Samantha Markle’s nuisance suit may ‘overshadow’ King Charles’s coronation

Last week, Samantha Markle and the Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers had a virtual hearing in Samantha’s unhinged defamation lawsuit against Meghan. Samantha’s argument, as best I can tell, is that Meghan defamed Samantha when Meghan said she felt as if she grew up as an only child, and Meghan said she had not seen Samantha in something like 18 or 19 years (when it was more like 15-16 years). Samantha is also very mad about Finding Freedom, a book which was not written by Meghan. Basically, everything about this screams “nuisance suit” and the judge is currently deliberating on Meghan’s motion to dismiss. Hopefully, the judge will throw the case out soon, but who knows. It’s a minor, unimportant drama being financed (I believe) by the British media, probably the same people who paid Samantha and Toxic Tom for all of their interviews. The same people who write all of the White Markles’ unhinged scripts. Well, speaking of, Dickie Arbiter suddenly thinks this case will overshadow King Charles’s coronation. LMAO.

Meghan Markle’s legal ‘minefield’ could hit the Coronation and send it ‘sideways,’ after her half sister accused her of defaming her in order to ‘cover up’ her ‘false rags-to-riches’ narrative. That’s the view of Dickie Arbiter, who was The Queen’s press secretary between 1988 and 2000, who told Jo Elvin on Palace Confidential that ‘it’s a bit of a minefield this whole thing.’ Dickie, who was also press secretary for King Charles III, told the Mail Plus talk show that it has the potential to ‘knock the Coronation news sideways’ by causing a distraction in an important year for the Royal Family.

‘It’s a bit like walking through a minefield that’s only been half-cleared and we really have to wait and see what the judge is going to sum up on,’ he explained.

The elder Markle, 58, appeared with her lawyer on Wednesday in a virtual court hearing on her defamation case against her half-sister. Her attorney claimed Meghan ‘got caught’ and resorted to publicly ‘putting her sister down’ because she threatened to expose her. Lawyers for Meghan, who were also present on the call, said the claims were ‘inappropriate’ and ‘offensive’ to the former Suits star, 41, and demanded the case be dismissed over its ‘fatal defects’.

The will-they-won’t-they element of whether the Sussexes will come to the Coronation is also a headache for the Palace, argues the Mail on Sunday’s Charlotte Griffiths. The editor-at-large said: ‘They probably do want to end the speculation and it’s annoying for them, because I actually think Meghan and Harry haven’t made up their minds either.’

Responding to the question ‘should the palace just make a decision on this?’ Charlotte explained: ‘They can’t say “you’re banned” because that would make them look terrible…. [the palace] just don’t know whether Harry and Meghan will accept. It would be very embarrassing for them if Harry and Meghan make a show of refusing the invitation. So I think that’s why they’re allowing the speculation to keep going because they’re stuck in this no man’s land.’

[From The Daily Mail]

The palace “just don’t know whether Harry and Meghan will accept. It would be very embarrassing for them if Harry and Meghan make a show of refusing the invitation.” Like… the media would be so gentle on Charles if he openly extended an invitation to the Sussexes and they publicly rebuffed him. Charles would get to play the victim and the papers would really play it up, how Mean Meghan Ordered Poor Harry To Stay Away!! It would honestly be the best outcome for the Windsors. Unfortunately, the Windsors can’t stop tripping over their own d–ks for two full days, so here we are.

As for the stuff about Samantha and whatever Arbiter is talking about… they’re desperate to use Samantha’s lawsuit into something they can use against Meghan by any means necessary. If the Chubbly can be overshadowed by Samantha’s nuisance suit… lmao, that says more about Charles than Meghan.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

53 Responses to “Samantha Markle’s nuisance suit may ‘overshadow’ King Charles’s coronation”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Anna says:

    Idk about everyone else, but I’m more interested in Archie’s birthday than the Chubbly🤷🏻‍♀️

  2. Tessa says:

    If Chuck had made a statement early on in support of Meghan to the media this would not be happening. When people like piers brought out tom and Sam Chuck said nothing. Sam is getting money from the media imo and the derange r s want to fund Sam’s case. If he is worried about his big say sorry Chuck its your fault

    • kelleybelle says:

      It is, it totally is. The media started all this nonsense at the behest of the royal family. Can Arbiter not see that? Stupid, stupid man.

    • AnnaKist says:

      It is just idiotic. If they are married that this ridiculous lawsuit will overshadow the coronation, there is an easy way to fix it before it starts: Stop publishing, anything about the white Markles. If this issue detract in any way from King Chuckles moment in the sun, then it’s down to the media itself. No coverage of any of these grubs. Problem sorted.

