She won the case only because the MOS published too much of the letter instead of only parts relevant to her father wanting to answer the accusations made against him.
I personally couldn’t applaud anyone who schemed to allow 4 of her friends to reveal parts of the letter to the press which painted her father in a bad light and which were shown to be lies/out of context in subsequent emails revealed in court.

I personally couldn’t applaud anyone who withheld important documents from the court; therefore was in contempt of court, and outright lied about participation in the book, never mind all the other lies, manipulations and chaos she has caused previously.
As the present law dictates, she won the case on a technicality, but I certainly wouldn’t be applauding someone so devious as to use the press herself when it suits her to lie to the public to get their misplaced sympathies by deception.
But each to their own of course.

Good post jet..very true.

What????

I merely commented on your comment "she hardly needs the money" and I beg to differ....

:clap2:

Hasn't Harry been £1-ing her every night anyway?:hehe:

Sexual innuendos aside, why did the Daily Fail fabricate details in this case? If you don't want controversy then at least report the facts.:laugh:

Tbh Meghan's gonna get abuse no matter what the sum ends up being.

Facts in the Daily Mail.
I don't think we'll ever see that day Mock.:joker:

It's just about taken over from the Sun as the truly worst of gutter trash as to publications.

I won't insult the word ' news' as to term it a (news) paper.
It should be only on any fiction stands in retail outlets in my view.

I agree with all that you say here Joey.

I'm sure that at one time many years ago that DM had good intentions, but sadly has become corrupted by the Murdoch era.

No mock, Meghan pegs Harry every night to the sound of rule Britannia

Well we can try doing a Rule Britannia remix with their groaning added in.:joker:

Mock, could you explain what you mean by the Mail fabricating details in the court case? Have you a link that refers to this? :conf:

It's actually 37k LT.
They are too greedy lining their own pockets to care about promoting their charity....and Harry's Travalyst had made the Princely sum of 12k.

How much have you raised for charity in the last 12 months? I'm assuming a lot.

:facepalm:

Those amounts are pathetic for a high profile couple who have been busy raising many many millions in deals all for themselves.

Interesting piece in the DM - must be all lies of course....:laugh:

[Financial details of the Sussexes' charities and companies in the US are far more scant, thanks to their decision to incorporate their organizations in Delaware, notorious for its lack of corporate transparency.

Anti-corruption organization Transparency International has slammed the state as 'a place where extreme corporate secrecy enables corrupt people, shady companies, drug traffickers, embezzlers and fraudsters to cover their tracks when shifting dirty money from one place to another,' – although law-abiding businesses also incorporate there.
Though both Archewell's HQ and the couple's home being in California, all their charities and associated companies are incorporated in Delaware.
Even a company set up to hold the Archewell trademark was founded in Delaware – and appears to have not yet filed documents with the California Secretary of State despite being based in Beverly Hills.]

None of this answered the question I asked.

I work for charities, I'm not a high profile public figure that owns them....and I don't like to boast.

Sure thing, odd such a charitable non boastful person like yourself would openly scoff at any amount raised.

It's her own fault.

If you are happy with that paltry amount, which smacks of neglect, while H&M concentrate on making deals to fatten their bank account with millions upon millions, then what do you care what I think? :fan:

Wasn't you gleefully telling us how broke they were recently? Hard to care what anyone who constantly changes the narrative to fit their argument has to say.

:joker:

You do realise you are making a ridiculous comparison…:joker:

Here I was thinking ridiculousness was the tone for the crimes of Meghan Markle threads.