Harry and Meghan - OP updated with Threadbanned Users 4/5/21

Leg End Reject

I hear you're a racist now, father.

Apparently a new book claims Charles made the comment about the colour of Archie's skin.

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2021/1129/1263898-barbados-republic-flag/

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118241240#Comment_118241240

I watched the documentary and it was simply a bunch of journalists explaining why they wrote what they wrote- there was nothing earth shattering or particularly new in the program.

banie01

What I thought was quite interesting was Meaghan's lawyer giving a very detailed and specific explanation of what she believes bullying to be. Laying out in explicit detail what is and isn't bullying. Then adding a line that the Duchess doesn't wish to diminish anyone's lived experience.

It's a long held rule of PR that when you're explaining, you're losing. Further to that, if you have to hire a solicitor to ensure that others understand and appreciate a fairly unique definition of bullying? You're losing that argument too barring a narrow legalistic view 😉

The old argument of legally correct, morally wrong springs to mind and that Lawyer's explanation was a legal one and avoided any morality at all.

Kaybaykwah

Prince Charlie need add a wee bit o’ burnt umber in his watercolo(u)rs.

valoren

If it was Charles who made any comment then it doesn't follow that he would be allowed to walk Meghan down the ailse at their wedding if his comment was deemed remotely racist. Charles was likely (and reasonably) wondering what the children of his ginger idiot son and his bi-racial wife would look like. Years later his ponderous comment becomes warped to become racist with victim playing Harry and Meghan fully onboard with warping it because, as no longer working Royals, their funding came to a stop.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118243987#Comment_118243987

Indeed it stank of desperation and control. But saying that, the Palace is all about control and carefully choreographed statements and news fed to the press as the documentary outlined. The Queen is a genius at it-Charles is said to keep a good house too- but I think something happened with Harry and Megs approach- and of course sending press on a wild goose chase at the birth just meant they weren’t going to be happy campers.

valoren

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118243987#Comment_118243987

So it looks like we're on step 2 of the Narcissists prayer with the lawyer having to define for people what bullying is. Tacit acknowledgement that Meghan, while technically not a bully per se, was "Difficult". The mental gymnastics has already been that she was a demanding boss/that the staff weren't up to scratch. Nonsense, as if the Palace would hire people who were inadequate. My guess is that Meghan was interacting with well-educated and highly competent women and this made them unwittingly the targets of a bully unwilling to privately admit that she was in over her head and refused to learn the ropes leading to unnecessary acrimony, conflict and multiple departures.

That didn't happen.

And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was, that's not a big deal.

And if it is, that's not my fault.

And if it was, I didn't mean it.

And if I did...

You deserved it.

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118245222#Comment_118245222

It would appear so tbh. Very much a case of "I'm sorry you felt bad" rather than an apology for what was done. A pointed and overtly legal difference.

One that acknowledges a person's upset and does nothing to acknowledge responsibility. It's akin to a Ryanair apology.

HildaOgdenx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118243987#Comment_118243987

It's a bit like when people talk about 'my truth'. My eyes roll to the ceiling and sometimes take a long time to come back down. 🙄😂

Be right back

It doesn't say much when Donald doesn't like you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118249236#Comment_118249236

As much as I’m not at all a fan of Megan, to have DT comment on you in such a disparaging way egged on by NF, it can’t be easy to take.

this is what happens when you break away from the royal family but yet wish to remain “relevant” and in the public eye-it’s essentially open season with no chance of a media truce in sight.

I wouldn’t wish her life now for anything - her “more sinned against than sinning” act though is the main reason this is happening in the first place.

it is getting tiring and you feel less pity for both of them while at the same time you know this is just one big slow motion car crash happening anytime soon. They’re reduced to tabloid fodder but it could have been so much different

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118249263#Comment_118249263

it wouldn't have been very different, had they stayed they would remain tabloid fodder, all that would be of interest is how bad the coverage would have got when they wouldn't be the sun and daily mail's robots.

at least being in america, for all the faults their lives may or may not have now, they can do what they choose and all those 2 tabloids can do is throw the toys out of the pram while the rest of the world has long moved on.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118251855#Comment_118251855

A fair point but they’re shackled with a royal title so they’’ll never be independent celebrity’s like The Clooneys or respected royals like The Cambridge’s at this stage- They’re sort of in a limbo - I think they should ditch the titles as it won’t do them any good long term

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118252570#Comment_118252570

thing is even if they did drop them the chances are they would still remain stuck with them in some form, at least with some media publications anyway, not that i think they would stop using them and to be honest in a sense i can't blame them.

to be honest i wouldn't swap my life for theirs or any of the royals regardless of the money and all else that lifestyle brings, just not worth all that goes with it.

Harry’s got the solution to Covid. Managed to get his late mother’s name mentioned at least once. “Harry wrote: 'On this World Aids Day we recognise the 40 years that have shaped life for many. 

'We honour those whose lives have been cut short and reaffirm our commitment to a scientific community that has worked tirelessly against this disease.

'My mother would be deeply grateful for everything you stand for and have accomplished. We all share that gratitude, so thank you.'”

