KP staffers ‘rescinded’ their bullying complaints against Duchess Meghan in 2018

The Duchess Of Sussex Visits The Hubb Community Kitchen

It should not be forgotten: Kensington Palace was so desperate to smear the Duchess of Sussex ahead of the Oprah interview that they activated their fail-safe clown-play and accused her of bullying staffers. That’s how scared the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were that Meghan would tell all about everything they said and did to her. That’s why Jason Knauf plotted for years on this clownish scheme, even providing his dumb “paper trail” to the Times of London back in March. The backstory on Knauf’s role in the drama was that he wrote to Simon Case about how Meghan left white women in tears wherever she went, and KP staffers were apparently having daily meltdowns at the thought of working for someone who… did… something. What Meghan was actually being accused of was never clear, it was always purposefully and desperately vague.

Obviously, the “investigation” into Meghan’s “bullying” is still on-going, because the Windsors are still desperate to have something to hold over Meghan’s head in particular, to have something with which to smear her. The investigation was handed off to a law firm and Meghan’s lawyers have reportedly requested to give some receipts for how MEG was treated. The investigation won’t be done until next year, apparently. But in Finding Freedom’s new epilogue, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand point out something which was actually buried deep in the Times’ reporting at the time. That something? The people who actually submitted complaints about Meghan to Jason Knauf rescinded their complaints.

As a refresher, allegations against the Duchess of Sussex first came to light in an article by The Times this past March, just days before the couple’s tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey. At the time, the piece reported that Meghan faced a bully complaint at Kensington Palace, claiming she “drove two personal assistants out of the household and was undermining the confidence of a third staff member.”

The complaint was reportedly made in October 2018 by Jason Knauf, Meghan and Prince Harry’s communications secretary at the time, “seemingly in an effort to get Buckingham Palace to protect staff who he claimed were coming under pressure from the duchess. Prince Harry pleaded with Knauf not to pursue it, according to a source.”

According to Finding Freedom’s new epilogue, “sources confirmed that upon discovery of Jason [Knauf]’s email, two of the individuals mentioned in the email asked for any allegations made to HR about their experiences with Meghan to be rescinded.”

The book also claims that no such meeting with Prince Harry took place. A spokesperson for the duke and duchess called the story a “calculated smear campaign” at the time, and Meghan’s close friend, actress Janina Gavankar, said as much in an attributed quote in Finding Freedom.

“They didn’t hide that fact. It was without doubt done intentionally to discredit the duchess,” Gavankar said. “I have known Meghan for 17 years, and I have seen the way she regards people around her and the people she works with, and I can say she is not a bully.”

Buckingham Palace has since launched an investigation into the claims, a move which sources shared in Finding Freedom was welcomed by the couple who hoped the process would “shed light on the reality of these rumors.”

The Times first reported that the investigation, which is being conducted by an independent law firm, may delay its verdict until next year. A source told ET at the time that the bullying investigation underway at Buckingham Place is still continuing.

[From ET]

Again, we heard that at the time, it was just buried in the hysterical, melodramatic reporting in March. I’m glad Scobie and Durand independently verified it and are underlining the point though. Those staffers were fine with smearing Meghan when nothing was on the record and their name wasn’t attached to the smear, but when Jason Knauf began pushing the bullying narrative, suddenly those staffers saw how the sh-t could hit the fan. And throughout it all, we’ve still never heard any actual story about what Meghan said or did which destroyed so many palace staffers’ lives. All we’ve heard is variations on “Meghan looked at someone” or “Meghan expected people to finish projects in a timely manner” or “Meghan made someone cry, don’t ask how or why.”

The Duke & Duchess Of Sussex Visit Sussex

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

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

104 Responses to “KP staffers ‘rescinded’ their bullying complaints against Duchess Meghan in 2018”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Chaine says:

    Why is the “investigation” taking years? Just ask the two staffers “did Meghan bully you yes or no?” And get their answers and then “if yes what was the supposed bullying” that’s it!

    • hindulovegod says:

      They don’t want to uncover that two incompetent racists were hired by Jason despite having no qualifications for their roles. The so-called bullying was the expectation that they accomplish tasks related to their scope of work. Meghan’s lawyers are stuck in now, so they can’t bury this self-created crisis forever.

    • Izzy says:

      Well, manufacturing evidence takes time, you see…

    • equality says:

      For one thing that gave them time to disassociate from Jason Knauf by shipping him overseas. And they were probably hoping that people would forget and not ask for answers so the smear would be out there forever. I hope that Meghan’s solicitors hold their feet to the flames and make them put out a statement clearing her but even then haters will just claim “cover-up” so she basically has been smeared forever. I hope that this and Andrew’s business and any and every scandal any of the rest may have been up to are all widely reported next year and ALL “overshadow” that stupid jubilee.

      • MerryGirl says:

        Doesn’t matter what the haters say, an apology on the record can never be erased and that is what Meghan’s lawyers have to make them do. They claimed the bullying on an official BP letterhead and they have to apologize on an offical BP letterhead.

    • Harper says:

      BP has to stall until they can negotiate terms with Schillings for a conclusive report that does not point the finger at William for this mess. Knauf is Will’s right-hand man and they cut him loose because they want “former employee” written in any report that Schillings issues to make it look like Knauf acted on his own. The good thing is that the royals can stall this investigation as long as they want but a story about the royals stalling the investigation can be released at any time to a reputable source such as the NYTimes and be just as damning as the final report the Firm is trying to make go away. The American press does not have an invisible contract with the royals, so a nice flow chart showing where William fits into all this would be very revealing.

