“This is a victory not only for me, but for everyone who is afraid to stand up for what is right,” the 40-year-old actress and wife of Prince Harry began the statement issued after three British appeals judges ruled in the case. Its valid date. For the Duchess and her husband, this is a major victory over the tabloids they despise.
While cheers rose in California, where the famous couple reside, there was surprise in London about the ruling. Mail on Sunday She had strong indications that publishing the letter was part of a publicity campaign by Meghan and that she had always intended it to be made public. The Duchess’s friends are said to be the gossip magazine the people She was informed of the contents of the letter, as was Omar Scobie, her unofficial spokesman and biographer. It is an emotional letter from Megan to Father Thomas, with whom she has a bad relationship.
In their ruling, the judges stated in so many words that it was up to Meghan to decide what would happen to the letter and how it would be disseminated. Prominent media lawyer Mark Stevens said in response that this ruling gives celebrities more control over how they are exposed. In Britain at least. In the United States, where freedom of the press and expression is stipulated in the Constitution, the media can publish the message leaked by Thomas Markle without any problem.
memory loss
Interestingly, the matter never reached a real trial between Meghan and… Mail on Sunday came. The Duchess chose an abbreviated legal procedure in which no witnesses were heard in court, which is what the newspaper wanted. For example, the newspaper wanted to ask questions about its credibility. For example, Megan claimed that she was not involved in the Scooby book Find freedom. This later turned out to be the case. The judges described this case as an “unfortunate case of amnesia.”
Conservative politicians believe the justices overstepped the Legislature by crafting new privacy legislation. Ministers are now looking for ways to restore the balance between freedom of the press and the right to privacy. Mail on Sunday The appeal is being considered before the Supreme Court, which is the British Supreme Court. But it is uncertain whether this case will be accepted there. The only alternative is to involve the European Court of Human Rights. That would be a big step for a Eurosceptic newspaper.
