Low: Kensington Palace lied about Duchess Meghan’s ‘Saudi earrings’

Just before the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Oprah interview aired in March 2021, Kensington Palace dropped their huge smear package on Meghan specifically. This was the birth of the “bullying investigation” and all of the stories of how Meghan made KP employees sob constantly because she assigned them tasks to complete in a timely manner. There was another, more disturbing and carefully worded smear within the oppo dump though: that in 2018, Meghan had purposefully worn diamond earrings gifted to her by Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman when she knew that MBS had likely ordered Jamal Khashoggi’s murder.

It was a pretty bold smear, and it came from not just KP, it came from Angela Kelly, the Queen’s dresser and keeper of the Royal Collection jewelry. Because… those Saudi earrings were a wedding gift, and as such, they belong to the Royal Collection, not Meghan personally. The only way Meghan would have gotten those earrings is if they were given to her by Angela Kelly. Meghan and Harry also didn’t receive the earrings directly – it’s likely that Mohammed bin Salman gave the earrings to Charles and William, especially given that Charles and William met MBS in early 2018. It’s also likely that Meghan was told that the earrings were a gift from the Saudi royal family in general, not MBS specifically. I bring all of this up because the story/smear about the earrings is also included in Valentine Low’s book, Courtiers. Low broke the story originally, and again, it’s so curious to see how information is framed in a Mail excerpt from the book:

During their tour, Harry and Meghan spent 48 hours in Fiji. On the first night, they attended a state dinner hosted by the president, at which the Duchess wore an eye-catching pair of diamond earrings. Kensington Palace said they were loaned, but refused to say from whom. Even by Palace standards, this struck reporters covering the tour as unnecessarily unhelpful.

The reason for this reticence would not become apparent until more than two years later, when I revealed that the chandelier earrings had been a wedding gift from the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman. At the time of the wedding, there was nothing controversial about the gift. However, on October 2, 2018, the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a leading dissident, was lured to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, where he was murdered and dismembered before his body was disposed of. In the run-up to the Sussexes’ tour, the murder was a major international news story.

As early as October 12 – four days before the start of the tour – suspicions were growing that the Crown Prince had personally ordered the killing. Then, on October 20, three days before the dinner in Fiji, Saudi Arabia admitted its officials were responsible for his death.

The idea that Meghan would, at a state occasion, knowingly wear earrings given to her by a man accused of having blood on his hands was surprising – to say the least. Meghan’s staff, in particular, were bemused that she should wear them, given her previous public advocacy for women’s rights in Saudi Arabia. So the Kensington Palace briefing that the earrings were loaned had been misleading. But who was responsible?

Sam Cohen told colleagues at the time that the earrings had been borrowed from the jeweller Chopard. This, one presumes, is because it’s what she had been told. It was not true, however. A couple of months after the dinner, a sharp-eyed reader of a blog called Meghan’s Mirror spotted that they were from a collection by the Hong Kong jeweller Butani. So, not Chopard, and not borrowed from the jeweller. Was it an honest, if surprising, mistake? Or was someone lying? And if so, why?

The earrings were given another outing three weeks after Fiji, when Meghan wore them to the Prince of Wales’s 70th birthday party at Buckingham Palace on November 14. At that time, Cohen still appeared to be under the impression that they’d been loaned by Chopard. However, others knew the truth. When the earrings had first appeared in photos, London-based staff responsible for registering details of all Royal gifts had recognised them and alerted Kensington Palace. A source said: ‘We made a decision not to confront Meghan and Harry on it, out of fear for what their reaction would be.’

After the Duchess wore the earrings for a second time, an aide took up the matter with Harry. He is said to have looked ‘shocked’ that people knew where the earrings came from, although the Sussexes’ lawyers deny that he was ever questioned about their provenance.

Later, Meghan’s lawyers, Schillings, said: ‘At no stage did the Duchess tell staff that the earrings were “borrowed from a jeweller”, as this would have been untrue and therefore any suggestion that she encouraged them to lie to the media is baseless.’

Two days later, Schillings added: ‘It is possible she said the earrings were borrowed, which is correct, as presents from heads of state to the Royal Family are gifts to Her Majesty the Queen, who can then choose to lend them out to members of the family.’

But that is not convincing: if the earrings were loaned by the Queen, staff would have said so. And no one in normal conversation would ever have referred to them as being loaned; they were a wedding gift for Meghan, to use as she liked.

[From The Daily Mail]

Again, this is not hard: either the earrings belong to Meghan personally or they belong to the Royal Collection. Does Meghan still have the earrings? Doubtful, because Angela Kelly would have leaked that Meghan ran off with Royal Collection jewelry. So you have Meghan being given the earrings by Angela Kelly, who told her they were a wedding gift from the Saudi royal family. The MBS issue looks bad… because William and Charles had literally met with MBS in person just months before MBS ordered the assassination of Khashoggi.

All that being said, I’m completely open to having a conversation about the provenance of royal jewelry. Surely, if the Windsors are so concerned with Saudi blood diamonds, they’ll return those earrings Meghan wore? They’ll probably need to return all of the other blood diamonds given to Camilla and the rest of the Windsor clan too. I mean, if Meghan’s earrings are so problematic, surely the rest of the Saudi gifts are too? Perhaps there could be some kind of public audit of Royal Collection jewelry, specifically for gifts from Saudi Arabia which now need to be returned to the kingdom.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Instar.

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

112 Responses to “Low: Kensington Palace lied about Duchess Meghan’s ‘Saudi earrings’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Amy T says:

    The mean girling came from the top of the palace food chain. Just icky.

