Harry & Meghan 17: St Meghan's Hagiography

[Jackie3]

From the Guardian:

Quote

Whatever else might be said about Prince Harry, he got to pull the sword from the stone. He got his day in court, his longed-for legal vindication, winning phone hacking rulings against the Mirror group. The hacked-off royal even got to witness arch-enemy Piers Morgan’s head roll into the executioner’s basket (though, characteristically, the former Daily Mirror editor failed to go quietly, accusing Harry and wife Meghan of scheming to bring down the monarchy).

 

[viii]

20 hours ago, LilaMae said:

I'm not sure whether that's a huge amount for a couple with a 9 bedroom mansion in an expensive part of California. It must cost a bomb to run.

I thought I read a rumour that they were going to be selling their house soon. I feel like we’d have seen a listing though if that was true. 

[Jackie3]

21 hours ago, LilaMae said:

I'm not sure whether that's a huge amount for a couple with a 9 bedroom mansion in an expensive part of California. It must cost a bomb to run.

Are you worried about their financial situation? Or just hoping they will be poor soon?

[marmalade]

6 hours ago, viii said:

I thought I read a rumour that they were going to be selling their house soon. I feel like we’d have seen a listing though if that was true. 

They would probably wait until the New Year to put it on the market. 

[Jackie3]

On 12/14/2023 at 12:51 PM, tabitha2 said:

Harry was not raised to even think about buying groceries, apparently doesn’t care to learn or adjust to his chosen circumstances either and it becomes more and more apparent Meghan has dreams of grandeur and A list money on a C List budget and D list sense of reality

Really, don't most people. have dreams of grandeur? Exactly why is it so terrible if MM does? 

I'd certainly like some A list money! Wouldn't you? Who cares if Meghan does? She's just like the rest of us, then.

 

On 12/16/2023 at 5:47 PM, tabitha2 said:

Plus the Staff, the kids no doubt expensive schooling, their pricey wardrobes, security, lawyers,  publicity people, all the traveling they do various taxes and all the Sundries. 
 

You hope they are poor, or will become poor. Because that'll show them. 

The kids'll be poor too. But you still hope it'll happen.

 

[Father Son Holy Goat]

5 hours ago, marmalade said:

They would probably wait until the New Year to put it on the market. 

What is significant about 2024?

[marmalade]

12 minutes ago, Father Son Holy Goat said:

What is significant about 2024?

Nothing. I just figure the holidays aren't a good time to sell property. 

[TN-peach]

For anyone really interested, here is an article about the 33 articles that Prince Harry sued over

 

https://archive.is/LZQfN

The Duke of Sussex alleged that 148 stories published by Mirror Group Newspapers — in its titles the Daily and Sunday Mirror, and the Sunday People — from between 1996 and 2010 were obtained through unlawful means, such as phone hacking.

The trial considered a sample of 33, of which 15 were found to be the result of unlawful activity.

1: Diana so sad on Harry’s big day

Daily Mirror, September 16, 1996. Article was the day after Harry’s 12th birthday and before the duke even had a mobile phone. Harry lost

2: Princes take to the hills for gala

Daily Mirror, July 17, 2000. Judge: “Unclear whether any of the content could be considered private in view of previous publicity.” Harry lost

3: Harry’s time at the bar

Daily Mirror, September 19, 2000. Judge: Pizza restaurant with friends for 16th birthday so “doubtful that duke could establish a reasonable expectation of privacy”. Harry lost

4: Snap … Harry breaks thumb like William

Daily Mirror, November 11, 2000. Judge: Harry’s claim was “hopeless” as content was released by St James’s Palace in a media briefing. Harry lost.

{the article is longer but I don't want copy all of it) It is clear that the media for sure hacked Chelsy's phone. 

[viii]

It's so weird to me the way people dissect the cases and count how many he won and lost. I thought we could all universally agree the media is scum for the way they hacked everyone - Harry, William, Kate, Chelsy, etc, but apparently not. 

[tabitha2]

Because at the end of the day it’s all about money and how much he won or lost will determine their future. His sense of vindication or that the media was in the wrong and has to pay is irrelevant if they don’t get enough money  out of the rulings to maintain their standard of living l. 

