Meghan Markle has lost her credibility over court case says expert

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info

Speaking about Meghan Markle’s legal battle with Associated Newspapers, a lawyer said that the Duchess may still have a “reasonable expectation of privacy”. Amber Melville-Brown, global head of media and reputation at international law firm Withers, told Newsweek: “You can have a reasonable expectation of privacy while hedging your bets and taking some preparatory steps towards reputation protection in the event of a disclosure, without wanting or causing that disclosure, should it occur.

“Whether that is the case for Meghan here remains a matter of hot debate and argument.”

She added: “Of course, it doesn’t feel particularly comfortable to read someone planning so carefully for an exposure of private information that they wish to remain private.

“But it is certainly the case, whether or not it is in this particular instance, that individuals miss a trick if they did not seek to protect themselves against all eventualities.”

The Duchess of Sussex was forced to apologize to the court after she allegedly misled them by saying that she “did not contribute” to biography Finding Freedom.

It later emerged in the Appeal Court that she had asked an aide, Jason Knauf, to pass on information to the authors of the biography.

This came after Mr Knauf, the Duchess’s former communications secretary, handed private messages between himself and Meghan Markle to the court.

The messages include communications in which both Harry and Meghan appeared to authorize him to disclose information to the authors.

In her witness statement, the 40-year-old royal said: “I did not have the benefit of seeing these emails and I apologize to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.

LIVE UPDATES: Royal Family LIVE: Queen heartbreak as Harry poised to ‘rock palace’

“I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead [The Mail on Sunday] or the Court.

“In fact, had I been aware of these exchanges at the time of serving the Re-Amended Reply, I would have been more than happy to refer to them as I feel they strongly support my case.”

The Duchess was on the receiving end of harsh criticism as a result of the lapse, with the Sun referring to her as “Little Miss Forgetful” on their front page.

Meanwhile, Piers Morgan, retweeting the front page, called the Duchess “shameful”, adding: “I’ve now had 8 months to carefully reflect on my statement that I don’t believe a word Meghan Markle says…. and I still don’t.”

DON’T MISS: 
Senior royals step in to ‘do Queen’s duties until SPRING’ [REVEAL]
Gibraltar cancels Christmas celebrations amid Covid spike [REACTION]
Meghan Markle has moved to perfect state to catapult political career [INSIGHT]

Eric Schiffer, chairman of Reputation Management Consultants, said that the revelations only “highlights and reinforces what people like Piers Morgan and other detractors have been saying.”

He added: “It was not her best moment and I’m sure that she regrets it greatly but we’ll have to see how it’s going to play out with the court and whether the court has a view that her credibility has to be more carefully analysed.

“To the general public, I don’t think it’s a huge body slam. But some of her detractors will be able to take a victory lap and it reinforces the messaging that they’re putting out that her credibility is questionable.”

He added: “For those on the other side they are gleeful at that disclosure and they recognise that on some level it’s debilitating and I’m sure was upsetting to Meghan but what defines these things are not processes but results.

“We will have to see how the court at the end decides and that will be how history will look at this too.”

The Duchess of Sussex won her privacy case against Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Mail on Sunday, earlier this year when the High Court found its publication of the letter was unlawful.

However, Associated Newspapers are currently seeking to overturn this judgement at the Court of Appeal, disputing that the letter was simply private and personal.

They have argued that it was crafted with the “possibility of public consumption” in mind.

Source: Read Full Article