    • Geegee says:

      Wow Angela Kelly just sounds like a snobby racist rat doesn’t she.

      • ML says:

        I would love to see Angela Kkk more front and center when they report how to jewelry is loaned out, where it comes from, to whom/ what institution it belongs, etc. Low totally makes it sound as though this was all evil Meghan, when it really looks like she was framed.

      • How Rude and crude. Do she REALLY say this one?

  2. CROWHOOD says:

    This is like watching Fox News govern an entire island.

  3. ThatsNotOkay says:

    To the BRF: Give everything you were given or that you’ve stolen back. See how easy that was?

    Honestly, I’d like to see if they have any ethically sourced or uncontroversial jewelry or wealth. #AbolishTheMonarchy

    • Jan90067 says:

      I had to look it up to be sure; Diana’s famous sapphire suite of diamond and sapphire jewels (necklace, earrings, bracelet) was given to her as a wedding present in 1981 by Crown Prince Fahd of Saudi Arabia. She wore the necklace, earrings, and bracelet from the set for the Brisbane reception. She is pictured in them many, many times.

      So, is Peggy going to take the sapphires away from KHate and return them, too?

      • ThatsNotOkay says:

        30 years before 9/11?! Diana, what were you thinking!!!!! Lol

      • Julaine says:

        At the time of the wedding of Diana & Charles the rules were different. They changed after Camilla & Charles married and she was gifted 3 enormous sets of the gaudiest jewels, as a gift of the Saudi government from a tour of the Middle East. This is a pretty well known perk of middle Eastern tours or State visits.

        So Diana’s sapphires we’re a personal gift to Diana and her personal property. Just like Camilla’s haul is all hers. After the uproar though the rules changed to all gifts worth more than $500 are the property of the crown/Royal Collection and the Monarch allows the recipient the use under a lifetime loan. After the recipient’s death they must be returned to the Monarch who is free to bestow them as he or she wishes. So those earrings belong to the Royal Collection but Meghan has the right to wear them for her entire life.

        It’s considered a major insult to refuse such a gift and would have caused a major diplomatic incident to try to return them to the giver. You would be amazed how many pieces in the family have been acquired this way.

  4. SugarHere says:

    There was a time when a bunch of maleficient plantation owners would pretend to gift their freed slave some silverware so that they would be caught for theft and returned into bondage. To me the British Royals reason as planters and act as planters. Despicable set up.

    • goofpuff says:

      This is exactly that. Angela Kelly and Kensington palace did their best to set Meghan up. I’m sure this wasn’t the first or last time.

    • Kim says:

      @SugarHere: Wow. Thank you for educating us about this type of deception. Oh sure, I can imagine that H & M would “react” to the news considering they were set up! That’s pretty obvious because we all know that Meghan is far too astute to intentionally wear something from MBS. I can’t even with these people.

  5. Heather C says:

    A source said: ‘We made a decision not to confront Meghan and Harry on it, out of fear for what their reaction would be.’

    They are so doubling down on the bullying thing, it’s amazing. It’s been quoted so many times, and it’s just so applicable. Michael Sheen as Tony Blair in The Queen: Will someone please save these people from themselves!

    • Lindsay says:

      That’s artfully worded too: “out of fear for what their reaction would be.” This likely means the staffers realized they’d messed up (by failing to check the provenance or by being misled by Angela Kelly), they didn’t want to own up to their mistake to M&H, and hoped they could just be quiet and the press would move on. Which it did, until this got trotted out years later to smear Meghan.

      • BeanieBean says:

        Yep, said the same thing below before reading comments. Continuing the narrative of being afraid of M&H, when in all likelihood they’re afraid of revealing their incompetence & getting fired.

    • AmB says:

      @Heather C:

      Nicely played.

    • Anastasia says:

      This might be a time that I did actually fear them, because, based on their values, can you imagine what their reaction would be if they found out that the staff and Angela Kelly gave them blood diamonds to wear? This might actually be justified rage.

      I guess the part that sucks is that the staff wouldn’t see it as justified.

      Actually, now that I’ve said that, it makes a lot of sense with the “bullying”/”Meghan (and Harry) don’t know their place” narrative. I wonder how many times they were given dubious projects and/or jewels and had already put their feet (foots?) down.

      • JW says:

        I find it very hard to believe that H&M didn’t know who gifted her a substantial pair of diamond earrings for her wedding. Seriously? They would have overseen thank you notes. These are gifts between royal families who have a long history. She knew exactly who they were from.

  6. Nutella toast says:

    BP can safely cushion them in the bag of cash that Charles is going to return.

  7. Mooney says:

    The only time Meghan got to wear the royal jewels, apart from the wedding of course, and still smeared both times for it. Besides, weren’t there headlines that Prince Wails is ensuring how Meghan doesn’t get to wear Diana’s jewellery or even the crown jewels and that only his stalker be allowed because hierarchy and all?
    God! I feel so angry all over again for Meghan and what she had to endure.

  8. Becks1 says:

    Sigh. This story again? So Low wants people to think that Meghan was hoarding jewels and being dodgy about where they were from and was purposely wearing earrings from MBS in the midst of the international outcry over Khashoggi?

    I don’t know the rules about personal gifts vs royal gifts. Like the ruby and diamond necklace Kate wore with the black velvet dress back in 2011 (she wore the matching earrings to a service at WA, might have been “the” commonwealth service) was said to be a “private gift” and we weren’t told anything beyond that at the time. So is that Kate’s personal necklace, or is it part of the royal collection? diana got a lot of jewelry as gifts, how much was personal and how much went to the royal collection? Is it all matter of whether the gift is from a head of state or government representative?