  3. Tessa says:

    Big day

  4. Miranda says:

    They’re manufacturing and funding this fuckery for the sole purpose of placing all the blame on Meghan if/when it “overshadows” or spoils Charles’ big day. These people are deranged.

    Also, Samantha Markle looks like every white person’s tipsy, pill-popping Aunt Karen. That is all.

    • SomeChick says:

      they’re right to be concerned about potential overshadowing. Charles has managed to overshadow himself with a pen! TWICE! without any help from anyone!

  5. ThatsNotOkay says:

    Seriously. The second greatest day in Charles’s life is so flimsy and inconsequential globally that it could be overshadowed by literally anything else Meghan chooses to or not to do that day, says so much about how little importance there is to this coronation. And hence, to Charles’s existence.

  6. Jay says:

    I would love to ask Mr. Arbiter to explain why this obviously frivolous lawsuit by a distant relation of someone who is married to the sixth in line for the throne is more upsetting than Andrew settling with Virginia Guiffre just last year. Seems to me that that has a better chance of toppling the monarchy.

    • North of Boston says:

      I’d also like to ask Dick A if he just made all this up out of thin air, just like that time he made up stuff about the Oprah interview he reported on before it ever aired.

  7. Tessa says:

    Meghan is an only child of tom and D o r i a .Sam needs to get a real job and leave Meghan alone.

    • Debbie says:

      “Meghan is an only child of Tom and Doria.” Well, that’s a problem for Scamantha because, since Meghan and Harry became engaged, she’s been trying to retroactively manufacture a close, personal relationship with Meghan which simply doesn’t exist. And everybody knows that, even the BM. One would think that she’d have some pride, but here we still are.

  8. girl_ninja says:

    Dickie Arbiter and his daughter love making things up out of thin air as most of the British tabloids and rota.

  9. Polo says:

    Someone mentioned that she already had another lawsuit in the pipeline so I’m guessing she expects this won’t go far.
    I’m not a lawyer but this seems like an open and shut case. I’m guessing she might try to go after her daughter and the Netflix series but again she’ll lose.
    This is like the nuisance lawsuits trump tried to throw at Hilary.
    Sam’s “exclusives” with British media have dried up so they have to find other methods. When even the Gb News trolls are sick of seeing you Wootens show then you know your time is up.

  10. Amy T says:

    I looked up “desperate” in the dictionary and Samantha’s picture was the illustration.

  11. M says:

    What exactly can someone you haven’t had a relationship with in two decades expose about you exactly? That’s what I keep looking at. She “got caught” doing what? It’s so vague.

    But don’t be surprised if this does go to depositions. My mother is involved in one of these stupid lawsuits right now with my grandfather’s ex-wife over a damn car that she claims was “gifted” to her (it wasn’t) and my mom gave her a nervous breakdown when she sold it (ho was crazy already). She’s just a money grubber like Scammy Sammy.

  12. lleepar says:

    The judge already has tossed out the “Finding Freedom” part of TOD’s case. She didn’t rule on Meghan’s Oprah comments at the same time because TOD’s lawyers tried paraphrase what Meghan said, not tell the judge what Meghan actually said in the interview. The judge asked for an actual transcript before ruling.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      lleepar, the judge hasn’t ruled yet, but she did say that she had difficulty finding a basis for Finding Freedom. Certainly, it sounds like she will be dismissing that issue. I didn’t know that she had asked for a transcript. It sounds like there’s a pretty good chance it will get dismissed, but you never know until the order is filed.

  13. equality says:

    So a lawsuit in another country will overshadow the coronation? But the fact that the king’s “subjects” are struggling to get by won’t factor in at all? This is just smoke and mirrors to distract from the fact that KC is throwing himself an expensive party. H&M should celebrate KC’s day for charity in the US and give big to something US-based. Then put out a statement that they would have done so in the UK if they were actually welcome and had security there.

  14. Cessily says:

    I think we will be getting the written judgement very soon, my understanding is that they were waiting on the full transcript from the Oprah interview that aired. Scammys attorney was supposed to provide it and failed to do so. The burden of proof for this case falls on scammy and I don’t see that she has any. (I’m also not an attorney just have had to use a few with a nasty divorce, you learn a lot)
    As for this interfering with the Chubbly it seems that it’s already doomed since the Sussex’s are the only focus of the entire event. Has anyone recieved invites yet? Who else has confirmed or declined? We don’t even know who is on the guest list, beyond the Sussex’s. It really shows just how pathetic the brf, Rota and tabloids are. Whatever the Sussex’s decide to do I hope they wait till the last possible moment before accepting or declining, let these people spin out of control while the world is watching the invisible contract in full view with the insane rantings.

