|
|
[The BRF] Istana Bawang 12: The Markle Debacle and Other Stories
[Copy link]
|
|
|
The communications between Thomas and Meghan Markle
Thomas Markle is said to have called and texted his daughter numerous times in the weeks preceding the wedding and suggests they were on good terms.
Thursday 10 May, 2018
“I look forward to trying on my shoes and see how we look thank you for getting it ready for me its probably past your bedtime so have a good night I love you Dad”.
Friday 11 or Saturday 12 May 2018
Mr Markle, Meghan and Harry have telephone conversation about his staged paparazzi pics.
Monday 14 May
He wrote to Meghan stating that he was sorry; that he loved her and that he would not be attending the wedding; and was going to make a public apology to both her and Prince Harry.
He received a text response from Prince Harry saying that he (Mr Markle) did not need to apologise and that he should call.
Tuesday 15 May 2018
He texted Meghan to say he was “back in the hospital”. Meghan asked him to call her.
Wednesday 16 May 2018
Mr Markle texted Meghan to let her know that he had undergone surgery and would not be able to attend the wedding because his doctors would not allow him to fly. He said he was sorry for not being there, that he loved her and wished her the best.
A follow-up message asked who would “be giving [her] away?” and said if she really needed him he would come, and that he was sorry “about all this”.
Thursday May 17
Mr Markle received a text response “admonishing him for talking to the press, telling him to stop and accusing him of causing hurt to his daughter”. It did not ask how he was or how the surgery had gone. It was signed “Love M and H”.
Mr Markle replied: “I’ve done nothing to hurt you Meghan or anyone else I know nothing about 20 phone calls I’m sorry my heart attack is there any inconvenience for you.”
After the wedding, on May 19, Mr Markle tried to contact his daughter by phone and text, but received no response until the letter received in late August 2018.
Mr Markle continued to text Meghan asking her to contact him.
25 November 2018
He wrote: “I want to reach out to you or try to reach out to you one more time. You apparently have just written me off and now it’s telling me I guess for the rest of my life?”. No response.
source
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ada gambar baru ratchet tgh naik seaplane kat vancouver.
malas nak tepek, lg pun diambik oleh paparazi upahan peberet dia, splashnews. whyboder x3  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Sambungan-
Daripada source yg sama
“The Duchess of Sussex just wanted to protect her privacy.
Last autumn she declared she was suing a British newspaper over the publication of excerpts of a letter she had sent her father Thomas Markle, accusing him of breaking her heart “into a million pieces”. The bombshell announcement was made on the penultimate day of an (up to then anyway) successful Royal tour of southern Africa.
The Duchess must have hoped the threat of legal action would have brought a halt to what she perceived as the Mail on Sunday’s campaign against her.
But on Tuesday night, any chance of putting a lid on the rift with her father - and further adverse newspaper reports - appeared to have been blown sky high.
The defence document lodged yesterday in the High Court in London exposes in full their deteriorating relationship while accusing the Duchess of allegedly being - in part at least - an architect of her own breach of privacy. It suggests that when she wrote the letter to her father, she was aware it would likely end up in the public domain.
The letter’s existence only came to light six months after it was written when a US magazine, briefed by friends of the Duchess, made mention of it.
The 44-page defence submitted by Associated Newspapers, the owners of the Mail on Sunday, contains details of text messages and phone calls between the Duke and Duchess and Mr Markle both in the run-up to and in the aftermath of their wedding on May 19th 2018.
After days of largely excoriating criticism of the Duke and Duchess for wanting to quit as ‘senior’ Royals, the Mail on Sunday’s legal defence is probably the last thing they needed. The newspaper is refusing to back down and has seemingly signed up Mr Markle as its star witness. The court case, whenever it should take place, is likely to be the trial of the century with the Duchess pitted against her father in the witness box. It won’t be pretty and the loser will be facing a legal bill running into the millions.
The defence document is quick to point out that the Royal family are public figures supported “largely by public funds”. The security bill for their wedding, held in Windsor castle, says the legal defence by way of example, cost the taxpayer ￡30million. The Duchess, 38, enjoys the lifestyle of someone with ‘extreme wealth or elite connections’ flying to Ibiza, again by example, on a private jet, it claims.