    Anyway, I think a few things here are clear. Meghan did not know the earrings were directly from MBS. She may have been told they were a gift from Saudi Arabia, but I imagine that would be the most she was told. And she probably did consider them borrowed if she borrowed them from Angela Kelly. AK was so stingy with lending Meghan jewelry that she definitely made a choice here in lending those earrings to Meghan.

    ANYWAY (again lol) this whole thing makes me so mad bc if we want to examine the origins of the jewelry the royal family wears, sure, let’s do that. Let’s start with the crown jewels.

    (btw John Oliver has a great segment on his latest episode about countries stealing artifacts from other countries, he rips the British museum apart, its super interesting. I think there’s a second part next week.)

    • Jais says:

      Thanks for the John Oliver rec! I’ll never forget how he said marrying into the royal family was going to be really weird for her and she still had to time to back out. I’m glad she didn’t but am sad how it went down. This jewelry thing is such a setup.

      • Pam says:

        I loved when John Oliver called the Royal Family “duties” a “Pseudo-Silly Job”! 🤣🤣🤣

    • C-Shell says:

      That Low is outright saying that Meghan had **any** agency or even knowledge about the provenance of the damned earrings is a blatant misrepresentation. I’m not convinced Meghan would have worn them if she even knew they were a gift from the Saudis — the whole Khashoggi story was blowing up at that time. AK is purely evil and, whether she was in cahoots with KP or not, this was a setup.

      “A source said: ‘We made a decision not to confront Meghan and Harry on it, out of fear for what their reaction would be’.” Oh, there’s a great deal of truth here. I’d replace “confront” with “fill in” and maybe get closer to it. I can well imagine Harry’s reaction to learning that Meghan was given blood-drenched diamond earrings from the Royal Collection.

      Low can attempt to manipulate the facts all day long, but the truth is right there for anyone with critical thinking ability to see.

      • Becks1 says:

        Weirdly that was the part that sort of rang true to me – that whenever the staff found out (or if the staff had known all along), they didnt’ want to tell H&M that the earrings were from MBS because they knew the news would not go over well (of course it wouldnt!) Out of all the jewels in the royal collection, someone (I’m assuming AK) lent Meghan jewels that were a recent gift from MBS himself?!?!

        I mean I know Meghan is a better person than me but I would be LIVID if I found out I was set up like that. I imagine Harry was livid as well.

        (and FTR being angry and upset at a setup like that is not bullying LOL.)

    • Snuffles says:

      I saw that John Oliver episode yesterday and it was brilliantly done. The EXCUSES these British art historians gave for stealing and keeping these treasures were absolutely ABSURD. I thought I was watching an SNL skit.

      • C says:

        Lol. They know it’s theft. It’s why they passed the British Museum Act of 1963 which basically forbids the return of stolen art.

      • BeanieBean says:

        Really? Now that is interesting. There’s been a lot of repatriation going on in recent years, maybe eventually someone will re-examine that act?

      • C says:

        I doubt it. It was the legal basis for them ruling in 2005 that Nazi-looted art couldn’t be returned.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @C, I did not know about the British Museum Act of 1963. Thank you. Looking it up I came across a video Vice did called The Unfiltered History Tour. The focus was on 10 artifacts from 10 different nations in the British Museum that were taken by the BRF/British Empire.

        Amazing how they created an act that says we did it and we’re not returning a d@mn thing. Then again, so many acts were created to exempt the BRF.

    • Nic919 says:

      There is an excerpt of an article saying that the Queen received the gift in March 2018. So it is definitely a part of the royal collection. The Times reported this, so this is Low lying again and implying Meghan controls things from the royal collection.

    • Elizabeth says:

      I believe that Angela Kelly loaned Meghan the earrings, knowing their provenance, and didn’t tell her solely so that the Royal Family could smear her later. It’s not like Meghan was rooting around in the collection and picked them out herself. The Queen, or Angela Kelly, in this case, gives the wearer a limited choice of items.

      • Becks1 says:

        The one thing I keep turning over in my head is – did AK care that they were from MBS? The queen has lots of blood jewelry. Because if she cared, why did it take over 2 years for that information to come out? AK had no qualms about smearing Meghan. Was it something she was sitting on, was it something Low was sitting on, was it something that AK forgot and then at some point remembered and called up Low? Or called up Kate and told her?

      • Betsy says:

        @Becks1 – of course Kelly cared. The history of the other jewels is, for most, misty at best (many would probably have a vague idea that many pieces were stolen or ill begotten) and impenetrable at worst. Khashoggi had only *just* been murdered in a most horrific way. This was a deliberate attempt to link Meghan with that murder. I mean what kind of deranged is Kelly that that’s how she rolls?

      • Kingston says:

        LOL Why is everyone giving angela kelly agency? She’s a servant, isnt she? Where do you get it from that she has any authority to “loan”
        any member of the royal family anything?????

        She was betty’s right hand servant so she carried out betty’s instructions. There are pictures of betty shaking MBS’s hands in March 2018 when he is said to hv presented the earings to betty as a wedding gift. They became part of the BRF crown jewels, there for BETTY to authorize the wearing of them by whoever she chose, NOT her servant, kelly.