    • Concern Fae says:

      This sounds like the ordinary venting that people do about their boss, but the person they vented to went to HR with it. I can totally believe this. If my boss was sending emails in the early hours of the morning, I’d roll my eyes and share with my cubemate. We’d get a coffee, have a laugh, and get on with our day. No biggie.

      I did have an undermining cow of an officemate once who would act as a spy and run to our HR manager with all of the petty shit that goes down in any office. I can’t imagine working somewhere where somebody was running to the press with that sort of garbage.

  2. Emily says:

    Last time Meghan made somebody cry, it turned out that that person actually was the one to make Meghan cry.

    • DeeSea says:

      Exactly! It’s akin to GOP-style deflection and projection. Blame others for what you yourself are guilty of.

      Also: I wish this “person A made person B cry” style of wording would die. No one can *make* another person cry (unless maybe they’re physically manipulating the other person’s tear ducts). I like reporting that keeps the focus on what people actually SAID or DID, not on how others responded to it.

    • Lex says:

      Also some people genuinely cry at the drop of a hat. “Making someone cry” is not always some heinous act.

      • Tessa says:

        The crying story was compounded by Kate trying to mastermind Meghan’s wedding and complaining about “protocol” for the bridal attendants. But there was evidence when comparing Meghan’s to other royal attendants, she was following protocol.

  3. Seraphina says:

    Yes, I am sure they did rescind their complaints because their name was attached and shit was about to get real – on a global scale.
    This is nothing more than a smear tactic. They took Meghan’s work ethic (the opposite of other royals) and used it against her. I have seen a turn in the work place in the past two years where when someone actually holds others accountable and is pushing for work to be done the person is labeled a “bully”. That is probably what happened here.

    • Granger says:

      I’ve seen this too — and this strange attitude that anyone who’s a little bit ambitious or pushes you to go above and beyond is creating a “competitive” atmosphere in the workplace. It’s like people are afraid of hard work, and — as you say — being held accountable for it.

      • Harper says:

        Don’t assume that what Meghan was asking for was hard. Remember, there were territorial issues going on in the KP office. Staff that worked for Will & Kate were also working for Meghan. We know that the Cambridges were wary of Meghan to begin with and jealous when she succeeded, so it’s not a stretch to say that attitude also was communicated to the KP staff, and that was the wall Meghan was running into and frustrating her. Meghan could have been asking for simple things like returning phone calls for all we know.

      • Mac says:

        I suspect W+K don’t ask much of the staff and they were totally put out when Meghan expected them to actually work.

    • Surly Gale says:

      I got accused of bullying when I tried to hold each strata council member accountable for a decision made whilst I, the president, was not present. It was over $250.00 (Cdn). I got bullied so badly by one councillor coming into my home and accusing me of starting a ‘war’.
      People don’t like being held accountable for their biases.

    • AnneSurely says:

      I spent a few years in a company that was like this. You couldn’t make the staff do anything. It was all about ‘coaching’ people to do their jobs, which was maddening. Everyone but the Karens went about their day, but those white women were ultra sensitive about any feedback. It was exhausting and the reason that I switched jobs to a more corporate atmosphere where everyone was expected to toe a certain line.

    • Lurker25 says:

      I, petite WoC, was accused of bullying and intimidation by a six foot blonde white guy. I was told*when I was hired* that he was a problem and my job was to hold him accountable. This was in media where he would actually write (to the public readers!) that he showed up late for the event so couldn’t review it but that he did have fun in the VIP tent.
      I set professional guidelines. Next thing I know, HR calls me in, says their hands are tied because the sheer fact that I’m in a higher position means I can intimidate. I can’t say PT do anything because that would be retaliation. And I had to take mandatory sensitivity training.
      It cost me a promotion. But that was the end game – the guy was friends with the white guy who got the promotion. I was set up, and HR was complicit.

      • AnneSurely says:

        I’m sorry that happened to you. I’ve learned to ‘partner’ aka make HR responsible for problem employees in tandem with the employee on a plan with milestones and goals. I once had a staffer who confided in me about her mental health challenges and asked that we manage them in office without letting HR know and I will never do that again. The second I needed her to modify behavior, HR was calling a meeting about ‘bullying’.

      • Lurker25 says:

        Thank you @Annesurely. I’m at an *entirely* white place of work now. My boss keeps telling me he wants me to “be more authoritative” (eyeroll). I made sure to have HR on speed dial to flag anything problematic before it gets twisted back on me.
        That said, I have no idea how to tell HR about the convos trying to gently educate my boss on how he shouldn’t say the N word out loud even if he’s quoting MLK, that his childhood bullying isn’t the same as systematic racism, etc. Sigh. He’s a truly nice guy. But this place is exhausting.

  4. ModeratelyWealthy says:

    How long should such investigation, led by an independent party ( or the company that was hired already dropped them?) take to yield results?

    It is not like they are accusing Meghan of, you know, raping trafficked teenagers…and is not like Meghan is, you know, hiding not to get her papers served…

    so, there is no explanation why is taking so long, and why there are literally no factual details to be heard of.

    Unless, of course, the objective was merely to smear Meghan, which of course it was.

    • LaraW” says:

      From a US perspective: Really depends on the scale and how much the institution’s employees lie. Some clients hire firms to conduct internal investigations to ensure compliance with regulations and there’s usually a timetable. That timetable can quickly expand as people name more names, which necessitates more interviews, documents to be collected and reviewed, etc.

