The legal battle between Meghan Markle and Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) has taken a dramatic turn as it is revealed that Meghan tampered with evidence.
ANL, the publisher being sued by Meghan for breach of privacy and copyright, is now appealing the ruling after discovering crucial information withheld by Meghan and her husband, Prince Harry.
The case centers around a private letter Meghan wrote to her estranged father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018, following his absence from her wedding.
Meghan argues that the letter was intended as a personal communication and never meant for public consumption.
However, ANL’s lawyers dispute this claim, presenting evidence that Meghan collaborated with her former communications secretary, Jason Narf, in composing the letter.
They argue that Meghan strategically crafted the letter to improve her public image, intending for it to be leaked and published.
Additionally, ANL alleges that Meghan authorized Narf to provide information to the authors of the Finding Freedom biography, which portrayed her and Prince Harry in a positive light, despite Meghan denying any involvement in the book.
In a surprising twist, ANL recently received a statement from a confidential source, revealing that Narf regretted not testifying in the High Court case and expressing a willingness to provide a statement for the appeal.
Narf’s statement, released on the final day of the appeal hearing, confirmed his assistance in drafting the letter and his belief that Meghan was aware it could be leaked.
This directly contradicts Meghan’s written evidence, in which she denied collaborating with Narf and claimed she did not think her father would leak the letter.
During the proceedings, Meghan apologized to the court for failing to remember an email exchange in which she agreed to Narf providing information to the authors of Finding Freedom.
She attributed her forgetfulness to the stress of pregnancy and living in a foreign country.
ANL’s solicitor, Keith Matheson, emphasized Narf’s credibility as a senior and trusted member of the royal household staff, stating that his statement raised serious doubts about Meghan’s honesty and credibility.
Matheson argued that Meghan’s letter was not merely a private expression of her feelings, but a calculated PR move to shape public opinion and counter negative press.
He described the letter as a carefully crafted piece of public relations, highlighting Meghan’s vested interest in how she was perceived in relation to her father.
According to Matheson, Meghan used the letter to set the record straight and present her side of the story after her father faced damaging allegations in a People magazine article.
ANL’s barrister, Andrew Caldicott QC, echoed Matheson’s sentiments, emphasizing Meghan’s intention to influence public perception.
He stated that Meghan had a very real interest in how her relationship with her father was viewed by the public and that the letter was a strategic move to address false claims made against him.
The revelation of Meghan’s manipulation of evidence and the refusal of Prince Harry to testify have significantly impacted the ongoing legal battle.
ANL’s appeal is now supported by Narf’s statement, which raises serious questions about Meghan’s credibility and the true nature and purpose of the letter.