      • lanne says:

        Kelly had it in for Meghan when Meghan didn’t kowtow to her over the tiara loan. Harry went to bat for her, unlike Kate, who went without a tiara test. Kelly had to put Meghan in her place. The queen likely had a say in what tiara Meghan would wear for the wedding, but Kelly would likely only offer the most ill-gotten jewels to Meghan. Operation Get Rid Of Meghan was in effect, and it was all hands on deck. That’s what I believe Charles and company are so afraid that harry will talk about in his book.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Betsy nah they’ve got a lot of jewelry of sketchy origin (especially Saudi). thats what I mean when I say she didn’t “care” – like maybe she just tossed Meghan some jewelry (maybe purposely choosing Saudi, maybe even purposely choosing MBS bc he was problematic even at the time of gifting the earrings) . I’m just turning over ideas for why this took almost 2.5 years to come out. It could have come out during the smear campaign – not only does Meghan DEMAND tiaras, she wore earrings from MBS!!!! like you said it was an attempt to link her to the murder, so wouldn’t it have carried more weight if it was released at that time? I wonder if someone – maybe William – wanted to sit on it to save it as a final resort? If they didn’t want people paying too much attention to other royal jewels? etc. I’m not saying it wasn’t a set up – I think it was – but there’s this 1% of me that just wonders “why the hell did this story take so long to come out”, you know?

        @Kingston its been well documented that Kelly DID have a lot of agency in the royal household. One story about Kate is that she made a point of buddying up to Kelly early on so that’s why she gets a lot of the big jewelry on loan. My guess is that Betty probably gave a blanket approval of several items for various family members and then Kelly doles them out accordingly. But its definitely been a thing for years that AK had way more power in that household than she should have had.

        @Lanne oh Kelly definitely had it in for Meghan and I agree it was a direct result of Harry and the tiara incident. I wonder how many other sketchy items Kelly had put aside for Meghan to wear. Remember we never got to see her wear that many big jewels.

      • Betsy says:

        @Becks1 – I think it did come out back then? The story wasn’t totally new to me today. I do not have a memory like a steel trap for these details like some posters here do, but I dimly remembered that Meghan wore earrings around that time and that it was announced that they’d been gifted (to someone; I don’t remember if they tried to claim *to her* or just sort of the royals in general) by MBS. It was weird to me because Meghan is very conscientious and I thought gosh, that’s out of character for her.

        It wouldn’t be exactly out of character for Angela Kelly though. That would be a great way to set Meghan up to her.

      • Nic919 says:

        The MBS link to the earrings only came out days prior to the Oprah interview. At the time she wore them in Fiji there was no obvious link to MBS. The CIA only made that conclusion on Nov 16, 2018, well after the Fiji state dinner.

        So was Meghan supposed to know more than the CIA while she was on a tour?

  9. Nic919 says:

    Angela Kelly had no problem saying which tiara could not be used for the wedding so it’s pretty clear she sat silent on these earrings on purpose.

  10. Osty says:

    So a whole arse article to say nothing intelligent? They really want to pin Meghan with something but have nothing so they result go these asinine articles hoping it stickb

  11. Em says:

    Yawn at this point she needs to ask them to give her the earrings. If they’re gonna keep smearing her then she needs to be in actual possession of these earrings. Also all these books kinda fall flat now because people just don’t care anymore

  12. Amy Bee says:

    Meghan said that she doesn’t have the earrings and that they belong to the Royal Collection. Camilla has an entire suite of jewellery from Saudi Arabia and when Diana got married she also got a bunch of sapphire and diamond jewellery to match her engagement ring. So is it that the Camilla and Kate are never going to wear those jewels? What about all those horses that the Saudis have given them over the years.

  13. equality says:

    According to the rules on royal gifts, something of that value would belong to the crown, so “they were a wedding gift for Meghan, to use as she liked.” is a lie. I’m sure that the earrings, along with hundreds of other things with a shady provenance, are in a vault with the crown jewels.

    • Startup Spouse says:

      This story is confusing me a little bit, but here’s me putting on my tinfoil tiara from what I can gather:

      MBS gifts M the earrings as a wedding gift, but they go to the Royal Collection due to their value. Angela Kelly, knowing that it would bring M bad headlines, lends M the earrings and doesn’t tell her directly about the provenance. (They are “borrowed” because they do not belong to M.) KP then leaks about the earrings’ provenance in their smear campaign. It was a setup.

      Am I on the right track?

      ETA that I see your posts below and it looks the same to you guys as it does to me. The RF and their staff are a bunch of wankers.

      • equality says:

        Given that some of the tiaras were said to have a shady provenance so couldn’t be used for the royal weddings, the courtiers seem well aware of what shouldn’t be loaned out, so, yes, a set up.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        This is a great thread on the issue. Absolutely believe she was set up.

        The thread includes a photo of the Queen wearing Saudi gifted jewelry several weeks after Meghan.

        Aljazeera has done a number of timelines on Khashoggi’s murder. (includes commentary from the Orange One claiming it was people going rogue. gah) October 20 is when it was confirmed he was killed inside the consulate. People were arrested. MBS wasn’t named. The Sussexes tour started on October 16th. MBS wasn’t officially named by the CIA until November 17, 2018.

      • Petra (Brazen Archetyped Phenomenal Woman) says:

        @Agreatreckoning, thanks for the link to the thread. I’m glad you are able to post the link because I was not able to.

  14. Jais says:

    I don’t even understand this. So Meghan was loaned earrings from the Saudi family by AK and said they were borrowed. But was likely unaware they were specifically gifted from MBS. And Low is making this into a thing? When it was likely AK and possibly some courtiers setting Meghan up? Am I understanding correctly?