      Given that the RF’s strategy in this seems to be “delay, delay, delay,” I would not be surprised if they are uncooperative— interviews rescheduled at the last minute, documents not provided in a timely manner, everyone lying, etc.

      And the lying is a lot more problematic than it might seem. It’s not an investigation by the government, so people are not compelled by law to tell the truth. Cannot tell you how many times a client’s employees will straight up lie to your face, then you slam an email they wrote in front of them which proves they were lying, and then watch as the employee tries to walk back their statements. Even worse if parties believe a lie told to them by someone higher up. It can get messy really quickly.

      I have literally seen emails written by people saying things like “I consulted with legal and they said not to do this illegal thing we’ve proposed we do, but we’re gonna do it anyway.” Try explaining that to the government when they catch wind of something and launch a Real Investigation. At that point, the only thing you can say to the government is “look, we know this looks really bad, but it’s not as bad as it seems. Sort of.”

      On the upside, I get paid for it all. Yay billables…

      One last edit lol— the fact that they let go of Knauf is problematic. He is under no obligation to cooperate with the investigation being conducted by an independent firm— he’s not under the RF’s employ and so cannot be compelled to sit down for an interview. And since it sounds like he’s the crux of the matter… yeah, it might take some time. I am actually suspicious now regarding the timing of his being let go.

      • LaraW” says:

        Now that I think about it, the timetable for the investigation could indicate that the independent firm is either 1. Dragging it out on purpose or 2. Actually taking it seriously and will perform an actual investigation.

        I know a lot of people are betting on option 1, but a good investigation also takes time to conduct. So we’ll have to see what report they’re going to issue at the end of it all. The fact that all roads seem to lead to William is probably something that has to be undertaken with great care and lots of strategy.

      • Moderatelywealthy says:

        Thanks for the explanation.

        The last company I worked in took its sweet time as the managers would stall since many of us has temporary contracts. Once we got unionized though…

        Jason announced he was leaving months before he was due to leave. I imagine they would have time to interview him…

        Anyway I am sure the paper trail tells a very different story than the tabloids and KP-CH are desperately trying to bury their findings next year during the Jubilee celebrations.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Laraw: Knauf is still employed by KP. He officially steps down in December so he can be compelled to give evidence. What KP didn’t bank on was Meghan asking to be included in the investigation.

      • LaraW” says:

        @Amy— thanks for the clarification. I thought he had been completely cut loose. I can’t seem to get all the interlocking institutions separate in my mind. I know the Prince’s Trust is separate from CH, though the lines keep getting muddy with the pay for play scheme and all that. And it sounds more and more like KP uses the Royal Foundation as a slush fund.

        Oh to be a true forensic accountant auditing the Royal Family’s expenditures!

      • Amy Too says:

        That Melissa Toubati person was fired for cause by Meghan/KP and she was one of the main complainants, I think. So, while Jason does still work there and can be made to at least meet with the investigating team, Melissa doesn’t and she was the employee that was referred to most often in the press and in leaks from KP as being so “bullied” and “belittled” by Meghan and “made to feel stupid/incompetent” by Meghan (because she was) that she was “forced to quit” (she was actually fired) to “save her mental health” from that “mean girl harpy” Meghan.

      • Jaded says:

        @Amy Too – Melissa was let go for “gross misconduct” which can involve anything from fraud or theft, violent and offensive behaviour, doing drugs and alcohol on the job, causing damage to the workplace, etc. Because she was fired in the middle of the night, it had to have something to do with Archie as she was Meghan’s PA and occasional night nanny. Maybe she was drinking on the job and passed out, maybe she snuck in a boyfriend and they were caught shagging, but she was fired on the spot and had to leave immediately so it has to be something very serious. Jason and Melissa are apparently close friends so it wouldn’t surprise me if he cooked up the bullying sh*t to get even with M&H and stay on the Cambridges’ good side. He sounds like an evil little b*tch who would stop at nothing to align himself with the most powerful players, but you know M&H have receipts on him and Melissa, and will drop them if necessary before December when he officially leaves his job.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Melissa T was also a temp hire for wedding planning AND a friend a Jason Knauf’s. Meaning she was always a plant and never to be trusted.

      • Debbie says:

        Amy Bee, I guess Jason K. still being employed by Kensington Palace after his bungling left W & K in an awkward situation is like Jeopardy’s Michael Richards, in that certain people can’t just be fired, even when caught in wrongdoing. First, their employers do nothing and hope to weather out any bad press. Next, if the media storm gets too hot, their bosses find other titles & positions for them STILL W/N THE SAME ORGANIZATION. It’s like rearranging the deck chairs while the Titanic is sinking. Only if or when the media persists do they actually take further (quiet) action. But fear not, that man usually leaves with a golden parachute deal, pockets bulging w/ cash, and glowing recommendations, mark my words.

    • Amy Too says:

      It almost sounds like they’re just holding off on releasing the results of the possibly already completed investigation. The way that these articles are worded doesn’t make it seem like there’s this team of people hard at work, still combing through files and actively interviewing people. It sounds like they’re done but just don’t want to publish the results until “later” so they can keep pushing it back to save their butts.

      “ The Times first reported that the investigation, which is being conducted by an independent law firm, may delay its verdict until next year. A source told ET at the time that the bullying investigation underway at Buckingham Place is still continuing.”

