Meghan Markle court case: ‘Palace Four’ may have letter of proof



[ad_1]

Four former aides to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex may have evidence that could ‘shed light’ on Meghan’s letter to her estranged father, the High Court was told today.

Meghan, 39, is suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), publishers of Mail On Sunday and MailOnline, for breach of privacy for publishing excerpts from a letter she sent to her father Thomas Markle, 76, after her royal wedding in 2018.

His lawyers have asked for summary judgment, a legal step that would allow parts of the case to be resolved without a trial and without the need for witnesses, but the newspaper says the case is “ totally unsuitable for summary judgment. ”

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex leave Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey in London on March 9 of last year, for their last royal engagement before leaving royal life.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex leave Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey in London on March 9 of last year, for their last royal engagement before leaving royal life.

Meghan is suing Associated Newspapers Limited for breach of privacy for posting excerpts from a letter she sent to her father Thomas Markle (pictured) after her royal wedding in 2018

Meghan is suing Associated Newspapers Limited for breach of privacy for posting excerpts from a letter she sent to her father Thomas Markle (pictured) after her royal wedding in 2018

On the second day of the hearing today, lawyer for publisher Antony White QC told the court that a letter from lawyers representing the so-called ‘Palace Four’ said they would be in able to “ shed light ” on the writing of Meghan’s letter to her father.

He told the court it was also ‘likely’ that there was further evidence as to whether Meghan ‘directly or indirectly provided private information’ to authors of an unauthorized biography of the Duke and the Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom.

The letter was sent to the parties on behalf of Jason Knauf – former communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who the newspaper said was involved in the wording of Meghan’s letter – and Christian Jones, their former secretary communications assistant.

The other two members of the so-called “Palace Four” are Samantha Cohen, formerly the private secretary of the Sussexes, and Sara Latham, their former director of communications.

Jason Knauf, former communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex

Christian Jones, former deputy secretary for communications to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex

The letter was sent to the parties on behalf of Jason Knauf (left) – the former Sussex communications secretary, who the newspaper said was involved in drafting Meghan’s letter – and Christian Jones (right), their former assistant secretary for communications

In the letter sent on their behalf, their lawyers said: “ None of our clients welcome their possible involvement in this litigation, which stems solely from the performance of their duties in their respective jobs at the time of the facts. .

“This is particularly the case given the sensitivity, and therefore the required discretion, in their particular roles within the royal household.

He added, “Neither of our clients wants to take sides in the dispute between your respective clients. Our clients are all strictly neutral.

“They have no interest in assisting either party to the proceedings. Their only interest is to guarantee a level playing field, with regard to the evidence they could provide. “

Samantha Cohen, Former Sussex Private Secretary

Sara Latham, their former director of communications

The other two members of the so-called ‘Palace Four’ are Samantha Cohen (left), former private secretary to the Sussexes, and Sara Latham (right), their former director of communications.

The letter continued that their lawyers’ preliminary opinion was that one or more of our clients would be able to shed light on three key areas which it lists as follows:

  • the creation of the letter and the electronic draft.
  • whether or not the requester expected the letter to enter the public domain.
  • whether or not the requester has directly or indirectly provided private information (in general and in relation to the letter in particular) to the authors of Finding Freedom.

Mr White said the letter showed that “further oral and documentary evidence would likely be available at trial, which would shed light on some key factual issues in this case.”

The court heard that another area in need of a ‘factual investigation at trial’ is the writing of the royal biography Finding Freedom, which tells the story of Meghan’s life and marriage to the Duke of Sussex.

The newspaper claims that she has cooperated with its authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, or allowed her friends to share the details of the letter.

A court artist's sketch of Ian Mill QC (top left), Justin Rushbrooke QC (top right) and Judge M. Justice Warby (bottom), at the Royal Courts of Justice in London yesterday

A court artist’s sketch of Ian Mill QC (top left), Justin Rushbrooke QC (top right) and Judge M. Justice Warby (bottom), at the Royal Courts of Justice in London yesterday

Meghan has denied the allegations – as has Mr Scobie – but conceded in a court document submitted at a hearing last year that she allowed a friend to speak to them on her behalf.

Mr White said: ‘What did the Claimant tell this unidentified person about the letter in order to counter what she describes as her father’s account in the media?

“This is another issue that requires factual investigation at trial.

The court was also made aware of a People magazine article from February 2019, which first revealed the letter and contained interviews with five of Meghan’s friends whose identities have not been disclosed.

If a full trial takes place, they are expected to all testify and be asked under oath how the article came to be.

Mr White told Judge Warby: ‘The letter was sent by the plaintiff (Meghan) for reading by others or the public. ”

The newspaper claims Meghan cooperated with Finding Freedom writers Omid Scobie (above) and Carolyn Durand, or allowed her friends to share the details of the letter.

The newspaper claims Meghan either cooperated with Finding Freedom authors Omid Scobie (above) and Carolyn Durand, or allowed her friends to share the details of the letter.

He added: ‘The writing of the letter to be used as part of a media strategy, the extent to which it provoked or allowed information about it to be passed on to the authors (of Finding Freedom) and People magazine cannot be ruled out and requires a thorough investigation at trial.

On the first day of the hearing, Justin Rushbrooke, QC, representing Meghan, told Judge Warby that the newspaper’s case had no chance of success and that the release of the excerpts had been a “ three-stroke violation. his right to privacy ”.

He described the letter as “a heartfelt appeal from a distressed daughter to her father” and that she had no intention of making it public.

Mr Rushbrooke added: ‘This is as good an example as one could find of a letter that anyone of ordinary sensitivity would not want to be disclosed to third parties, let alone in a mass media publication, in a sensational context and to serve the commercial purposes of the newspaper. “

[ad_2]

Source link