Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex vs Associated Newspapers

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Herat said:
Judge accuses Duchess of Sussex of ‘energetically briefing the media’ about court case
Click to expand...
Damaging stuff from M playing this game. Cases go through stages. The 5 friends will be identified when testimony begins...MOO

"Before her witness statement was made public this week, details were posted to Twitter by Omid Scobie, co-author of the biography Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Family, which is due for publication next week. The judge stated that it was ‘accompanied by a quotation attributed to “a close source” criticising the Mail for wishing to ‘target five innocent women through the pages of its newspapers and its website’, adding ‘Mr Scobie then tweeted the passage from the witness statement that I have quoted above. The inference invited is that he had been provided with a copy by representatives of the claimant. This seems very likely.’

On 5 August, Scobie Tweeted: ‘A source close to Meghan’s legal team tells me, “The Duchess felt it was necessary to take this step to try and protect her friends – as any of us would – and we’re glad this was clear. We are happy that the Judge has agreed to protect these five individuals.”’
 
What is the issue here? Will the five friends testify under oath whether their names are revealed or not? Or is Markle trying to keep their identities secret from the COURT so that they cannot be called to testify whether it was HER setup or not?

I wonder if one of the friends is Jessica Mulroney, her former best friend.


“Even before meeting Prince Harry, Ms Markle was embraced by a duo that Toronto Life magazine called the city's "most polished power couple" - Jessica and Ben Mulroney.“

Ben Mulroney is the son of former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and is a prominent TV host and entertainment reporter - Canada's answer to Ryan Seacrest.

Mulroney has now reportedly joined the list of Markle’s Discarded Family and Friends. Very telling that Markle’s friends went public to support HER reputation but she would not come forward to defend Mulroney reputation.

Jessica Mulroney Is Worried Her Friendship With Meghan Markle Is Over
 
stmarysmead said:
What is the issue here? Will the five friends testify under oath whether their names are revealed or not? Or is Markle trying to keep their identities secret from the COURT so that they cannot be called to testify whether it was HER setup or not?

I wonder if one of the friends is Jessica Mulroney, her former best friend.


“Even before meeting Prince Harry, Ms Markle was embraced by a duo that Toronto Life magazine called the city's "most polished power couple" - Jessica and Ben Mulroney.“

Ben Mulroney is the son of former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and is a prominent TV host and entertainment reporter - Canada's answer to Ryan Seacrest.

Mulroney has now reportedly joined the list of Markle’s Discarded Family and Friends. Very telling that Markle’s friends went public to support HER reputation but she would not come forward to defend Mulroney reputation.

Jessica Mulroney Is Worried Her Friendship With Meghan Markle Is Over
Click to expand...
The friends will have to testify later when the case heads to the trial phase. Judge said they will remain anonymous at this stage of the case. He didnt say they would remain secret forever, he is trying preserve the case till it moves along through the legal process. The issue re the friends is it has been proven that ppl close to M's side is leaking info and the judge called her out for that. Bottomline, M allowed her friends to speak on her behalf re the letter which is why there is media coverage re that. Her credability is not so honest. MOO
 
CSIDreamer said:
I love the phrase "energetically briefing the media". It invokes images of high school cheer teams. Jmo
Click to expand...
Does the press energetically seek sources? IMO the judge's bias now coming to the open.
Is the subjective measure of the amount of energy energy going to be part of this. No individual can out do the anount of energy the DM puts into targeting.
 
Boxer said:
Does the press energetically seek sources? IMO the judge's bias now coming to the open.
Is the subjective measure of the amount of energy energy going to be part of this. No individual can out do the anount of energy the DM puts into targeting.
Click to expand...
Biased? The judge spoke with what he saw on print. No one can control that narrative. MOO
 
Oregonmama said:
The friends will have to testify later when the case heads to the trial phase. Judge said they will remain anonymous at this stage of the case. He didnt say they would remain secret forever, he is trying preserve the case till it moves along through the legal process. The issue re the friends is it has been proven that ppl close to M's side is leaking info and the judge called her out for that. Bottomline, M allowed her friends to speak on her behalf re the letter which is why there is media coverage re that. Her credability is not so honest. MOO
Click to expand...
The DM has no credibility.
The DM is her constant attacker.
 
CSIDreamer said:
I love the phrase "energetically briefing the media". It invokes images of high school cheer teams. Jmo
Click to expand...