      The Times… reported [months ago] that the investigation… [was] being conducted [at the time that the Times’ reporter spoke to their source, months ago]. A source told ET at the time [as in back then, not recently] that the bullying investigation… [was] still continuing [back then. At the time when the Times article was published].

      “May delay it’s verdict until next year” sure sounds like they have the verdict already, they’re just not sharing it yet because they need time to spin it, or they hope to drop it in the middle of some other huge story so that the verdict will be buried, or they’re trying to settle with Meghan’s lawyers and find a way to get around publishing the results of their investigation. If they were still investigating right now, wording would have been something like “the investigation may continue into next year.”

    • windyriver says:

      @LaraW – some of this is a bit of an aside, but note, the pay for play stuff referred to in the article a few days ago was not about the Prince’s Trust, but the Prince’s Foundation, which is a different organization.

      In that article the other day, @BTB mentioned Dumfries House wasn’t Charles’ private property but held under the Great Steward of Scotland’s Dumfries House Trust. I know that like me @BTB has also followed details about Dumfries House (I personally think that whole undertaking was far from simply another house for Charles, and a personal vanity project, especially given the economic impact on a depressed former mining community, and the historical value of the house and intact original furnishings). In any event, when I looked up more details, I found the Dumfries website had changed, and The Great Steward, etc. trust was merged in 2018 with The Prince’s Foundation for Building Community, The Prince’s Regeneration Trust, and the Prince’s School of Traditional Arts, and it’s all now the Prince’s Foundation.

      Interestingly, this foundation is headquartered at Dumfries. Having apparently completed their main infrastructure and landscaping projects, and now positioning themselves as a major destination for weddings and corporate and private events in addition to a stately home property for the tourist trade, it makes sense this would be where Charles would chose to entertain potential donors. There’s a separate “luxury” 20+ room guest house, but since a number of rooms in the actual mansion are now refurbished and available for events, no doubt there are additional accommodations in the part of the house where Charles has had rooms for some time (hence people having to be quiet so as not to disturb him!).

      Note too that Dumfries House has for for a number of years been the location for multiple education and training programs (hospitality, traditional building and crafts, textiles). But these are now listed differently, under general subject headings. Previously though, they were specifically highlighted on the website, for example, as “The [your name here] center/building for Textile Arts”. The Tamar Manoukian New Cumnock Pool is a community facility in the nearby town that Dumfries helped to refurbish. So one thing some donors got for their money was naming rights, though who possibly got behind the scenes payments for facilitating the connection with Charles, and what else they got – like a fancy place to spend the night – is a different question.

      And yes, as per @Amy Bee it’s also my recollection from the original announcement that Jason Knauf doesn’t leave until December. Also I suspect the bullying accusations were in part based on Melissa Toubati, the underqualified good friend of Jason’s who was placed as Meghan’s PA prior to the wedding and fired for a breach that hasn’t been disclosed.

      ETA: I see @Amy Too has also mentioned Toubati’s likely involvement in this…

      • notasugarhere says:

        Dumfries was never intended as a home for Charles. It was always intended to be restored/preserved as an historic home and as a place for education, arts, and training programs. No idea where the thought came from that this was ever intended as a home for Charles.

      • windyriver says:

        @nota in the Charles cash for access article a day or two ago there was a discussion among some commenters about Dumfries House, and that’s what the above refers to. Several people had suggested the purchase, using a 20 million pound loan from his foundation, was just another way of getting Charles (who has quarters at Dumfries) another estate in Scotland – and that it was primarily a vanity project.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is definitely a vanity project, but none of it is his private property and never will be. Charles knows that as do all of his funders.

  5. Cessily says:

    The fact that it takes so long for this law firm to do an investigation tells me just how incompetent they are.. I don’t believe anything from the BRF or tabloid media especially with the racist/sexist regulatory commission that rewards unforgivable bullying and harassment. The entire island is toxic.

    • Jaded says:

      I don’t know if it’s incompetency or deliberately trying to stave off any decision until Jason Knauf leaves his job in December, then he’s under no obligation to give evidence about his part in the bullying allegations. It’s a slimy thing to do but when you have FK, FFK and FQC piling up on the Sussexes it’s kind of expected, mostly because they were complicit in Meghan’s bullying.

  6. LaraK says:

    WTF is with the “undermining confidence” bs???

    Basically she showed people up with her work ethic. It’s really hard to undermine the confidence of someone competent without actual bullying. But then the complaint would be about the bullying, not the confidence. So dumb!

    Basically Knauf said she made people cry because doing the bare minimum was no longer good enough, and now they had to work! For a black woman! Oe noe, my confidence!

  7. Tom says:

    God, don’t you want Beyoncé’s dance squad to perform that Super Bowl halftime routine in the Queen’s upcoming anniversary parade. With an update about receipts.

    This is my prayer.

  8. Becks1 says:

    I’m glad the point is being emphasized – that the complaints were rescinded. I wonder how ticked those staffers are that the palace hit the nuclear option ahead of the interview and released this in the Times.

    I still think the “bullying” was as simple as what Omid said in a special a while ago about them – it’s a lot, as a staffer, to be expected to attend meetings every say when before you were attending one meeting a month. Will and Kate don’t work, therefore their staffers didn’t work and it was probably considered a pretty cushy royal gig. That’s prob why Harry went outside the royal sphere for his own projects like Invictus and Sentebale etc.