    • Abby says:

      Didn’t see your post when I wrote mine, but that is what it looks like to me too.

    • Becks1 says:

      no, you understand it correctly. Meghan was loaned earrings, maybe she knew they were from the Saudis, maybe not, and likely Angela Kelly didn’t give two effs that they were from MBS, but she sure leaked that info when it was convenient to smear Meghan the most.

      • Petra (Brazen Archetyped Phenomenal Woman) says:

        @DuchessCofC did an amazing thread on this on Twitter. People need to go and read this thread.

      • Pam says:

        She was set up. Honestly, if they’re so concerned with all the Royal jewelry origins, perhaps they should give it all back.

  15. SugarHere says:

    Reading that other piece of slander, we can only imagine how much more planned plantings the Sussexes have been through and chose to deliberately leave out during the Oprah interview, to avoid legal issues. There must be a ton.

  16. Abby says:

    Reading this, I’m putting on a tinfoil hat. What if courtiers or whoever purposefully kept the origin of the jewelry from Meghan, but then they encouraged her to wear the earrings to set her up for a fall?

    • Kaiser says:

      that’s exactly what happened.

      • Becks1 says:

        yeah that’s pretty clearly what happened, no tinfoil hat needed. She was basically set up by someone (AK, the KP courtiers, IDK) so that this could be used against her.

    • Couch potato says:

      I think we all know by now that’s the truth. Angela Kelly is far from an angel.

    • Jaded says:

      AK47 deliberately set Meghan up. Remember the fuss over her stonewalling Meghan when she’d made an appointment with her hairdresser to test-run tiaras and Harry finally had to step in to demand that AK stop cancelling out or not showing up and get the damn tiara test done. She is a horrible, racist harpy and I hope she’s booted from her position by KC3.

  17. lanne says:

    This was the dumbest smear in the world. Because Diana’s most famous jewels, the ones that Kate is itching to wear–are Saudi. The sapphire suites (2 of them) are Saudi and Omani. Lots and lots of the queen’s most well-known jewels are of Saudi and gulf state origin. Diana’s big pearl earrings–Kate has worn the smaller ones, but the bigger ones Diana wore in Pakistan–are Qatari. One of the Queen’s diamond necklaces worn by the queen and Diana–Saudi. By attempting to smear Meghan this way, they have brought scrutiny to the origins of all of their biggest bling. I suppose they will be surprised when Camilla sports the Koh-i-Noor and the response is…let’s say, less than positive. Scratch that. It’s going to be savage.

    Every time they smear Meghan and Harry, it comes back to bite them.

    • Lucy says:

      I don’t know if it’s because we don’t understand that rules are for other people or if they don’t understand that double standards are clear and people aren’t dumb.

  18. MsIam says:

    Who is to say Meghan even knew they were meant to be a wedding gift to her? Those evil bitches might have “neglected” to even mention that to her until the ish hit the fan.

  19. Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

    It was the queen, herself, who accepted these earrings from MBS, in person, as a wedding gift to Meghan.

  20. Pumpkin (Was Sofia) says:

    *eyeroll*. Sorry but 95% of the royal jewels don’t have a wonderful history. There’s a reason why the palace dropped the whole “blood earrings” smear because they don’t want people looking too closely at the story of where the rest of the jewels came from

    • QuiteContrary says:

      Exactly this, Pumpkin.
      The royals have been wearing blood diamonds and other ill-gotten gems for centuries. But of course, set up the biracial woman to take the fall.

    • ChillinginDC says:

      It’s so stupid. Even Jason the Knife dropped this real quick when jewelry historians popped up pointing out the providence of all kinds of things and also pointing out that Meghan doesn’t own those earring, the former Queen did.

  21. ThisWitchIsntDead says:

    It is so obvious to me that Angela Kelly intentionally set Meghan up with these earrings. She intended to sabotage her. Now Low is carrying the torch more than two years later. It is especially cruel.

    • molly says:

      Angela Kelly is an absolute snake, as was most of the KP press office.

      Every time stories like this come out, it’s even more clear why Meghan was so unhappy. No amount of (borrowed!) jewels is worth living like that.

  22. thaisajs says:

    While we’re examining the dubious origins of royal jewels, perhaps we could also look into how many suitcases of cash the royal family has accepted from Middle Eastern countries over the years?

    • Kingston says:

      Spkng of suitcases of cash from middle easterners, as well as all the horses gifted to betty over the years and, of course, soooooooooo many pieces of jewelry, one has to ask: what do the brits give as gifts to other royals and dignitaries when they visit?

      I vaguely recall that Pres Obama received a signed photo of betty and, of course, we recall dimward and sofiesta “gifting” the PM of one of the countries on the 2nd leg of the flop Caribbean tour a signed photo of themselves. Prince Harry has mentioned the cringeworthiness of “gifting” pix of himself to HoS when he visited other countries while a “working royal.”

      Are signed pix of the british royals the extent of their gifts to others when, in fact, they receive high-end gifts including millions in cash, horses and jewelry?

      Such nasty, spineless, class-less cheapskates.

  23. Elizabeth says:

    Real quandary: How does one keep up with all the smears against Harry and Meghan? There are soooooo many!

  24. Layla says:

    Valentine low is such a b*tch.
    He knew about Meghan being suicidal and still manipulated stories to make her the bad guy. I’d want to punch him in the face but sh*t splatters

  25. Harper says:

    Remember that this Saudi jewels story was leaked in tandem with the bullying allegations the weekend of the Oprah interview. KP created a slander opportunity then held onto it until they needed it.

