Harry and Meghan #34 Maleficent Meghan and her Petulant Prince'

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
Miss Havisham said:
I agree that it does come across as quite sexist.
It’s all very odd. It’s comes across like she is making up the rules - and they all sound rather ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I guess their argument would be that because it involves royalty, the level of media interest would be multiplied significantly vs. friends of Joe Schmoe, so it would only set a precedent for cases involving people similarly in the public eye.
 
Last edited:
Oona said:
I posted this for you in the previous thread, you probably did not see it, it's about the article in the Times claiming that they were advised and offered help with her dad already before the engagement and many times after the engagement but refused:

"Any thoughts about the removed Times article? I just read it again and if it's true it is pretty amazing. Meghan has in that case not seen har dad since at least June 2016. Harry has never met him. Yet they claim that the media destroyed her relationship with him. Also, where did the article go?"

The Sun still refers to the original article:

www.thesun.co.uk

Harry and Meg rejected offers to help protect her 'troubled' dad, book claims

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle rejected offers to help protect Thomas Markle, sources have claimed. Palace aides have revealed the pair refused to “engage” with Meghan’s dad ahead…
www.thesun.co.uk www.thesun.co.uk
Click to expand...
Any thoughts on Thomas Markle's situation if she drops the case. He has been mostly quiet and was prepared to give evidence/statement etc. in court if case goes to trial....After all the letter to him started it all but that seems to have gone out of focus now.......
 
She's the gift that keeps on giving...at long last someone called her bluff and she hates it..cos she doesn't know what to do...
Noone ever said no to her and really mean it.
This trial is going to make jonny Depp look like a playground spat...
And I feel sorry for the poor trees used in the increased production of the DM as it has a field year with this...what's she gonna do if she doesn't like what they print...sue them🙈🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
antinoos said:
Maintenance is actually paying or even contributing to someones legal bills. Never do it! Obviously a waste of money with additional hidden dangers.

This just confirms other very unattractive things about both of them that are frankly unsurprising. If you piss off a lot of "little people" when you are riding high they are going to pubicise their justifiable grievances when you come off your horse. There will be a lot more of this kind of thing. No NDA lasts forever! A pair of prize bastards.


I really really hate people like that. I used to delight in taking them down (though its never easy because the law is so painstakingly fair). Its one of the worst forms of abuse and bullying. If I had my way we'd get all medieval on their asses and brand V L on their cheeks for Vexatious Litigant.
Click to expand...

If they decide NOT to call it quits and I was the Mail's attorney, I'd be pretty interested to hear what Thomas Markle and others have to say about that article. Right now, I'd pay to have been behind the scenes at The Times when they 1. Pulled the article; 2. Found out that Scooby-Doo had lied to them about his age.
 
catp said:
That is really interesting. I can't believe the RF lawyers haven't considered this.
Click to expand...
Im sure they have, if they are paying it will be subtle circuitous and opaque - but very very risky! I'm genuinely intrigued about just who has the bottomless pit to fund this. I think we can be quite sure that its not her; she simply doesnt have the resources. It has become THE story and its unravelling will I suspect be the final chapter in the Mother of Vipers bid for global hegemony. She does have all the makings of a historical supervillainess a cross between Imelda Marcos, Elizabeth Bathory and Lady C's favourite Madame Fahmy who literally got away with murder (because of real British racism actually).
 
antinoos said:
Its actually very dangerous funding someone elses litigation. Its called "maintenance" and its fundamentally unlawful the punishment being liability for the other parties costs. If the Mail really wanted to stir up some tit they could demand proof of whose paying for this. Especially if she Discontinues and they can argue it was all a sham!

It really is one of the biggest shitshows Ive ever seen nearly as cringe to watch as the bloody wedding.
Click to expand...
Maybe the Mail could be persuaded to ask the question? 😂

All joking on one side, you're absolutely right, it's an incredible shitshow, by throwing more and more tit on everybody in the RF and beyond she somehow ends up with all of it stuck firmly to herself...
 
mardymare said:
Any thoughts on Thomas Markle's situation if she drops the case. He has been mostly quiet and was prepared to give evidence/statement etc. in court if case goes to trial....After all the letter to him started it all but that seems to have gone out of focus now.......
Click to expand...
At least if he appears he may get to be in the same room as her,...if Rona has gone by then...
Did you know that the WHO and CDC government website has had Rona downgraded to a bad cold since march.. and Matt Hancock has shares in a mask manufacturers....what does that tell you???👽👾do,do ,do do plays xfiles music in background for heightened effect😁
 
Norbs said:
I guess their argument would be that because it involves royalty, the level of media interest would be multiplied significantly vs. friends of Joe Schmoe, so it would only set a precedent for cases involving people similarly in the public eye.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was thinking about this as well and also about the general interest of protecting journalistic sources. Not sure about the legislation in the UK, but where I'm at you are not even allowed to investigate re sources, i.e. trying to find out who they are.
 