    Poor Meghan thought she was entering an actual philanthropic organization, where people were actually invested in making a difference. She didn’t really it was just a cover for their vacations etc.

    • Sofia says:

      I agree. KP staffers probably spent their time reading Tatler and organising holidays for W&K instead of actually working. So when Meghan asked them to work, it was a massive shock. I bet she didn’t even ask them to do much just a few hours or the standard hours or something each day but when you spend your time doing nothing, that’s a lot of work.

      • The Hench says:

        It was also probably terrifying for those staff as because, not only were they used to not working but they were completely unqualified for the positions that they held. They had no idea where to start but, obviously they couldn’t say that so they started shouting “bully” to deflect.

      • Sofia says:

        @The Hench: I agree that a lot of those staffers were probably unqualified and also white and aristocratic. Like granddaughters of Dukes, cousins of Barons etc etc who needed a “job” because they’re not getting the money from the family estate so they picked an easy job with very little qualifications needed and hoping to do little work.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Becks: I agree. And I suspect that at least one staffer had a meltdown in the office and called Meghan the n word.

    • Jaded says:

      @Becks1 – I wonder if Melissa Toubai is one of the complainants? If the reason for her “gross misconduct” firing gets out, she may not be able to keep her current job as a weekend nanny for Natalie Livingstone, the wife of billionaire Richard Livingstone. Interestingly enough, neither staff member made complaints of their own, it appears to be all Jason’s doing. The two individuals cited in Jason’s complaint to HR asked for the matter to be rescinded and for it to not become an official complaint. Man this gets murkier and murkier…

      • notasugarhere says:

        She was hired for the nanny job after she publicly attacked Meghan on social media. Livingstones know that and still hired her. I don’t see them firing her for anything that comes out about this investigation.

  9. Amy Bee says:

    It was reported at the that the two staffers told Knauf to rescind the bullying claims. Knauf just decided, with approval from William, to tell the story to the Times. The reason why Knauf had to step down from his position as CEO of the Royal Foundation was because his antics failed to get the desired results and only brought the Palace into disrepute. Now BP is saddled with an investigation which will only serve to expose them further.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Amy Bee, I for one will be thrilled to see what comes from these egregious “bullying” allegations!!! I will be dancing in the streets when it comes to light that there were zero allegations and everyone, especially the worst offenders, Knauf and Toubai, will all come crashing down, along with their professional careers!!

  10. C-Shell says:

    Jason Knauf and his band of 🤡🤡🤡 really are the most incompetent buffoons ever. His inept smear attempt dragged real people’s names into this mess — Simon Case, the woman who is/was the head of BP’s HR (I forget her name and I’m too lazy to look it up) — who at a minimum should be required to state any facts, “evidence” they have on this trumped up allegation. Now an outside law firm has been handed a bag of steaming bullsh!t to try and find a way to rationalize or make it disappear. Good luck with that. I hope Meghan’s lawyers hold their feet to the fire.

    I’d love to see Poor Jason get hit with a defamation suit, but he’s hiding in France somewhere to avoid service of process. It’s a BRF thing.

    • Cessily says:

      I thought I read he was relocating to America.. if so I would like to know his or his spouse/significant others employer. We could make sure he gets the same welcome he gave the Duchess of Sussex . Sure his spouse/significant other will enjoy 24/7 media/social media attention also.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Cessilyk I think it would be fitting that we Americans guarantee Knauf and his husband the welcoming that they deserve, ALL the way back from whence they came!!!

      • notasugarhere says:

        His spouse was conveniently found/handed a job in France, necessitating their move out of the UK.

    • Sid says:

      The clown emojis are very fitting C-Shell. Jason also exposed his bestie Melissa. Who he recemmended to be Meghan’s assistant and help plan the royal wedding when she had no such experience. Circus indeed.

      • C-Shell says:

        That’s right. Wasn’t she the one who came to work for Meghan with a background as a nanny? Totally unqualified. And isn’t she the one the Sussexes had to fire, and then she ran to the tabloids? Or am I conflating 🤡🤡?

      • Jaded says:

        @C-Shell – yes, Melissa worked as Meghan’s PA and part-time night nanny, but was fired for ‘gross misconduct’. Then she ran to the tabloids (or Jason did, they’re close friends) saying that she had to quit because the demands were too high and Meghan was horrible to work for (Jason’s sleight of hand methinks).

      • notasugarhere says:

        Jaded, I tend to think Melissa T was hired as a temp hire/wedding planner help. When she wasn’t given a permanently position she felt *she deserved as a friend of Jason’s*, she started making trouble. I don’t think she is the nanny who was fired after one night for whatever that horrible nanny did to/around Archie.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Yes, it was my understanding that the night nanny was a different person than Melissa.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Looked it up. Melissa T was fired in Oct 2018, long before Archie was born.

    • Lady D says:

      Jason’s job ends at KP in December. He’s still around and can be served.

      • C-Shell says:

        Entirely possible, but there was talk about him imminently moving to Europe with his spouse, which doesn’t preclude him staying on the payroll through the end of the year as part of his golden parachute.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Lady D., if I was Meghan, I would get my attorneys on Knauf as soon as possible, since once he leaves the Salty Island Of Bitterness And Jealousy, all bets are off!! There must be a clause for a timeframe.

      • Lady D says:

        I’m sure William wants him in another country tout suite. I’d have my attorney’s move on him quickly too, I’m sure he’s itching to get out of Britain. Can he really not be served once he leaves England? I thought there was an agreement between the European countries about cooperation in court cases.