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, TN-peach said:

For anyone really interested, here is an article about the 33 articles that Prince Harry sued over

 

https://archive.is/LZQfN

The Duke of Sussex alleged that 148 stories published by Mirror Group Newspapers — in its titles the Daily and Sunday Mirror, and the Sunday People — from between 1996 and 2010 were obtained through unlawful means, such as phone hacking.

The trial considered a sample of 33, of which 15 were found to be the result of unlawful activity.

1: Diana so sad on Harry’s big day

Daily Mirror, September 16, 1996. Article was the day after Harry’s 12th birthday and before the duke even had a mobile phone. Harry lost

2: Princes take to the hills for gala

Daily Mirror, July 17, 2000. Judge: “Unclear whether any of the content could be considered private in view of previous publicity.” Harry lost

3: Harry’s time at the bar

Daily Mirror, September 19, 2000. Judge: Pizza restaurant with friends for 16th birthday so “doubtful that duke could establish a reasonable expectation of privacy”. Harry lost

4: Snap … Harry breaks thumb like William

Daily Mirror, November 11, 2000. Judge: Harry’s claim was “hopeless” as content was released by St James’s Palace in a media briefing. Harry lost.

{the article is longer but I don't want copy all of it) It is clear that the media for sure hacked Chelsy's phone. 

Sounds like you are rejoicing over the losses! Are you a fan of phone hacking? Murdoch? Do you approve of phone hacking a dead child's phone? Strange bedfellows you've chosen!

 

[Baxter]

2 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

Because at the end of the day it’s all about money and how much he won or lost will determine their future. His sense of vindication or that the media was in the wrong and has to pay is irrelevant if they don’t get enough money  out of the rulings to maintain their standard of living l. 

If all Harry cared about was the money, he probably would have taken a settlement a long time ago. He was trying to make a point about the terrible tactics that the media use to invade privacy. So in that sense, I'm sure he feels vindicated by the judgment. 

[TN-peach]

4 hours ago, viii said:

It's so weird to me the way people dissect the cases and count how many he won and lost. I thought we could all universally agree the media is scum for the way they hacked everyone - Harry, William, Kate, Chelsy, etc, but apparently not. 

Obviously, I find it interesting.  You don't have to.  I thought that it was interesting that the articles that he lost were ones where the media received the information from press releases or other media stories.  In my opinion, it shows that in some ways Harry cannot be rational with his war with the media.  He has decided to go to war with the media and he is losing over half of the cases. 

And according to the Black Belt Barrister, it is possible because Harry lost the majority of the claims he might have to pay the court costs of the other side.  It is something in British law that if a certain pretrial offer is made and not accepted and the case goes to court.  If the result is less than the pretrial settlement, then the opposing side has to pay the court costs.  Here is the link to his video where he explains it.

 

But I do agree the media were scum for hacking their phones.  Looking at the details of the case doesn't make the actual hacking less scummy.  Harry should have concentrated his case on articles that could've only come from hacking.  Clearly, he did not.  Some of the articles he used were from before he had a cell phone. 

[Jackie3]

6 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

Because at the end of the day it’s all about money and how much he won or lost will determine their future. His sense of vindication or that the media was in the wrong and has to pay is irrelevant if they don’t get enough money  out of the rulings to maintain their standard of living l. 

This guy has plenty of. money.

If it were all about the money, he'd have taken the first settlement he'd been offered.

It was about public exposure of the media's excesses. And he accomplished that completely! He even has piers morgan on the hot seat.

To him, the outcome is pretty fantastic! I bet they had a big celebration in Montecito.

 

6 hours ago, viii said:

It's so weird to me the way people dissect the cases and count how many he won and lost. I thought we could all universally agree the media is scum for the way they hacked everyone - Harry, William, Kate, Chelsy, etc, but apparently not. 

I think some people really struggle here. They want Harry to lose everything--money, house, titles, wife. . . .but on this occasion, he was on the side of good. What to do? How to celebrate his win without celebrating his win?

[nelliebelle1197]

18 hours ago, Baxter said:

If all Harry cared about was the money, he probably would have taken a settlement a long time ago. He was trying to make a point about the terrible tactics that the media use to invade privacy. So in that sense, I'm sure he feels vindicated by the judgment. 