The DM sending Caroline Graham the US head of DM and Camilla rehabilitation specialist to Mexico to squeeze the knee (so to speak) of MMs father, was quite an energetic action by the defendant in this suit.
MOO choosing to describe one side as "energetic" lays open the bias of negative interpretation. Actually the it is same negative interpretation the DM-Allied has shown constantly, unjustly and energetically.
MOO this ruling shows the court is hopelessly pickled in its own biases so no justice will come to MM via a corrupt system.
 
Boxer said:
The DM sending Caroline Graham the US head of DM and Camilla rehabilitation specialist to Mexico to squeeze the knee (so to speak) of MMs father, was quite an energetic action by the defendant in this suit.
MOO choosing to describe one side as "energetic" lays open the bias of negative interpretation. Actually the it is same negative interpretation the DM-Allied has shown constantly, unjustly and energetically.
MOO this ruling shows the court is hopelessly pickled in its own biases so no justice will come to MM via a corrupt system.
Click to expand...
Am I correct? You are referring to the court’s use of ‘energetically’ to describe MM’s ‘actions’ as the bias? Forgive me but it’s been awhile since I visited this subject. :)
 
Han said:
Am I correct? You are referring to the court’s use of ‘energetically’ to describe MM’s ‘actions’ as the bias? Forgive me but it’s been awhile since I visited this subject. :)
Click to expand...

I am saying, my opinion only that to make a judgement depicting MM as "energetic" while at the same time the DM-Allied tabloid nexus being sued is exerting extreme energy against the plaintiff is biased.
 
Last edited:
Meghan and Harry suing DM for breach of privacy and is adding a line of near direct accusation of Kensington PR shop complicity but by "negligence."
Which is kind, by offering a bit of a fig leaf to the RF.
MOO to me it seems there is little doubt there was a breach. Interesting to watch the defense claims of otherwise.
 
Last edited:
ADMIN REMINDER:

Many posts have been removed. For some reason, discussion about issues related to the BRF become very contentious.

This thread is strictly for respectful discussion of issues related to the lawsuit. General discussion of the BRF or PH and MM's personal life is off topic and generally nasty opinions are not welcome at Websleuths. Such posts will be removed at Mod/Admin discretion and members who disregard this reminder will be issued a thread reply ban or a temporary or permanent loss of WS posting privileges.

Please post accordingly. Thanks !!
 
CSIDreamer said:
I love the phrase "energetically briefing the media". It invokes images of high school cheer teams. Jmo
Click to expand...

IMO the statement invokes comparison of energies between plaintiff and defemeldent. Obviously DM has more staff and "energy."

I know that my point of view here is unpopular regarding MM, but I would ask you in fairness to take a moment and think why I might feel the MM was unfairly targeted, and my view that the DM-Allied papers are the at least in part ,the militant expression of palace intrigue.
MOO Hence the DM-Allied lawsuit is in part proxy battle.
It is a great misfortune for MM to have a weak man for a father, but in a way, she is still honorably sticking up for him as merely weak and naive in the face of a conglomerate onslaught, rather than just outright greedy and unintelligent.
This tack preserves a way back for him with a simple apology.

<modsnip: discussing removed posts.> I wish to vigorously weigh in for the plaintiff does anyone have a copy of the lawsuit?
I would appreciate some help getting it. Is a copy even published?
I cannot find on line.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Boxer said:
IMO the statement invokes comparison of energies between plaintiff and defemeldent. Obviously DM has more staff and "energy."

I know that my point of view here is unpopular regarding MM, but I would ask you in fairness to take a moment and think why I might feel the MM was unfairly targeted, and my view that the DM-Allied papers are the at least in part ,the militant expression of palace intrigue.
MOO Hence the DM-Allied lawsuit is in part proxy battle.
It is a great misfortune for MM to have a weak man for a father, but in a way, she is still honorably sticking up for him as merely weak and naive in the face of a conglomerate onslaught, rather than just outright greedy and unintelligent.
This tack preserves a way back for him with a simple apology.

<modsnip: discussing removed posts.> I wish to vigorously weigh in for the plaintiff does anyone have a copy of the lawsuit?
I would appreciate some help getting it. Is a copy even published?
I cannot find on line.
Click to expand...

I can't find it. I'll keep looking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 141 more.
Total: 2,275 (members: 142, guests: 2,133)

Online statistics

Members online
142
Guests online
2,133
Total visitors
2,275
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,881
Messages
18,131,300
Members
231,174
Latest member
Jmann420
Back
Top