    Also, I am struck by the fact that Charles had a 70th birthday party at Buckingham Palace. It reminds me how the Keens whiffed on their joint 40th birthday party that they said they would have later in the year, but never did.

    • Becks1 says:

      It was actually a three part smear – the bullying, the jewels, and the story about the UN not wanting to work with Meghan anymore or some such BS. That part got buried bc it was so stupid, and even the jewels story got buried really fast bc so many were asking “uhhhh, what about the other jewels the royals wear?”

      But to clarify, we had heard the bullying allegations before. They were part of the original smear campaign in 2018-2019 – the 5 am emails, aides crying in fear of talking to her, etc etc. Low just repackaged that story and added some more details for the Times story before the Oprah interview.

      • Becks1 says:

        Also just pointing out that something interesting about this particular story was that we had already had the tiara story about how Meghan wanted to wear an emerald tiara of “unknown provenance” or whatever the specific wording was and the Queen had to say no – so it was already set up in the tabloids that meghan was someone who “didnt care” about where the jewelry came from, which makes this story even grosser. They were building on their previous smears to try to destroy her.

      • Snoodle says:

        That tiara story was always weird as hell because there’s only 2 emerald tiaras that we know of in the Royal Family’s possession, the Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara & the Greville Emerald Kokoshnik, & we know the entire history & quite legal & proper provenance of both of them.

        The closest to shady of the two is the Vlad (commissioned & owned by a cousin of the Russian Imperial Family, smuggled out after the revolution, when the Grand Duchess in question died the UK’s Queen Mary purchased it from the Grand Duchesses’ daughter at standard market price for the time) & it has only ever been worn by Queens so that is CLEARLY not an issue there.

        Until Eugenie wore the Greville Kokoshnik at her wedding nobody had seen it for most of a century & we weren’t even sure it still existed! It’s one of the least questionable pieces the BRF has (originally commissioned by the wealthy daughter of a major English beer magnate who left all her best jewelry to the Royal family in her will).

        Unless there’s a third completely unknown to the public emerald tiara that’s been gathering dust in the vault for untold years that we need to add to the already-known count of approximately 28 tiaras that are still intact & in either the Royal Collection or the personal collection of Elizabeth II/ Charles…then SOMEBODY is LYING about this ‘shady’ emerald tiara story.

  26. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    We’re tearing M apart for wearing gifted jewelry on loan? It’s time to go through everything then. It’s past time. If having these represents blood, then doesn’t everything?

    • lanne says:

      We know better–no one here is buying the slander. I think everyone needs to light up twitter every time the royals wear ill-provenanced jewels from this point forward. Tag all the ratchets in the posts. Get the royals wearing blood jewels trending every time they pull out the jewels.

  27. Gem says:

    Meghan really rocks those cape dresses! Angela Kelly is such a trouble maker. First the tiara stories and now this? Do your job, Angela!

    • Jaded says:

      I hope KCX3 boots Angela out, I’m sure Cowmilla has her own *dresser* and there are no doubt numerous people who would happily manage the royal jewelry collection without fantasizing it’s their own.

  28. W says:

    Wait so wearing jewelry from a saudi dictator is more problematic than actually meeting the man? HUH? And wasn’t the queen JUST gifted a horse by another problematic dictator during her platinum jubbly?

    • Feeshalori says:

      Isn’t that sheer hypocrisy? The royals shouldn’t even be in the same room with these dictators, let alone accepting their gifts. This entire situation is so blatantly two-faced and double standard and they don’t even think of the blowback wearing questionable jewels with the vault full of them. Do what l say, not what l do, right? How Low can you go?

  29. Chantal says:

    This nonsense again? I thought one of the palaces, in a rare moment of self preservation, shut this damaging story down? I guess Low didn’t get the “stop talking about this or you’ll expose us all” memo. Esp since TQ accepted them for Meghan. Surprised they didn’t throw her under the bus again. AK47 was very eager to rehash this smear. Again, the biggest threat to the monarchy aren’t the Sussexes. Its the greedy BM and the jealous Drab 4 (love that name) and their pathological need to smear the Sussexes, and esp Meghan.

  30. QuiteContrary says:

    This is the only part that is believable to me: A source said: ‘We made a decision not to confront Meghan and Harry on it, out of fear for what their reaction would be.’

    I agree with Becks1 that this reluctance was not because Meghan is a mean bully — but because she would have been justifiably upset about being set up. Meghan knows more about world events than the dumb grifters in that family. She has a strong moral core and wouldn’t have knowingly worn jewelry that came from MBS. And Harry would have rightly been furious on her behalf.

    • Jaded says:

      And it wouldn’t have been the first time Harry got angry with AK. He let her have it re: tiaragate.

  31. W says:

    Which also contradicts Low’s claim about Meghan “knowingly” wearing those earrings. If staff didn’t “confront” Meghan about it, how would she have known?

    Also, confront is an interesting word being used here. Confront means to “meet face to face with a hostile or argumentative intent”. So they’re confirming THEY were the ones starting arguments and being hostile towards Meghan? The same staff that were happily leaking to right wing reporters about the horrible names they called Meghan and we’re supposed to believe she’s a bully? Like everything Low writes, he contradicts himself. These courtiers are apparently supposed to be masterminds but they can’t even think out their smear campaigns before going through with them

  32. BeanieBean says:

    There it is again, staff didn’t want to say anything because they were afraid of the Sussexes reaction. I don’t believe this for one second. Staff were not afraid of the Sussexes, but I do think they might have been afraid of losing their jobs after revealing their incompetence.