  15. Eurydice says:

    Once they switch from Delusional Dickie, Charlotte’s bit makes some sense. The Palace has to decide if it wants to invite H&M or not. Right now, they’re waiting for an RSVP before even sending the invitation and that’s just not going to work.

  16. CC says:

    Is Samantha Markle going to jump out of a plane and parachute directly into the king’s golden carriage? Because that’s the only way anyone in the world is going to pay any attention to her on the day of the coronation.

  17. Norvell says:

    In order to defame someone, that person should be famous, which Meghan’s older half-sister isn’t. I hope PH and MM have arranged investigations into who is paying her sister. These accusations, lies, and interviews seem to be the source of how SM makes her money.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      I agree! Samantha doesn’t have the money to retain an attorney for a high level case such as her defamation lawsuit.

      I would like for Dick A, to please share with us how this lawsuit could possibly affect the Con-a-nation?? Could it be that the Britshidmedia may be exposed as the sources of money for Scammy’s lawsuit?? That would be the ONLY reason for Dickie to be dropping this nugget of ridiculous.

      • bbrook says:

        A good lawyer would not take this case, even on contingency. There is no way that this case would do anything for an attorney except get a Judge pissed off at them.
        (I was the administrator of a law firm for over five years so I do know a little about this stuff.) Don’t piss off a Judge. 🙂

    • SomeChick says:

      that’s not what defamation means. it’s about reputational damage. now, arguably, Samantha is doing that quite well on her own… but my point is that non famous people can and do still sue for defamation.

  18. Brassy Rebel says:

    Something this frivolous can’t overshadow something of great importance. Obviously, the con-a-nation is not considered of great importance even by the royal ass kissers.

  19. Yes, because of course we believe dicky doofus who lied through his false teeth about the Ophra interview and took money to lie!! Sam Sam who can scam markle needs to shut the hell up and disappear. She was branded a liar and a fantasist by the judge at her divorce hearing, her ex husband and children have all said the same. Wonder if the judge will ask her about that! And ask her why she said Doria was the maid because she didn’t want people to know her father had married a woman of colour. I don’t see how the judge can let this case continue as she has sold so many interviews about Megan and Harry (who she has never met), christ she even turned up in London to try and blag her way into the wedding. The first and ONLY question the judge should ask is WHO IS FUNDING HER.

  20. The Hench says:

    I confess that I can’t even wrap my head around how this has got as far as it has. How can Meghan saying she’s an only child be counted as defamation against Scammy? The only harm it can be doing her is to undermine her ability to make money out of selling Meghan out by underlining the fact they are not close and haven’t seen each other in years – which is true, so also not defamatory. What a waste of time and money all round.

    • kelleybelle says:

      Exactly, very simple. Dickie Arbiter remains as useless and delusional as ever. The royals started it all anyway. Isn’t it called lying in the bed you’ve made? And speaking of lying …

  21. Amy Bee says:

    I saw a snippet of that discussion and Charlotte Griffiths essentially said that nothing would come out of the lawsuit and that, even though she never agrees with Meghan, she came down on her side in this case. I doubt the case will overshadow the coronation but the Royal Family’s lack of support for Meghan and their encouragement of the Markle’s behaviour has led to this. So the press and the Royal Family only have themselves to blame. I also believe that the British press is financing this lawsuit

  22. Jeanette says:

    Wec That’s one of my favorites Meghan moments, her “Polo Ovulation Day”, Songbird Sussex, You Coulda Had a Bad Bitch, Wedding Reception Glamor and Betty’s Repast Teardrop are my “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex Mt Rushmore” moments.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Am I the only one who doesn’t understand what you wrote? Perhaps you could explain it?

      • SomeChick says:

        Betty’s teardrop would be when Meghan was seen crying at the queen’s funeral.

        Wedding reception glamour is probably the pic in the convertible with the halter dress and aquamarine ring.

        Coulda had a bad bitch refers to the Sussex farewell tour. if I had to guess I’d say it’s the umbrella photo.

        Polo ovulation refers to some rather gross commentary/speculation around a pic of Meghan and Harry kissing after a polo match shortly after they were married.

        Sussex songbird tho, I got nothing.

  23. Jais says:

    It must be so annoying for Meghan to have to even entertain this silly lawsuit. What a waste of time, my god.

  24. Grace says:

    Nobody would know of this person had she not pushed herself to the public eye. So she’s definitely not famous in her own right. In many countries she’d not even have been able to take a case like this to the court. It’d have been dismissed right away.

    • Emily_C says:

      I’m shocked she was able to get it this far in the U.S. Defamation suits are notoriously hard to prosecute here, even when the defendant is spreading damaging lies and claiming that they’re facts. Someone saying she feels something? What? It’s deeply strange.