At the heart of the case is the letter - given the capitalised significance The Letter in the court documents - sent by the Duchess to her father in August 2018, after the wedding he had missed.
Mr Markle, 75, insists he was too sick to travel after suffering a heart problem. But prior to the wedding, he had been caught out - ironically perhaps by the Mail on Sunday itself - arranging with a photographer staged photographs showing him preparing for the wedding. These were then sold to newspapers around the world and Mr Markle received his fee.
In the week before the wedding father and daughter had been on good terms, according to the defence document. On May 10, Mr Markle sent his daughter a text about “looking forward to trying on my [wedding] shoes” and ending it “Have a good night. I love you dad.”
But a day or two later they had an awkward phone conversation in which Mr Markle admitted to staging the photographs and that an article was about to appear.
On May 14, the defence document alleges, he wrote to the Duchess stating “that he loved her and that he would not be attending the wedding and that he was going to make a public apology to the Claimant and Prince Harry.”
He received a “text response from Prince Harry saying that he (Mr Markle) did not need to apologise and that he should call.”
But on the same day Mr Markle insists he “began to feel very ill with shortness of breath and chest pains” and went into hospital in California where he wad diagnosed with “suspected congestive heart failure”.
On May 16, according to the defence documents, Mr Markle “underwent an emergency heart procedure” and “on the same day he texted the Claimant to let her know that he had undergone surgery and would not be able to attend the wedding because his doctors would not allow him to fly, and said he was sorry for not being there”.
The defence alleges he later received a text response signed ‘Love M and H’, “but which read as if it was from Prince Harry… admonishing Mr Markle for talking to the press and telling him to stop and accusing Mr Markle of causing hurt to his daughter.”
The defence goes on: “The text did not ask how the surgical procedure had gone or how Mr Markle was or send him good wishes.”
Mr Markle, the Mail on Sunday alleges, was “deeply hurt and responded with a curt message: ‘I’ve done nothing to hurt you Meghan or anyone else.”
Mr Markle received no further messages from his daughter, according to the legal document, until being sent the letter in August 2018, some months after the wedding.
Excerpts from the letter were published in the Mail on Sunday on 10 February 2019, six months after it was sent, under the headline: “Revealed: The letter showing the true tragedy of Meghan’s rift with a father she says has ‘broken her heart into a million pieces’.”
The letter’s existence had been first made public four days earlier in an article published in People, a US magazine, which claimed that five of the Duchess’s closest friends wanted to set “the record straight”.
A “longtime friend” had told People magazine that even up to the night before the wedding the Duchess was trying to contact her father, sending him a message “Please pick up. I love you, and I’m scared.”
One headline in People magazine online stated: “The Truth About Meghan Markle’s dad - and the Letter She Wrote Him After the Wedding.”
In its legal submission, Associated Newspapers alleges that the People magazine account had “depicted Mr Markle as having acted unreasonably and unlovingly, having cold-shouldered his daughter and being solely to blame for the estrangement”.
The newspaper adds: “This was a one-sided and or/misleading and false narrative.”
The defence submission adds: “The Claimant’s privacy rights do not extend to silencing her father.”
In its legal defence submitted to the High Court, the Mail on Sunday argues that the “letter was written and sent by the Claimant [Duchess of Sussex] with a view to it being read by third parties and/ or disclosed to the public, alternatively knowing that the same was very likely”.
The defence submission states: “The Letter does not appear to contain the Claimant’s deepest and most private thoughts but to be an admonishment by the Claimant of her father for failing to behave as she would have wished.
“Amongst other things, she accused him of breaking her heart, manufacturing pain, being paranoid, being ridiculed, fabricating stories, of attacking Prince Harry, and continually lying.”
The newspaper alleges that the Duchess had taken “great care over its presentation” adding: “The Letter appears to have been immaculately copied out by the Claimant in her own elaborate handwriting from a previous draft. There are no crossings-out or amendments as there usually are with a spontaneous draft. It is to be inferred also from the care the Claimant took over the presentation of the letter that she anticipated it being disclosed to and read by third parties.”
The defence claim goes on: “It [the Letter] rehearses the Claimant’s version of the history of her relationship with her father and her family in a way that strongly suggests the Claimant wanted or expected third parties to read it.”