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10262801/Prince-Harry-compares-Covid-pandemic-HIV-Peoples-Vaccine-video.html

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118253166#Comment_118253166

“to be honest i wouldn't swap my life for theirs or any of the royals regardless of the money and all else that lifestyle brings, just not worth all that goes with it.”

I don’t think that anyone would swop places with them. At least the likes of the Kardashians go into self promotion with their eyes wide open - not to mention a dodgy blue movie!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118253808#Comment_118253808

Oh dear.

like I said above it’s one long slow motion car … actually only now (literally) realising as I type this, how inappropriate my analogy is - nothing intended at all and indeed no one has even picked up on it here since my post earlier on this thread but just shows you how saying the wrong thing is easily done

anyway, I think Harry, no less myself, needs to take a break from these announcements

Ash.J.Williams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118244621#Comment_118244621

It was probably a clumsy few words that were forgotten about until the Oprah interview where by phrasing it a certain way, encouraged a big response from the interviewer

Be right back

She must be delighted! Surprised that they lost..

Leg End Reject

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118255991#Comment_118255991

It was pointed out here that it was likely they'd lose on a technicality of law.

However, ask yourself, who has the the moral victory? Meghan's reputation and credibility has been damaged by this.

valoren

Upholding the original judgement (i.e. that publishing circa 500 words from a 1,250 word private letter was excessive) was expected but it has proven to be a pyrrhic victory for Meghan (and Harry) given that ANL always had a right to appeal. The details surrounding Finding Freedom and the "unfortunate lapse of memory" which were introduced during the appeal were irrevocably damaging. While it's another win, the reputational damage is tantamount to a defeat. What did we learn here? That Meghan ran the risk of perjuring herself if the case went to a full trial following a successful appeal? That the ramifications of this advanced an apology from her to the court about "forgetting" that she had explicitly authorized Palace staff to brief the authors of a hagiography she said she had no involvement in? That she forgot about the extensive notes she provided to shame and smear her paternal family in that same book she didn't collaborate with?

Apologizing to any court is not exactly a brilliant selling point or a ringing endorsement for any future endeavors despite the right versus wrong stance taken for bringing the case about. It has the capacity to make you persona non grata to and snubbed by the likes of Hollywood, A-listers, CEO's i.e. people you might want to ingratiate yourself to as opposed to getting reduced to doing pranks with a PR firm peer on her soon to be cancelled show.

Meghan is now 2 for 2 in cases against the press in court. She sued Associated News Ltd over copyright and privacy for a letter she wrote to her father (or "Daddy") half of which was (excessively) published without embellishment but without permission. I can't grasp the need here to take a case anyway as the letter itself showed Meghan, the author of that letter, as a compassionate victim who was imploring her father to no longer interact with exploitative tabloids. I could never grasp why this in particular triggered that law suit. It didn't even attack her reputation as it was written to "pull at heart strings" in case it was published. The bringing of the case has now, through her own conduct as a manipulative liar throughout, ultimately destroyed her reputation with anyone with a modicum of common sense who can see via the details of the case that this was a manipulative and malignant operator at work. I seem to recall the Times newpaper publishing an article this year regarding accusations of bullying multiple Palace staff.

Royal aides reveal bullying claim before Meghan’s Oprah interview

Meghan sued over a letter but (tellingly) she didn't sue the Times from publishing a smear on her character. Instead, a terse statement about a smear campaign at play had to suffice.

"The duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma. She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good."

That victim playing pulling-at-the-heart-strings statement from her lawyers ought to now ring hollow given her shattered credibility and known manipulations. I can guess as to why Meghan might not want to go for the hat trick so to speak. Spoiler: Jason Knauf, who was the aide in question during the bullying allegations, keeps his receipts. Even if the findings of the independent investigation into the bullying allegations are kept private then all one has to do is take the details of the ANL case about a letter into account and surmize that Meghan didn't bring a case against the Times because what they printed was quite likely the truth.

Be right back

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118256561#Comment_118256561

It has but I doubt she'll see it that way, rather that she has taken on the mighty press and won. She will milk it for all it's worth.

backwards_man

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118256864#Comment_118256864

She has no legal basis for sueing The Times. They merely reported that the allegations were made, directly from the people who made them, they didnt say the allegations were true nor did they call her a bully. ANL went beyond what was allowed in law to refute the claims made in People Magazine, had they limited their printing to a smaller section of the letter they might have had a legal basis to challenge the suit. However they have had a victory of sorts because it has forced her hand to admit that she lied (or forgot, as she phrased it). What ANL could have done was persuaded (paid for) Thomas Markle to sue People magazine for defamation of his character, realsing the full letter into the public domain via that case then piggy backed off that to print it.

Neyite

She was forced to admit that she perjured herself. Everything written about her that has doubts about her integrity from this point on will unfortunately reference the fact that she committed a crime - perjury - from here on in.

I dont think the Mail ever expected to win this one. Their intention was to force out some dirty laundry that utterly discredits her. And they did what they intended. But they aren't done - there's still the supreme court to appeal to and which may require another shake of the laundry basket.

