Prince Harry begged Thomas Markle not to speak to press before marriage, court documents say


Documents filed on behalf of the Duchess of Sussex show that Prince Harry made comments in a series of text messages to Thomas Markle on May 14, 2018 – shortly after Markle confirmed that he would not attend the wedding at Windsor in May. 19.

Harry also told him that the couple was not angry with him for withdrawing from their marriage, according to the documents.

In a series of messages sent on May 14, 2018, Prince Harry said: “Tom, Harry again! I really need to talk to you. You don’t need to apologize, we understand the circumstances, but “making public” will only make the situation worse. .

“If you like Meg and want to get it right, call me, because there are two other options that don’t mean you have to talk to the media, who actually created this whole situation. So please call me so I can explain to you. Meg and I’m not angry, we just need to talk to you. Thank you, “he wrote.

The details of the text messages were released in a lawsuit brought by the Duchess of Sussex against Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Mail on Sunday, for invasion of privacy and copyright infringement after the newspaper published extracts from a handwritten letter from Meghan to her father, sent shortly after her marriage to Prince Harry.

Meghan and Harry tell four British tabloids that they can expect 'zero engagement'

According to the publication, Meghan complained to her father that she had ignored many of her attempts to get in touch, saying that her actions had “broken my heart into a million pieces.”

The original article in the Mail on Sunday also included claims by Thomas Markle that he had reached out “several times” to try to fix things.

Lawyers acting on behalf of the Duchess say the texts were included to define “full exchanges” in messages between Meghan and her father before marriage, rather than relying on the “very partial summary of the accused “

The response brief also details the text messages that Prince Harry sent to Thomas Markle.

In another message, Harry wrote, “Oh, any press speech will backfire on me, believe me Tom. Only we can help you, as we have tried since day one. “

Rather than respond to Prince Harry, court documents allege that Thomas Markle posted a statement on TMZ celebrity news website that he went to hospital after suffering a heart attack.

A day later, on May 15, 2018, Meghan sent a text to her father to tell him: “I contacted you all weekend but you do not answer any of our calls or answer any text … Very concerned about your health and safety and have taken all measures to protect you but do not know what to do more if you do not respond … Do you need help? Can we send the security team again? I’m sorry to hear you ‘are in the hospital but need you to contact us please … Which hospital are you in? “

According to the documents, she texted 10 minutes later to say that she and Prince Harry had dispatched a security team to deal with him, but it was refused.

Meghan's father, Thomas Markle.

In the rejoinder filed in court, lawyers for the Duchess of Sussex say that Meghan’s phone received a missed call at 4:57 a.m. on May 19, 2018 (the morning of her marriage) but received no text messages nor any other missed calls from Thomas Markle at any time thereafter.

Harry and Meghan were married later today in Windsor, England.

The Mail on Sunday and parent company, Associated Newspapers, previously stated that it maintained the original story it published and would vigorously defend the case.

Society will argue that there was a “huge and legitimate” public interest in members of the royal family and their “personal relationships.”

In her reply, the Duchess of Sussex states that any claim by the defendant to freedom of expression to publish the contents of the letter is offset by her expectation of confidentiality.

A hearing on the matter is scheduled to take place on Friday.

This story has been updated to correct what the Sussex’s response says about freedom of expression and the expectation of privacy.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here