Last edited:
Toto said:
@antinoos Thank you Aunty Legal for explaining all the legal stuff.

I love your bitchy asides. This one cracked me up:


Can I ask about your "or" in this post please?


Does this mean that if M coughs up lots of (Prince Charles') money and says sorry to the DM, that the DM can't then publish all the dirt on her that they would otherwise have used in their defence?

Thank you.
Click to expand...
Yes basically if shes prepared to pay enough she might be able to negotiate some kind of deal that preserves some dignity or secrets. If not and she just unilaterally abandons the claim they get all their assessed costs and they can say and do anything they think can get away with to sell newspapers and clicks.

I wouldnt like to try and play her hand - though it would be a fascinating tactical exercise. She's almost certainly the worst client imaginable and hated by her lawyers and professional obligations aside there are six ways to Sunday to get your own back!
 
catp said:
Best bit of the whole "Abigail Spencer" being accidentally named is that no-one knows her.🤣

Lots of Twitter comments asking who she is. " Is she a relative of Diana Spencer?" was a good one!

Nope, she was another supporting role actress on cable show Suits.

So a similar "fame" level to our supposed "Hollywood" actress and "Mega star" Meghan Markle before she met Harry when hardly anyone knew who she was, either
Click to expand...
We've all seen her naked tho.
 
Silbee said:
I agree with this. My late husband and I were involved in a lengthy case against his former partner for fraud. You don't sleep. I was lucky to get three to five hours a night. It wears you down to the nub, I don't recommend it at all.
Click to expand...
The thing about fraudsters from long experience is they come in two equally awful flavours. The psycho's who are so sunk in fantasy and self-righteousness that they believe it themselves (exactly the same mentality you encounter in sexual criminals who blame the victim); and the utter bastards who know they are bad and love it. Sometimes as with Jeffrey Epstein and serial killers you get both in the same monster. Poor you, Ive seen good people badly hurt but they remain good. In my experience eventually something catches up with the other lot and they never really prosper.
 
antinoos said:
Its actually very dangerous funding someone elses litigation. Its called "maintenance" and its fundamentally unlawful the punishment being liability for the other parties costs. If the Mail really wanted to stir up some tit they could demand proof of whose paying for this. Especially if she Discontinues and they can argue it was all a sham!

It really is one of the biggest shitshows Ive ever seen nearly as cringe to watch as the bloody wedding.
Click to expand...
@antinoos thanks for all the deciphering - sitting over here on the other side of the world in the Convict Colony, it's not always easy to understand the nuances. Although - a shitshow is a shitshow, regardless of where in the world you are.
 
Carey2020 said:
Anne docu showed how it's done. If you think about it, her and H were the equivalent of each other, second to older brother who would be king, but one chose duty and appears to be v content and secure in their own skin. Tim Laurence was a big surprise, never heard him speak before. V steady, confident, a real gentleman, I get the attraction. They seem v happy.
Click to expand...
I thought this also. Particularly liked the reference early on when Anne said she was reflecting HMQ when on official engagements. Meghan could never have mastered this, it would always have been about her.
 
Carey2020 said:
Anne docu showed how it's done. If you think about it, her and H were the equivalent of each other, second to older brother who would be king, but one chose duty and appears to be v content and secure in their own skin. Tim Laurence was a big surprise, never heard him speak before. V steady, confident, a real gentleman, I get the attraction. They seem v happy.
Click to expand...

Oh I missed this, will need to catch up. Absolutely, being a sibling of an heir to the throne does not have to be a millstone around your neck. I hate hearing how Harry is hard done by this, Anne has managed it perfectly well, she's got a very fulfilling and valuable role in the royal family and carries it out without fuss attention or invasion of privacy.
 
antinoos said:
The thing about fraudsters from long experience is they come in two equally awful flavours. The psycho's who are so sunk in fantasy and self-righteousness that they believe it themselves (exactly the same mentality you encounter in sexual criminals who blame the victim); and the utter bastards who know they are bad and love it. Sometimes as with Jeffrey Epstein and serial killers you get both in the same monster. Poor you, Ive seen good people badly hurt but they remain good. In my experience eventually something catches up with the other lot and they never really prosper.
Click to expand...
You are so right Aunty in terms of something catching up with them eventually. The litigant was last seen crying in court because the judge basically told him he was a bucket of tit! He’s currently embroiled in attempting to sue the Welsh Assembly for using the same photo. They are taking none of his tit. For me, I wouldn’t piss down his throat if I saw him on fire! On topic, Meghan is still a bleep 😬
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top