  11. BnlurNforever says:

    There’s no investigating going on, there never was. They just said they were investigating and using an outside firm to frighten Meghan into silence and she called them bluff by sending in her lawyers to hear these claims with binders of evidence to compare what actually happened and when. They’ve been laying low ever since and the only reason this hasn’t been put on front street that the palace lied is because HnM have a complicated relationship with Elizabeth and don’t wish to embarrass her. HnM’ve probably agreed to say nothing further about it if the palace says nothing further about it, which I hate because even though it’s clear to all of us who’ve been following along that she’s being smeared, there are people out there who believe that nonsense and Meghan’s name needs to be cleared.

    • Alexandria says:

      This. They don’t work, why would they bother to actually investigate? Their work is leaking and gossiping on taxpayer money!

    • The Hench says:

      Agree. I suspect what investigation there is ever going to be has probably already happened and concluded that there is nothing to answer so they’re just going to fudge and drift until it all goes away in classic BRF style.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      This is what I believe too. The Sunday Times(RR member Roya Nikkah) was the first to say that Buckingham Palace hired an independent law firm to investigate. And that said investigation was to begin imminently with no set time frame. Other outlets have said a law firm was reportedly hired. One thing I’ve failed to see in any of the reporting is the name of the independent law firm that was supposedly hired. Maybe that isn’t unusual. The lack of transparency seems off.imo (unless I missed the naming of the firm somewhere) We know Harbottle & Lewis and Farrar & Co. are law firms the BRF use.

      The BM have dilligently neglected to mention the complaints being rescinded as often as they should have. Along with failing to mention that Toubati didn’t quit but was fired/dismissed. But those headlines wouldn’t aid in the smear campaign or false bullying allegations. As stated quite publicly by Janina(who said ‘good’ about the investigation) & Gayle-M & H have receipts.

      @The Hench. Right. BRF style wait til it all goes away or people forget an investigation was suppose to take place while continuing on with the smear campaign. A$$hats.

  12. HeatherC says:

    Of course this “investigation” isn’t completed. It was started by KP who we know can’t finish any project they start.

  13. Jay says:

    How mad do you think Jason was when, having made complaints to HR “on behalf” of two staffers (possibly even without their permission) they pretty quickly pulled the rug out from under him and rescinded the complaints. Maybe an HR professional can chime in here, but I thought the usual routine is to make a complaint yourself, in your own words, about what happened and when, where etc. Not an email sent around the office based on secondhand rumours and just outright racism.

    It makes me think this kind of underhanded crap happens so routinely that Jason assumed he would just be able to threaten Meghan and have things go his way. I hope that this investigation ends up opening several cans of worms, because the whole organization seems rotten.

  14. Tanya Nguyen says:

    Meghan is a stronger woman than me. As an American citizen, I would have left and gone back to the states a lot sooner than she did. For instance, when they wouldn’t get her any medical help for her mental health. When they told her to just stay in the house for months on end. When all these clowns in the office were bullying her. I would have taken my passport and gone back home to be with my mother. Even all that stress over the birth of Archie, I would have actually gone back to the US and had my baby. Since the royal family didn’t care about him anyway. I feel maybe because she loved Harry so much, she let go of so much agency in her life. And she placed that agency with the brf. She gave them so much power over her life.
    And I’m still mad at Harry for being so naive. When the brf told him that there was no money to pay for Meghan, I wish he had understood then that they would need to leave and that Meghan didn’t need to uproot her whole life to be with him

    • Alexandria says:

      I will cut Harry some slack. He has never married before so he wouldn’t expect his so called family to reveal their racist two-faced selves. He was probably so pleasantly surprised that he managed to marry Meghan who had charisma, brains and beauty. Meghan was also optimistic and eager to work. Both of them were so hopeful about their future and potential work. They did not think it was easy but they thought it would be fair. Thank God they’re out. The one thing I’ll never get is the Queen’s actions towards them versus Andrew. I really doubt they would be friends with someone like her if she’s not their grandma.

      • Tessa says:

        I think Harry realized long ago what his brother is like. But he and Meghan probably in their wildest dreams during the engagement did not expect that their baby would be compared to a chimp by a journalist and Not One of his relatives including the baby’s paternal grandfather complained publicly. I read a book about Meghan recently and the author wrote that Kate would be cold to Chelsy and later Cressida. So Harry IMO had some inkling about his sister in law’s behavior. But maybe he did not realize it could go beyond coldness of his sister in law.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Tanya: Harry said that when they came to him before the wedding and told him that there was no money for Meghan, he knew it was going to be tough for them but I don’t think he expected his family to sanction the smear campaign against Meghan. He saw how Kate was welcomed and protected by the family and expected the same for his wife. I don’t think that was a unreasonable expectation. I think he believed them when they said that they had learned from the mistakes they made with Diana. He got assurances from the Palace that Meghan would be protected. You can’t blame him for believing that the institution and family had changed. This is the line that was also fed to the public.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      ” When the brf told him that there was no money to pay for Meghan”

      I still do not exactly understand what the BRF (or their flunkies) meant by this statement.

      • lanne says:

        I think they meant that they didn’t want Meghan in the family, but were too cowardly to say so openly. They thought, “we’ll just push the Hollywood showgirl out instead. She’s no match for us! She’ll be too intimidated and she’ll crumble under the pressure. She’ll be gone in 3 years tops (degree wife), she’s “too old” to have kids, and then we’ll marry Harry off to Annabel Earl’s Daughter instead!” We’re geniuses! Let’s sip tea.”