Of course he does feel vindicated and what was done to him and others was wrong. Even if he had taken the relatively small settlement he would have been obligated to donate it as William did. He was likely hoping the verdict would lead to more popularity and deals but the very intentional Scobie leak dashed that hope. The money in this case was not cash from the tabloids but rather the kind of public sympathy and popularity he could trade on for income. 

He probably needs the money at this point.  His lifestyle is incredibly expensive and he expects to live as he did in the UK today. Like his uncle David, he will plow through what he has very quickly because he cannot give up the royal trappings in many ways. The Netflix and Spotify deals were not what they seemed and required the actual production of content, very little of which was realized. Better Up is not a goldmine and there is very little left in the way of royal dirt to sell. 
 

 

Edited December 19, 2023 by nelliebelle1197

[nelliebelle1197]

For anyone who thinks Newsweek is a reliable source, it has not been in over a decade. A cult linked to the Moonies bought it. Look up David Jang. Some of these cult members were indicted for using the magazine for money laundering in 2018. The current owners are still suspect and the whole sale after indictment was shady. Newsweek has been little more than an old reputation since 2013 and is currently leaning heavily right wing and still in influenced by the Moonies bizarre beliefs.

[Manda]

On 12/16/2023 at 8:08 AM, Jackie3 said:

Didn't they get $100 million for something (the book, netflix?)

No.  That was the alleged total package they could get if all the contract options were used and they fulfilled all the contractual obligations.  They haven't done that yet on any of the contracts.

[viii]

6 hours ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

He probably needs the money at this point.  His lifestyle is incredibly expensive and he expects to live as he did in the UK today. 

Agreed; they probably make a lot less money than the average person realizes they do. 

[Jackie3]

48 minutes ago, Manda said:

No.  That was the alleged total package they could get if all the contract options were used and they fulfilled all the contractual obligations.  They haven't done that yet on any of the contracts.

Well, here's hoping they are struggling! That would be great for the children.

[Father Son Holy Goat]

They still have a significant amount of money so my sympathy for their relative hardship is limited. 

[GreenBeans]

On 12/18/2023 at 7:21 AM, marmalade said:

Nothing. I just figure the holidays aren't a good time to sell property. 

I’ve never really thought about that. On the other hand, at least here (Germany) many people have the days between Christmas and New Year’s Day off, life in general is very slow and people would have lots of time to look at properties. We actually found our apartment just after Christmas and went to look at it on December 30th (but that may have been unusual, I don’t know).

[treehugger]

11 hours ago, Father Son Holy Goat said:

They still have a significant amount of money so my sympathy for their relative hardship is limited. 

Even if they don’t any more, they did, so I’m with you. No sympathy here.  I have no patience for privileged, entitled dolts who squander their wealth and then whine about it.  

[tabitha2]

Watching old Royal clips and home movies of him years ago interacting  with his Grandparents , Father ,Brother and family is very bittersweet and makes me feel sadness and sympathy for Harry but then I think about how things turned out with him and that all evaporates.  

[Coconut Flan]

I at first thought the coffee ad was a joke, but apparently not.

[Baba O'Riley]

I casually follow the goings-on of Harry and Meghan, but I'm not strongly pro or con about them.  I did enjoy Harry's book. I stumbled on a busy thread at Quora that promotes some conspiracy theories about them,  some really wacky.  I had no idea of any of these rumors.  I hope it's ok to share these. 

1.  Harry and Meghan are the bio parents of Archie and Lili, but had a surrogate for both births. 

2.  The photos of the kids are not the real kids. They wanted them to look whiter.

3.  Harry is the bio dad, but Meghan is not the bio mom.

4.  The kids don't live with them. In fact, neither of them are supposed kids' parents. Their house doesn't have pool roped off or have playground equipment or other toys. The kids are never seen.  Referred to as "invisikids."
 

A few people on that thread have gone through a lot of time and trouble to compile  photographic "evidence" and construct a very detailed timeline supporting these theories.  Are these theories actually gaining traction out there, or are they just the products of people who maybe hate M & H and have a lot of time on their hands? I haven't read these rumors anywhere else. 

Edited December 20, 2023 by Baba O'Riley