  33. Vanessa says:

    We all know this was coordinated effort by William and Jason and Kensington Palace to destroy Meghan credibility before the Oprah interview. They throw everything but the kitchen sink hoping people wouldn’t believe Meghan words once they saw the immediate reaction to the backlash of the jewelry people we’re calling out the queen and the royal family for their practices for acceptance of jewelry for all sorts of people . That line was removed entirely for the hack job from the times but low wants to put this out there in public again to get a reaction from the Sussex’s.

  34. Amie says:

    Had I been told the earrings were a gift from the Saudi Arabian royal family, I wouldn’t have worn them, full stop. I feel like nothing good comes from wearing anything gifted by the Saudi royal family or Russian billionaires… I know Diana wore jewelry from the Saudi royal family as did the Queen but given how things stand today, I think Meghan would have been more careful. My guess she wasn’t told at all they were a gift from the Saudi Arabian royal family because I don’t think she would have worn them if she had. She most likely was purposefully set up or incompetent staffers failed to check the provenance of the earrings.

    People have mentioned above the recent segment on Last Week Tonight with John Oliver about the shady provenance and acquisition of historical artifacts by museums, specifically giving the British Museum a really hard time. It was really well done and informative, though it isn’t something I was completely unaware of. My sister who works in one of the museums briefly featured in the segment (not the British Museum) forwarded it to my family. She said the segment was really interesting but because the segment featured her museum director being interviewed, people were going to think she was the off camera PR person advising the director when she was hired after that interview took place. I highly recommend you watch it if you have a free 30 minutes to spare.

  35. Katya says:

    Didn’t Meghan comment? I thought she said something like “I wore what I was sent to wear.”

    My understanding is that royals submit itinerary and outfits to be matched with loans from the Crown.

  36. Agreatreckoning says:

    My personal theory is the earrings were never a wedding gift to the Sussexes in the first place. The earrings were presented and given as a gift to the Queen. When Meghan said ‘borrowed’, it was exactly that. (It would be either way considering the crown takes ownership of shiny objects.) Meghan was set up. The BRF/BM have to work really hard to put Meghan in a negative light.

    There was zero need for MBS to give a wedding gift in the first place. He wasn’t invited to their wedding. He was invited to the Queen’s funeral though.

  37. Solidgold says:

    The British establishment never wanted Meghan in the institution. They undermined and sabotaged her from the very beginning.

    One day a reporter will find their spine and report the obvious about Meghan’s treatment but till then, all the noise is just deceit.

  38. Mary says:

    Pursuant to the current rules on gifts to members of the royal family, gifts from businesses and strangers over $200 are not to be accepted UNLESS it is a wedding gift. Meghan and Harry have the right to accept and keep, as their personal property, wedding gifts like this pair of earrings. Exceptions are made only for wildly inappropriate gifts. Gifts given to Royals at state occasions or on other Royal visits belong to the Crown but are on lifetime loan to the Royal donee.

    These earrings were clearly a wedding gift to Meghan but because the Queen received them from MBS, on Meghan’s behalf, at a reception they were deemed not wedding gifts but diplomatic gifts. The queen clearly torqued the circumstances and rules to ensure that Meghan did not receive these earrings as her own personal property, when she should have. Meghan was also not even apprised of the existence of the gift until months after her wedding.

    It was also reported that the Sussexes had to return anywhere from 2 million to 7 million dollars worth of gifts. Kate and William, on the other hand, were able to retain all of their gifts, even though their wedding was a state occasion (the palace got around the gift-giving issue by calling it a half State occasion (?)).

    The clothes that Melissa tabouti returned to designers because Meghan was not supposed to receive gifts from commercial entities? If they were wedding gifts, Meghan had every right to receive them and keep them as her personal property

    Not allowing Meghan and Harry to keep wedding gifts is so maddening because not only is it inconsistent with the rules but it appears to stem from pettiness and the Queen and Kensington Palace not wanting the biracial Duchess to have nice things.

    • equality says:

      Sounds about right that they bend rules and laws of their country to suit them. Maybe that’s why Tabouti got canned. And, of course, they ended up paying for their other “gift” Frogmore. Since the wedding gifts went to the crown and their was so much profit associated with their wedding, the haters who want them to pay for the wedding can definitely stuff it.

  39. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    It was reported at the time by more reputable news sources (I want to say Newsweek, but maybe it was CNN?) that the Saudi family gave the earrings directly to Queen Elizabeth at a meeting or luncheon. The earrings immediately became part of the royal collection, regardless of whether the Saudi family “wanted” Meghan to have them. The only way Meghan could have worn them is if the royal collection leant them to her. Most likely scenario: Meghan had no way of knowing where they came from, only Elizabeth and the people working for her would know. The back-stabbing saboteurs then leant them to Meghan without telling her, and set her up to be smeared by the press. I base that guess on the specifics of the earrings (how they became part of the royal collection) as well as other evidence of an intentional smear campaign.

    • Mary says:

      @mrskrabapple, I disagree with your comment that the earrings immediately go into the Royal Collection upon receipt by the Queen. The rules apply to a Royal donee receiving a gift at a diplomatic or state event (and not a third party). It was reported that the earrings were given by MBS to the Queen for Meghan as a wedding gift. This, to me, falls outside of the language of the rules applying to diplomatic gifts, both literally and in spirit.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        Admittedly, I am not an expert — but based on the descriptions here https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media-packs/gifts_policy_2003.pdf
        the earring sound like official gifts, not personal ones (the value is above £150 and there was no private relationship between them, etc.). Official gifts are not private property, and the policy on the official site says “as a general rule, all official gifts given to The Sovereign from a Head of State or host government automatically become part of the Royal Collection.” So I still think they were part of the royal collection on loan to Meghan. (Again, I could be wrong, and would defer to experts on this).

