knew her friends did that interview they would have that print in bold letter on the front cover of their newspaper. Right there that tells me all I need to know Meghan didn’t know what her friends were playing on doing the article happen right after her Meghan baby shower were the press were become increasingly more abuse towards her . The press didn’t care that Meghan was pregnant they attack her daily that could have been the straw that broke the camel back for her friends seeing your friend pregnant and being constantly hound. I do believe think that palace didn’t want the marriage to happen but knew if the queen deny Harry his choose of bride how it would look . I think people in the palace decide that once they were married they would use the press to chase Meghan out but she become pregnant that’s when the negative racist behavior when up ten . I think daily mail and all the other tabloids in Britain had agreement with the palace and the Cambridge’s to go after Meghan full throttle. And now the daily mail and Thomas are left in the open to deal with the fallout best believe that the palace will circle around each other and Protect themselves.

  37. Awkward symphony says:

    I agree with everything you said apart from your comment about Meghan authorising her friends to do that interview. It reminds me of the claim that Meghan was personally writing Instagram posts despite her having a TEAM of communications staff especially Sara Latham who’s American British! People think that Meghan is a control freak and that she makes all the decisions which is wrong.

    I’m so happy to see their latest move. The WHOLE WORLD SEES THIS. Everyone can finally see how the British press fabricated lies,printed salacious gossip and paid off her estranged relatives all to break her mentally. I pray that Meghan gives an interview or releases a statement after she wins stating how she will donate some of the money for a mental health and anti bullying charity and to to ask for press regulation. I’ve always said that Harry’s case will result in a leveson2 scenario but I now think we’ll see Meghan’s case might be the trigger

    • Thirtynine says:

      Awkward Symphony, I agree. I too think Harry is hoping that these cases trigger Leveson 2. I think it’s what he wants, and it’s why I don’t expect any kind of settlement. For that happen, they need to win outright.

  38. Amelie says:

    Geez the text messages are heartbreaking to read. I greatly admire Meghan’s restraint in her texts though. She isn’t insulting or name-calling him out of anger and hurt, she is simply trying to get in contact with him to figure out what the heck is going on. Harry’s texts have a more emotional tone to them but then he didn’t have much experience dealing with Tom as Meghan did.

    I also don’t agree that Meghan authorized her friends to speak to People last year. We all thought she did back then obviously but if all this is being entered into evidence to play out in a court, Meghan is too smart to lie about that in the face of a lawsuit. Maybe her friends gave her a heads’ up or maybe they told her after the fact that they had spoken to People, but I always thought that the 5 friends speaking to People seemed a bit too… much? Meghan does not seem like someone who would use other people to speak on her behalf anyways. I’m guessing she either is no longer friends with those people (so mourning broken friendships) or will think twice before confiding such personal info like the letter she sent her father.

  39. Mtec says:

    Anyone else catch the street interview Oprah and Gayle did about the Sussexes? The paps caught them outside a building and O & G decided to give their opinion on H & M leaving full-time royal duties. You can tell it was very impromptu, & that they decided to do it without asking or informing H & M.

    So yeah, I can believe some of her friends answered some questions about them without H & M knowing or getting a heads up.

  40. Linda says:

    I just can’t get over how pretty she is. I fear for her because she is like Diana in the sense that Diana without Charles wouldn’t have been the same story.

  41. Awkward symphony says:

    @MTEC great point there. I also add Gayle speaking about what they did in the baby shower on her show which was clearly her decision not Meghan. People should stop making Meghan out as a diva calling out all the shots! It’s what they accuse Sussexsquad of too.

  42. aquarius64 says:

    Here’s a thought: what if the judge rules in favor of Meghan, but also rules Toxic Tom is NOT a victim of the tabloids but a willing co-conspirator in the smear campaign? He voluntarily gave (read sold) PARTS of the letter to MoS and the judge may see this as no evidence of manipulation. If Toxic Tom is declared by the courts a bad father and worse he couldn’t handle it. Could there be further legal exposure to him?

  43. Isadora says:

    Rupert Murdoch is mostly behind these British tabloids. He also owns a lot of American tabloids as well. Not surprisingly he also behind things like Fox news so you know the sh*t quality reporting you’re getting.