      • Sid says:

        It was another tactic to try and get the wedding called off. Throw up as many roadblocks as possible in front of of M&H in hopes that one or the other gets frustrated or rethinks things. They never wanted Meghan in the family.

        In what universe is there no money for a daughter-in-law (one of only 2) of the next king?

      • Alexandria says:

        Exactly Sid. They wanted to coast off the popularity of two senior royals as they did senior royal work but didn’t want to accord the protection and remuneration the Sussex family needed.

      • Amy Too says:

        I get that it was meant to make Meghan and Harry reconsider marrying, but when they said they couldn’t “pay for her,” what exactly did that mean? They couldn’t pay for her to be a working royal? Like they couldn’t pay for her work clothing, personal project expenses, and assistants but they would give her a private allowance from Charles’ personal income so she could buy clothes and necessities for her private life? Or were they not going to pay for ANYTHING. Like she wouldn’t even get an allowance for her private expenses and they honestly expected her to either keep working or be funded by her and Harry’s savings accounts? Was the idea that she’d run through her savings in a couple of years on fancy clothes and then have to divorce him so she could go back to work as an actress? Because we know they would not have allowed her to continue working as an actress while married to Harry, even if she weren’t a working royal.

        But Harry gets working royal money and what was going to stop him from just sharing it with her and having her benefit from the money that he was getting? Like she would be living with Harry in the home that he uses his working royal money to pay for. And she could have (and did) work out of the same offices and use the same staff that Harry did that were already paid for with his working royal money if she wanted to work. Was the idea that she would never be able to do any of her own individual projects without Harry because they weren’t going to pay for security for her when she was alone? So the idea was that she could tagalong to his work as “Harry’s wife,” but not ever work on her own as the Duchess of Sussex who has her own projects and patronages? And whenever she chose to tagalong with Harry, then she’d have to share his security and his staff and his car? And she’d have to wear clothes that were paid for privately by either herself or Harry? And the hope was that it would get too annoying and too expensive for her to do that so she would end up just sitting at home alone all day while Harry went out to do royal work and went on royal tours by himself? Did they expect Harry to accompany her to the grocery store or to hang out with friends, too, if she didn’t have her own security? Did they think that she wouldn’t need security because she wouldn’t be noticed because she wasn’t a working royal? Or were they always going to pay for security for her but just not the other stuff like funding for her solo projects and work clothes?

        I just can’t believe they really thought that that would work in any sense, that Harry would be okay with that, that Meghan would be okay with that, and that the press and public wouldn’t ask any questions about why Meghan wasn’t allowed to work even though we had been hearing for years that whoever Harry married would be a working royal.

        Was this “we can’t afford to pay for her” remark something that was just made up by a random courtier or family member who was trying to use it as an excuse for why Harry shouldn’t marry Meghan but Harry immediately knew it was BS and called them out on the lie? Or was it something that was seriously suggested once and then immediately shut down by Harry as being stupid and unacceptable? Harry did sort of brush it off as one of many stupid little things that people around him said about his marrying Meghan, so I wonder if it was just mentioned and then immediately shut down when he said “‘no, you’re gonna pay for my wife. Obviously.” I just can’t believe that anyone in the RF or royal institution honestly thought that Harry could be convinced that his wife shouldn’t be allowed to work and should basically live like a fundamentalist trad wife, unable to leave the house unless accompanied by her husband.

      • Dee Kay says:

        I think the “we won’t pay for Meghan, she should consider taking acting jobs” was a passive-aggressive way of either Charles or William saying, “We don’t want you to marry her.” I think it was Charles because he also used this tactic when Harry left — he wouldn’t pay for any of his security and in fact stripped Harry of his security detail without any warning. All of that was trying to control Harry through money. That’s how a lot of wealthy families operate: they make their children’s life decisions for them by deciding what they can have funds for and what they can’t. It’s emotional, interpersonal cowardice. Charles couldn’t say, “I don’t approve of your choice, I don’t think she’s the right one, I have misgivings about your marriage” or “I don’t want you to leave royal service.” What he said was, “If you do X, I won’t fund it or I’ll take the funding away.” Thank goodness Harry bet on himself and on Meghan and they walked. Being controlled by your family’s money is no way to live.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If this really happened, I think it more likely from William. He wanted the full amount of whatever Charles would extend as Duchy funding. He’d allow a little for Harry to be kept around as public whipping boy, but he didn’t want Meghan to have any help or assistance for work that made W&K look as useless and lazy as they are.

        Remember how the Queen and Charles agreed to co-fund a new Household for Harry and Meghan at BP? They would have been moved fully to SG funding the following year if they hadn’t left. All the while, William was publicly screaming about how their Household had to remain under his control, under his staff, under his direction. QEII and Charles (temporarily) stood up to William, said no, and were moving Harry and Meghan away from William’s control.

      • Eurydice says:

        What I get from that is there was no money from the Sovereign Grant to pay for Meghan. There was a BBC article that said 95% of H&M’s income was from Charles’ income that he gets from the Duchy of Cornwall – the other 5% came from the Sovereign Grant.