  25. Christine says:

    It would be hilarious if it did considering they’re the ones who allowed this clout chaser a platform. It would’ve been so simple to stand behind Meghan and use their influence with the press to shut Samantha down from the beginning.

  26. aquarius64 says:

    I think the real fear for the BM/BRF is Scammy losing the lawsuit. Meghan requested the court not only to dismiss but to have Scammy pay her legal and attorney fees. If the judge grants it Scam will be on the hook for almost two of legal expenses which will be huge. Also one can be sanctioned (fined) for filing a frivolous lawsuit in US federal court so Scam could face that and other fines. Her attorneys could be fined too. If it’s paid off quickly it confirms Scammy was bankrolled for this lawsuit because she doesn’t have the money herself. Is she is left holding the bag and has to eat those fines and fees herself, Scam will go to an outlet who is willing and tell who financed her. The biggest danger is the judge finds Scam lied to the court. That’s a perjury charge. Federal perjury caries up to five years in prison and a 250,000 USD fine. If Scam catches a charge she will definitely rat out the BM and the BRF if they financed this stupid lawsuit.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ aquarius64, oh yes!! Scammy will sing like a bird all the way to the Britshidmedia and possibly the BaRF…..

    • OriginalLeigh says:

      I know the BM and BRF are not very bright but shouldn’t they have anticipated that she would lose the lawsuit? There is literally nothing there?

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        OriginalLeigh, I suspect they thought it would have to go through discovery first. They may have thought it would be worth the cost if it was dismissed, but I doubt they would agree with that if they have to pay Meghan’s attorneys fees. This is going to be interesting to watch as they react.

  27. Vanessa says:

    Samantha is a con artist a vile racist bully poor excuse for a woman a mother and human being she treated Meghan and doria like they didn’t existed for years . She called doria the maid I’m sure she has said few racist things about Meghan and doria Ashley on record saying that Samantha has made comments about Meghan that are not true at all Samantha is known to have 12 accounts in her name she used to spread false Damaging lies about Meghan including the one that said Meghan couldn’t have children . Meghan grew up with her mom and dad raise as the only child of doria and Thomas . This lawsuit was baseless fraudulent Samantha is the one who should be sued for making defamations about Meghan.

    • kelleybelle says:

      She also has at least seven Facebook accounts too. All morbidly obsessed with someone who will never acknowledge her existence.

  28. Gabby says:

    Any and all Scammy (or other white Markle) lawsuits against Meghan should be dismissed for the unclean hands thing alone:

    Unclean hands
    n. a legal doctrine which is a defense to a complaint, which states that a party who is asking for a judgment cannot have the help of the court if he/she has done anything unethical in relation to the subject of the lawsuit. Thus, if a defendant can show the plaintiff had “unclean hands,” the plaintiff’s complaint will be dismissed or the plaintiff will be denied judgment. Unclean hands is a common “affirmative defense” pleaded by defendants, which must be proved by the defendant.

  29. Well Wisher says:

    One must agree with Dickie Arbiter’s version on this pressing matter, all be it scripted by who is signing the cheque.

  30. HeyKay says:

    This crummy half sister. Ugh.
    Somebody needs to have a lawyer bring her “sign the life long NDA, take this $100K one time payment, shut up and go away” papers.

    I find her to be a sad, grifter. When she dyed her hair dark to try to look more like MM, was really crummy and a cheap move.

    • Debbie says:

      Why on God’s green earth should Samantha get a penny of Meghan’s hard-earned money? Especially since we all know that she wouldn’t comply with any non-disclosure agreement, and she would still give interviews, and have a very hostile and false presence online spreading lies about Meghan.

  31. Renae says:

    “…cause a distraction in this very important year for the royal family”. Yeah, right! It’s ALWAYS an *important* year for those yokels. One yr its Phillip dying….then, its the Queens Jubblie, follow that with the queen dying (and her multi-city parade of the coffin) , now its the be-clowning of Charles……what next? Perhaps 2024 will be an important year for the royals cause Billy-Bob ,PoW will learn to fart out God save the Queen and a royal recording will be made of it? That’s how silly this all sounds.
    Hope Harry & Meghan stay far, far away.

  32. Christine says:

    “Meghan Markle’s legal ‘minefield’”

    Let me fix that for you. You mean *your* legal minefield you created when you paid Samantha Grant and Tom Markle a lot of money leading up to the Duke and Duchess’s wedding, to assassinate the character of both Harry and Meghan?

    That’s all on you, royals and rota. Remember when Meghan was confused that her completely estranged sister was talking about her at all?

  33. Bisynaptic says:

    You know who walked through mine fields? Diana.