The D. And D. Of Sussex In The News Again.

Was it legal to publish the Camillagate telephone conversation or theDiana’s Squidgy telephone conversation?

First we have victim blaming and now whataboutery. I have no idea about telephone calls - my guess would be nothing to do with copyright and everything to do with invasion of privacy. But why did you bring that up at all annie? Exactly what point are you trying to make? One bad thing done excuses another?

I think they are right to sue the Mail on Sunday. Why apart from the need to cause trouble for the pair, did they print that letter? And the fact that it may have been edited only adds to it.

I like this reply to the article in the In dependent.

"
Canon Ian Davi s
13 hours ago
The media, tabloid, online, all of us in the twittering classes are to blame. The monarchy in Britain and the Crown in particular.... in such a bleak and sad world, are an inspiration and just one of the few reasons it’s worth struggling against populism- and populism’s frightening outcome- jack-booted fascism.

There are some really bitchy threads on Twitter about Meghan. Obviously put out by Harry's adoring wannabes.

Social media has a lot to answer for.

We have a royal family. They have a job to do. They do it. Most of them do it very well.

suzie I asked a question , not trying to make a point , a question - ?

Just a simple question annie?

A gross invasion of anyone's privacy to find a personal letter published in the tabloid press. Horrid. But the Dss of S very much wants life on her own terms.

She is the one who constantly claims to crave privacy while courting publicity.

winter is wanting life on your own terms to be equated with being subject to illegal acts? Is the protection of the law only for ‘nice’ people we like?

First and foremost I am a passionate believer in the freedom of the press. There are some however who want that freedom removed and that is a scary thought.

We pay for the Royals and I don’t believe they should have any special treatment within certain guidelines.

Meghan comes across to me as a very self centred unforgiving woman.

She has completely cut her father out of her life. He has never met Harry or been sent a single picture of his grandson.

Yes he behaved badly in the beginning but now feels the press is the only means at his disposal to communicate with his daughter. Hence his agreeing to the interview and the publishing of his letter from Meghan.

I hope the legal action against the MoS is unsuccessful.

When Harry first started seeing Meghan, the press were all over it, praising her to the heavens. Now, as is normal with the press, they have turned on her - everything she says or does is criticised. They have manufactured a falling out with William and Kate where no evidence exists.

There was an example given on local radio this morning, Meghan wore a dress to an event and was criticised for it being tacky a few weeks later Kate wore a dress in the same style and was praised for it looking regal

We none of us know her - all we know is what has been written about her in newspapers. We none of us know why she decided not to see her father - we have only heard his side of the story.

Not a very sympathetic post at all jolbook. I imagine most of the royals would be happy if the press just left them alone. They neither crave nor need publicity.

In a democracy the press is free within the legal limits set by Parliament. We are all free to break the law - but must then ace the consequences

jennnifer your lack of logic stuns me. His only way to communicate with his daughter ???????

He could simply reply to her letter. But now he is a man who courts the press! Poor Meghan.

Jennifer- with freedom comes responsibility.

Why did the public need to see the letter ? What did it achieve? Did it serve any useful purpose?
Other than trying to increase the sales figures for the paper.

The letter was published in February, why sue now

I suppose Annie that it takes time.

I can't imagine how Thomas Markle must have felt seeing the pictures of his grandson being introduced to Desmond Tutu. ?

7 months is rather a long time, after their S.A. visit !

The Royals do not want the Press to leave them alone; they have press officers1 They just want the good bits out there.

MM problem is that she is not very classy. I think it is tacky to sue over a letter although I suspect the real reason is the relentless tide of negative stuff. She wants to be loved but this is not the way. Live with it lady; act it out.

They could have initiated the action in February though, if that was when it was published, surely.

I am a royalist, always very fond of Harry, but I agree with Jolbrook, they want all the good press, and then kick off when they don’t like it.

But I do think it was pretty low of the Mail on Sunday to print it.

He said he did write to her but he doesn’t have a private address for her so, speaking from memory, I think he said he sent his letter to her press office. He had no reply hence the interview.

I remember him saying he had tried to phone and text his daughter but had no reply.

That was all before the interview.

All this unpleasantness could have been avoided if Harry and Meghan had practiced what they preach couldn’t it?

I like Megan.
At first I thought she was a bit dictatorial but we all have faults and act differently. She looks very approachable and they clearly love each other very much.
It's obvious that Harry has changed but isn't that true of all of us when we marry or live with a partner.
We have to accomodate each other in order to get along harmoniously.
It's quite early days in their relationship and Meghan will get the hang of certain obligations in time.

Copyright belongs to the writer of the letter. However, the recipient can show the letter to another, but the other may not reproduce it. Therefore, the despicable MoS seems, therefore, to have breached copyright and should, rightly, be held to account for doing so.