They themselves have set precedent that authors retain the copyright of private correspondence and that the recipient has no right to publish it. That might come back to bite them on the arse when the Palace has correspondence to MM they may want to strategically leak parts of to the media.

She may have won this appeal, but it's got the potential to be their undoing.

She may have won the battle, but she’s lost the war. Piers Morgan doesn’t mince his words. “PIERS MORGAN: Put your gloating champagne away, Princess Pinocchio – the court of public opinion now knows you're a fork-tongued devious manipulative piece of work who only wants to protect your privacy so you can sell it” https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10268465/PIERS-MORGAN-gloating-champagne-away-Princess-Pinocchio.html

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118258413#Comment_118258413

oh but she highly likely has won the war, ANL are most likely going to lose in the supreme court since if there was a good reason to side with them then the appeal court would have sided with them.

not to mention that when the bitter, debunked and discredited piers morgan is throwing his toys out of the pram again because she wouldn't be his new BFF because she saw him for what he is, it is definitely a sign that the correct decision has been made and the right person has won.

all of the stuff about how she has apparently committed a crime, as in lied to the court, and was forced to admit that she lied to the court when really she only forgot something from years ago and informed the court that she has now recollected it at the first opportunity, is just wishful thinking really, sour grapes for the tabloids as well i would imagine.

if she had actually committed a crime, as in lied to the court then there would be a prosecution fourth coming, because the british courts do not tolerate lieing to them, ever, no excuses, no defense, never, ever, that's it, no discussion or debate as far as they are concerned, never.

valoren

Funny how it was only when someone brought the literal receipts that the truth came out (extensive involvement in the book which celebrated her for a US audience) and not "my truth" (no involvement in that hagiography). If ANL were successful and it went to trial, Knauf's evidence was damning and so a hasty "Sozzy, I forgot" was needed to avoid the clink for perjury. If it weren't for Knauf then Meghan would still be on the "my truth" train denying any collaboration with those authors beyond an aide allowed to give a minor correction for the sake of accuracy.

I'm reminded of the famous Admiral Yamaoto quote after Japan attacking Pearl Harbor. "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve". That's really what Meghan should be thinking instead of gloating and making “daily fail” type pot shots on a statement with a golden insignia. All she has done here is sink a couple of proverbial boats i.e. the MOS was in the wrong by printing as much as they did. In time, The Sun (pardon the pun) will eventually be dropped on them and they'll be annihilated by the provoked Press if the bullying allegations ever come out. I'd say that with it now going to the supreme court that the only true winners here are the lawyers. With the coverage this war has given the likes of ANL then they'll be ok for such a legal tab. I guess Harry better complete that "How to do a Podcast" training pronto and get his arse in gear.

The only reason she ended up in court with ANL is because she herself leaked contents of the letter to her five friends who leaked details to People magazine in the US. She wanted the letter leaked but her dad sat on it for six months and it was only when her friends went to People mag that Thomas Markle was baited into defending himself via the MOS. Of course, she didn’t sue People magazine or her friends for breaching her privacy. Such a manipulative cretin.

Of course she released a graceless statement gloating as if she has discredited ANL. She only won because of the stringent UK privacy laws. Supreme Court it may be but this case has ultimately shown her to be a manipulative liar, who ironically had quite a lot of control and help with Palace staff, and with the gloatingly grandiose statement she is even more unlikeable than she actually was before. Precedent setting? The daily fail? Ffs.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118258669#Comment_118258669

Lol, she 'forgot' something, no way did she lie!

She does a lot of forgetting that one 😂😂

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118258705#Comment_118258705

damning is a massive over exaggeration.

realistically she was never in danger of being found guilty of perjury as forgetting something isn't lieing ultimately and perjury is deliberately lieing and deliberately deceiving the court.

in a trial when a witness is cross examined certain information may come out that wasn't previously given, that doesn't mean the individual has lied to the court automatically, it will depend on a number of factors as to whether they have or not.

ultimately people do forget things or think particular titbits of information may not be relevant so don't mention it or whatever.

ANL are a big enough company so they would always be alright for the legal bills, but really that doesn't matter, it's the fact they have lost that will be the kicker for them.

realistically the only thing this case has shown is that ANL are bad losers, it hasn't shown anything about her apart from she forgot something from a few years ago.

I find it extraordinary that instead of meeting and reconciling with her father, she “ crafted” a letter to him, knowing full well, the details may eventually be published. So the letter was a cold and calculated attempt to silence him and to ensure that if the letter was published that she’d be seen in a favourable light by the media- what an absolute weapon.

Her treatment of her father really does give you the measure of her- he should have been wrapped in cotton wool and flown to the UK weeks before the wedding and protected from the media glaze with carefully orchestrated photo shoots etc. He’s an ordinary guy- why would you leave him to fend for himself - he was earmarked to walk her down the isle so it’s not like they weren’t talking to each other.

Between her treatment of him, tiara-gate, her insistence of blaming the palace and the bullying allegations, I think she lost all respect of the media and the people at that stage- washing dirty laundry in public is never a good idea.