      • ChillinginDC says:

        Actual Royal family jewelry experts have said she doesn’t own those earrings, they belong to the Crown. Why the story died real quick is when people starting pointing out that there’s no way that Meghan could have known, she wasn’t there to receive them, (photo of MBS and Queen shown) and them acting like Meghan had knowledge before the rest of the world that MBS was about to kidnap, kill, and dismember a journalist was some stupid logical reasoning. And then when people pointed out the RF was still hosting and meeting with MBS after Meghan and Harry left it showed how hypocritical they were. That was a dumb diversion by Jason the Knife and Low should have had better sense to even bring it up. It makes the Queen look bad. Trying to tie it to bulling was sloppy.

  40. ChillinginDC says:

    Eh, I don’t think Meghan was set up, no one knew about the MBS thing at the time. I think that Jason the Knife thought he could use these earrings at a later date to tie Meghan to an actual murder before the Oprah interview. It was outrageous then and it is now. It died real quick with the RR when people started showing receipts on twitter. Then everyone pivoted to she’s a bully and RR claimed they saw staff shaking and crying when Meghan was near. It was a mess.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Can kind of see what you’re saying. MBS wasn’t really announced as a guilty suspect until Nov. 17, 2018. The timing of Knauf’s/Low’s smear article/s was March 3, 2021. February 26, 2021 the declassified report came out from the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence placing blame on Khashoggi’s murder on MBS. Essentially he ordered it.

      That the RR’s/BM have conflicting stories (sounds like crygate) on this says a lot.

  41. Mary says:

    @mrscrabapple, An official gift is specifically described in those rules as a gift to a royal family “Member” who is the donee and who is performing an official duty or is partaking in an official function. In the case of the reception with MBS, the Queen was the relevant Member under the rules. So, if the earrings were for the Queen it was an official gift. However, in this instance, they were not “given” to the Queen, MBS was simply handing the gift to the Queen to pass on to Meghan as a wedding gift. In that instance, it should not be deemed an official gift because Meghan was not the Member conducting official duties and it was a wedding gift.. The Queen and Angela Kelly were fiddling with the rules to ensure that Meghan did not receive them as a personal wedding gift. So-called Royal jewelry experts are simply parroting what the palaces are saying and not what the rules specify. Had he walked over to KP and given them to Meghan directly, there should not be an issue. But then, Melissa Tabouti probably would have sent them back anyway.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      @Mary, you might want read the link Mrs.Krabapple provided again. It’s an official link to how gifts to members of the BRF are handled. The Queen wasn’t given the gift to hand over to Meghan. It wasn’t a by-the-way can you give this to Meghan when you get a chance situation
      We still don’t know the earrings were an actual wedding gift – only that’s how it was played out in the BM. It would be so shocking to find out they lied. /s

      MBS didn’t personally know Meghan. He couldn’t just walk the 2? miles to KP to give her a gift. She couldn’t accept it either if he did. Harry knows the rules. Personal gifts are discussed in the link Mrs.Krabapple provided. My opinion is that the earrings were a gift to the Queen/the Crown. Would love to see the Gift Form that was supposedly filled out for said gift.

      • Mary says:

        @agreatreckoning. You are right, we do not know the situation for sure. However, the general consensus in reporting is that they were a gift to Meghan,. If that is the case, I stand by my assertion that as a wedding gift she should have been able to keep them as her personal property. Wedding gifts are deemed the personal property of the donee. And yes, I have read the relevant rules.

        If they were indeed a gift to the Queen then the onus is on Buckingham Palace to explain why the Queen loaned the earrings to Meghan to wear once MBS became even more suspect than he already was.

        At this point, the earrings should just be returned to Saudi Arabia.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        I will say again, reporting by the British Media they were a wedding gift. Richard Palmer, who seems to be the one that tried to answer the question in a rather squirrely way, pretty much said the palaces/courtiers had no answer other than maybe wedding gifts are treated differently. There are a lot of non answers to what should be answerable questions from an institution that has been around forever and, you know, PrOtoCOls. Question: where are you getting the wedding gifting rules from?

        In Meghan’s lawyer statement to the Times, it was stated the earrings were ‘loaned to her from the Crown.”. This statement has never been directly refuted. Innuendo, allegedly, reportedly and “sources” say don’t cut the mustard.

        In this case, I’m ecstatic that the earrings are considered property of the Crown’s and not Meghan’s(you have to wonder what Charles was gifted at the time). If they were a gift from, let’s say, Prince Leesio of Lesotho, I’d be a bit p*ssed. If you look back at the BM’s coverage of Khashoggi’s murder & MBS’s connection, as a whole, it’s pretty passive. Hmmm..wonder why that might be. I’m sure it has nothing to do with the Queen, Charles and William dining & hanging out with him. It’s quite the shame that H&M’s personal imaginary Netflix camera crew wasn’t around then. #butherearrings are an issue?

  42. JRenee says:

    Makes more sense as to Meghan wearing a lit of her own jewelry now. So much ugliness directed towards her and lies to justify it.
    I hope Meghan has documentation on jewelry loans as well. This woman definitely has/had too much authority. I hope she is exposed for the horrible person she is.