(London) Meghan Markle won her case on Thursday against a British tabloid convicted for publishing a letter she wrote to her father, a “victory” that could reshape a sensationalist cruel and deceptive press, according to the wife of Prince Harry.
This is an important step for the 40-year-old American actress who, with her husband, sixth in the order of succession to the British crown, regularly decries the methods of the tabloids, often without mercy against her.
The editor of Mail on Sunday, the Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) group, challenged in the Court of Appeal a February court ruling that the publication of Meghan’s letter to her father was “manifestly excessive and therefore illegal”, and therefore violated its private life. The tabloid criticized in particular that the decision was taken at first instance, without going through a due process.
“This appeal will be rejected,” Judge Geoffrey Vos ruled on Thursday. “The Court of Appeal upholds the judge’s decision that the Duchess could reasonably expect respect for her privacy,” he added, stressing that the content of the letter was “personal, private and did not present not a legitimate interest for the public interest ”.
“What matters most is that we are now collectively brave enough to reshape a tabloid industry that pushes people to be cruel and takes advantage of the lies and the pain they create,” said Mr.me Markle after the London Court of Appeal decision proving him right.
Denouncing on multiple occasions the pressure of the media on his couple, Harry, 37, has also made it the main reason for his withdrawal from the royal family, effective since April 2020, and his exile in California with his wife, where they live with their two children.
In this letter to her father published in 2018, shortly after her marriage to Prince Harry, the Duchess of Sussex asked her father Thomas Markle, 77, to stop spitting out and lying in the media about their broken relationship.
the Mail on Sunday had been ordered to report in one of his legal defeat, and his publisher to pay 450,000 pounds (530,000 euros) to Meghan for his legal costs.
But the mass-circulation tabloid argued in its appeal reviewed in November that she wrote the letter knowing it might be disclosed.
“Chaos” rather than “truth”
Meghan Markle denounced the “ruleless” practices of this publication, which she said made “a simple, extremely convoluted affair, in order to generate even more headlines and sell more newspapers – a model that rewards chaos rather than truth “.
In order to support his claims, the Mail on Sunday had put forward during the hearings on appeal the testimony of Jason Knauf, former secretary of the communication of the couple who had affirmed that the draft letter had been written with in mind “that it could flee”.
In written testimony, Meghan had refuted this claim, saying it was only a “possibility”.
Bringing water to the mill of the tabloid which wanted to demonstrate that Meghan Markle regularly sought to influence public opinion, Mr. Knauf had also said to have provided on behalf of Meghan and Harry private information to the authors of the unofficial biography of the couple royal, “Finding Freedom” (“Harry and Meghan, free”).
According to him, the book project was “discussed routinely” and “directly with the Duchess, in person and by email”.
Mme Markle acknowledged this latter information and apologized for misleading the court by not having clarified it at first instance. She argued, however, that the information shared with the authors was “a far cry from the very detailed personal information” published by the Mail on Sunday.
But this backpedaling had earned him the mockery of the tabloids, the Sun nicknamed her “Madame Étourdie”, in reference to the series of children’s books “Monsieur, Madame”.