      • Debbie says:

        It simply means, BTB, that there was not enough money to pay for the Queen’s golden piano, Kate’s buttons, dozens of ponies, corgies, Land Rovers, a royal train, the grounds, the many castles, and palaces AND Meghan. My God, what do you think, they’re made of? Stolen treasures?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Meghan wouldn’t have been funded out of the Sovereign Grant at the start, so that doesn’t make any sense. Harry should have been moved to SG funding years ago, but his brother wanted to keep control of him and his communications. Ergo Harry was kept under Charles’s funding (Duchy) long after he should have been moved to SG.

        When they married, Harry and Meghan should have been moved to SG funding immediately as planning for the future. Or moved starting January 2018, after their engagement announcement. There were slowly being moved to SG funding, against William’s wishes, in Fall 2018. Once they were fully under SG funding, if they had stayed, William would have no say in their funding (until if/when he becomes king). If they were kept under Duchy funding, like William was demanding, he would have had control of them even once Charles was king.

  15. Molly says:

    That bullying claim right before the Oprah interview was the most obvious and ham-fisted PR stunt I’ve ever seen. I still can’t believe they put out an official statement with a straight face.

  16. Louise177 says:

    I really want to know what the bullying claims are. Usually something major gets released but the only thing that was were 5am texts and emails. If that’s the biggest problem no wonder the complaints were rescinded. The bullying investigation says a lot considering nothing is happening with Meghan’s claims and Andrew. Could they be anymore obvious?

    • lanne says:

      Not texts. 5am emails. From Australia.

    • Debbie says:

      I don’t know about other people, but I keep odd hours. I have been known to work late, and submit my work documents at 11 pm or some such hours. The recipients of these emails just open them when THEY start work. That’s the beauty of living in the electronic age. Don’t these palace “workers” know that? Anyway, if Meghan sent such an email from a place w/ a different time zone, that’s even more understandable.

    • Lila says:

      From what I’ve read, the “bullied” aides were claiming:

      – Meghan insisted on them having weekly or daily meetings.

      – Meghan expected them to keep her informed of her schedule for the day.

      – Meghan hired someone to get them coffee and Harry stopped making them coffee, which apparently “ruined” morale.

      – Meghan would inform them when their work wasn’t up to par and “that undermined their confidence”.

  17. Coco says:

    It must have been hard for Meghan’s staff to be transported out of the pages of a Henry James novel and into the 21st century.

  18. aquarius64 says:

    Meghan battled the Fail and won. Two years. KP is run by idiots and the head idiot will be head of state.

  19. Over it says:

    Meghan showed up said good morning and in the words of Rhianna, let’s work work work work. kP staff said work? Like is that code for something else? Clearly these jobs were given because of who they knew and not what they knew

  20. Dee Kay says:

    I bet William thinks he’s some genius strategic (future) monarch like Elizabeth I and Jason Knauf convinced William he could be his Walsingham: the conniving master of secrets, the sly manipulator who could run everything important on the low, behind the scenes. When in fact they are just Dumb and Dumber. Meghan is a real professional who understands employment law. William and Knauf are evil petty vicious idiots who understood nothing except that racism and misogynoir sells newspapers.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Dee Kay, you have pointed out a perfect scenario as to how this ALL unfolded!!! Jason “assured” FFK “The Tooth” that he would create a solid facade to undermine a perfectly planned smear campaign against Meghan with zero teeth, hehe!! Everyone would buy that Meghan was the ultimate “angry black woman” smear and not bat an eye. They didn’t realize that Meghan would immediately stand up for herself and take them to down a legal process.

  21. tamsin says:

    I was under the impression that Jason Knauf is an American and born and raised in the south, and therefore might have some pre-conceived notions about assertive, competent, successful, and powerful black women. Does anyone know anything about Jason’s background?

    • Lurker25 says:

      He’s from Texas. Near or in Dallas, I think. Wealthy, very white. Went to school in NZ. Worked PR for a bank in Scotland, covering up a huge scheme to screw over borrowers. I forget the details, but it was bad. Lots of regular people got hurt.
      Meanwhile William was tired of older, experienced staffers and went on a hunt for a new press sec. He finally settled on Knauf bc he’s the only one who didn’t come with his own ideas, just agreed with William.
      Also, regarding the staff being upset at Meghan’s with ethic (this is in NO WAY an excuse, just an FYI): They get paid so little it’s shocking. I think Knauf got, at most, £50k. The others around £39-35k. The Royals think working for them is a privilege, so don’t pay. Especially the Cambridges. This is all reported, btw, not opinion. It recently leaked that the queen’s head of security got £35-40k. It’s why they go tattling to the papers for money.

    • notasugarhere says:

      He attended Uni in New Zealand along with his friend and classmate, Dan Wootten.

  22. Lurker25 says:

    Excellent thread by a guy who specialized in investigating workplace/institution claims of mismanagement and harassment. Clearly and calmly goes over all the aspects of the Meghan-is-bully claims and blows them apart.
    Fascinating and well-worth reading.

  23. Lizzie says:

    ‘Oh sure, I want to spread evil gossip about the black duchess because everyone knows she is the worst. Oh wait, I might have my name published and be held accountable, I take it all back.’ I hope Meghan’s lawyers release a report and name every name and every lie.

    • notasugarhere says:

      It won’t matter. I think her lawyers will keep pushing for an official investigation, done by an independent third party. That’s the only way to completely clear her name.

  24. Lurker25 says:

    Sorry, double post

  25. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    The royals will never admit the bullying didn’t happen. At the end of the lengthy investigation, they will issue a non-statement such as “the results of the investigation are private, and were dealt with privately” — and hope the public continues to believe Meghan is a bully without issuing any findings of fact.