Show Notes
When the news broke last week that Thomas Markle had been accused of hoarding a stash of child sex abuse material, a certain kind of comment piece went round the, ahem, progressive end of the media almost instantly. The headlines were all variations on the same theme: how long before Meghan’s father allegedly hoarding pedophile material turned out to be "Meghan’s fault?" Not long, was the implication, if the wicked tabloids had anything to do with it. A week on, there is an alternative spin on offer, and it is coming from the Sussexes’ new house magazine, The Telegraph, and what it looks very much like, to my eye, is Meghan’s side trying to lump at least some of the blame for what happened to that letter onto William and Catherine. The same double standard runs through everything. In February 2020 they announced that by giving up public funds they had removed the “supposed ‘public interest’ justification for media intrusion.” In September this year their office issued a media advisory headed “PRINCE HARRY, DUKE OF SUSSEX SEPTEMBER PUBLIC ENGAGEMENTS,” and their friends briefed that they are public figures, not private citizens. They are whichever suits the day. And so it is with the letter: private when it protects her, public when it convicts the press, and now, apparently, a matter for the wider royal household when the question turns to who sat on it. I find the choice of vehicle fascinating. This is The Telegraph that last week fired around 100 staff as its new owner, Axel Springer (which bought the paper in June for £575 million), announced its intention to turn it into a “global, AI-powered premium media and intelligence business.” I called that a Slopbait factory in a Substack Note last night, and I stand by the coinage (neologisms are what Substack is for). Any tidbit about Harry and Meghan drives traffic, and what we appear to be watching is a paper abandoning basic journalistic principles and taking what it is fed on trust from a team that has been shown, again and again, to be highly manipulative and to say things that are not true when it suits them. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
More from The Royalist
First, the Metropolitan Police has referred itself to the police watchdog, the Independent Office for Police Conduct, over its handling of the January 2019 letter in which Thomas Markle’s first wife, Roslyn Loveless, accused him of child sex offenses. That is the Met admitting, in its own words, that it got this wrong. Not in a lost-the-paperwork way (although it did lose the paperwork, we’ll come to that). Wrong in two specific decisions that the watchdog is now going to investigate. Second, and this is the one that should be setting off alarms at Buckingham Palace: Richard Eden in the Daily Mail reports today that there is growing concern inside the Palace about what the Met’s review is going to uncover, and that a royal source has told him it is “unthinkable” the Royal Household was not told about that letter at the time. The source’s argument is simple. Harry and Meghan would not have been handed something like this on their own. The police had a duty to inform the Palace, and the source says they will have done so. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Please remember to like and subscribe! Check out my Substack: https://theroyalist.substack.com/ Check out my new book - The Dukes / Dukes of Hazard - here!: United States: https://a.co/d/0gmvpeQz Australia: https://amzn.asia/d/01Y4mpkj UK: https://amzn.eu/d/01mSqQKa And come to the launch party!: Ireland https://luma.com/8mthatr8 NYC https://luma.com/zlval2ce London https://luma.com/kj60msvh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Either Meghan believed in 2019 that her father was a pedophile, in which case she lied to Oprah about what was really tormenting her, or she didn’t, in which case last week’s statement was pure opportunism. There is no third option. In this video I lay out why the Sussexes’ handling of the Thomas Markle allegations (which he denies, and which are a matter for the courts) has turned whatever sympathy initially flowed Meghan’s way into something close to disgust. The whole story hinges on a letter, allegedly sent to the Metropolitan Police in January 2019 by Thomas Markle’s first wife, Roslyn Loveless, accusing him of traveling to the Philippines for sex with children. A copy, we are told, reached Harry and Meghan via their bodyguards. Meghan now says that letter is the one reason she cut off her father and kept him away from Archie and Lili. Yet the police lost it, had to ask the Sussexes for a copy, and then dated it to 2019 rather than 2018, at which point Meghan’s much-vaunted record keeping fell apart and her spokesman had to correct her. So why did nobody follow up? Meghan had five police officers around her for another year. She allowed friends to tell People magazine, a month after the letter supposedly arrived, that she had written to her father: “I love you. I have one father. Please stop victimizing me through the media.” Harry praised Thomas in Spare. Her lawyers blamed the tabloids for the estrangement. Everybody’s actions suggest neither the Met nor Meghan found the letter credible. And if she did believe it? Then she sat opposite Oprah and blamed her suicidal ideation on racist press coverage and a heartless royal family (the bridesmaids’ dresses, the lip gloss, the sofa) while saying nothing about a father she was convinced was an abuser. That narrative built a global brand. A pedophile father would have destroyed it. Meanwhile Meghan has launched a $550 As Ever “Library basket,” signed up for MasterChef Australia, and let staff brief that she has fled the UK in tears. The public verdict is in, and it is grim. In Spare, Harry raged at William for urging him to take his time getting to know “this girl.” If only he had. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
The latest allegations surrounding Thomas Markle, Meghan Markle’s estranged father, are raising new questions about one of the royal family’s most publicized family feuds. On this episode of The Royalist, Tom Sykes examines the disputed claims, a letter from 2019, and the complicated circumstances surrounding Meghan’s estrangement from her father. Could this overlooked chapter change how we understand Meghan’s account of the family feud—and the events that shaped her relationship with the royal family? Plus, Tom sits down with Paula Froelich ( @PaulaFroelich , https://thescoopwithpaulafroelich.substack.com/) to discuss Prince William’s appearance on The Graham Norton Show and why the Prince of Wales made such a strong impression.
The Metropolitan Police, the force charged with protecting the royal family, has had to go cap in hand to Meghan Markle and ask whether she still had a copy of a letter it was sent in 2019, because it had lost its own. That letter, according to The Times and The Telegraph, was written by Roslyn Loveless, the late ex-wife of Thomas Markle Sr. and the mother of Samantha Markle and Thomas Markle Jr. In January 2019 it was sent to the Fixated Threat Assessment Centre, the specialist Scotland Yard unit that assesses risks to the royals, and it contained serious allegations of child sexual offences against Meghan’s father, along with a warning that he could pose a security risk to Meghan, Prince Harry and Doria Ragland.