The legal documents adds: “Except for receipt of the letter, Mr Markle has not heard from his daughter since he wrote to tell her he was too ill to attend her wedding, nor has he ever been introduced to or met Prince Harry or their son, his grandson.“
Associated Newspapers says that the Duchess had not “complained to People magazine… about the publication of any of the information in the People interview, either on the grounds that it contains private information published without her consent or that it is inaccurate.”
The newspaper insists the letter sent to Mr Markle was his property and “he was entitled to give it to whomever he chose”. It also argues that Mr Markle had the right to publish his “account of events” in the wake of the People magazine article.
The publishers also claim that Kensington Palace has “refused to comment on whether the sources for the People interview had given the interview or co-operated at the request of the Claimant, or with her consent, express or tacit.” It adds: “The Claimant herself has not at any time denied this fact.”
Associated Newspaper goes further in its defence document, alleging that on another occasion in April 2018, the Duchess enlisted a ‘close friend of hers, Jessica Mulroney, to intervene” after another friend Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne, a former commercial adviser, had given an interview to the Mail on Sunday. After the interview - but before it was published - the newspaper approached Jason Knauf, the Duke of Sussex’s then communications secretary, notifying him of the interview’s contents.
Associated newspapers, in its legal defence, then alleges that on the same day the Duchess contacted Ms Mulroney “to try to ensure that a more favourable article was published”. Ms Mulroney, the newspaper alleges, wrote to Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne requesting she withdraw or change the statements she had given.
si plastik mulut ikan pun ada kaitan
The letter’s existence had been first made public four days earlier in an article published in People, a US magazine, which claimed that five of the Duchess’s closest friends wanted to set “the record straight”. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 02:10 AM
us tax.. as long as dia american, anak anak dia yg beribu bapakan american pon anak kena tax..
...
tu yg hadap duchy punya duit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 02:40 AM
nnt I bg u link dia sekolahkan skippy dlm bab BRF dan sgt la arrogant nya dia masa skippy bgtau ps ...
i akan baca. i syak dia masuk brf sebab konon boleh goda pw haha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tersenyum jer i tengok video ni. macam i yang dapat pingat. heheheheheh.
i'm not sure why but when i see Kate and William, they make me warm-hearted and nak senyum jer...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yup, u're rite baby kuaci ada Master je.. i'll vote for hanat & meggot divorce
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dani-rox replied at 15-1-2020 12:11 AM
ratchet nak balas dendam sbb Inskip yg nasihat Hanat psl terburu2 sgt nak kawen, dan selaku narc, ...
Sister dia kata dia guna strategy Divide dan controll. Camtu la kot dia buat kat bapak dia supaya bapak dia bg full attention kat dia, pay everything. Cukup masa off you go. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 01:04 AM
u know what.. bulan tiga maharaja jepun buat lawatan ke UK.. yipeee..tiara timeeee
Itu la i baru tau kalau Emperor datang dorang tido di Windsor Castle rupanye. Kalau PM or President tido hotel jer kan takpun embassy house. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dani-rox replied at 15-1-2020 06:45 AM
ada gambar baru ratchet tgh naik seaplane kat vancouver.
malas nak tepek, lg pun diambik oleh pa ...
Boleh plak dia tersenyum lebar dengan hoodie tu. Puas hati la tu dapat apa dia nak. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dani-rox replied at 15-1-2020 06:57 AM
-Sambungan-
Daripada source yg sama
Daripada sapa2 tak kenal Jessica plastic tu pun dah kenal tapi her fame comes with high price sebab awal2 dah kena kutuk associated dengan smeg. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 02:08 AM
mmg peluang dorg tu sis..
.dia dr haritu da buat referendum.. tp dorg kalah.. now hampir keselur ...
BoJo dah tulis surat takmo refrendum ni lagi. Tapi tula yang Monarchy ni kene set as an example la...ni dengan kes PA. Lagi macam2 orang nak abolish. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw this toooo. Kemain menyeringai acik meggot ya.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 01:03 AM
narc nie bahaya.. semua org salah. dia seorg je yg x betul kekdahnya hahhaha
Very unfortunate for brf sebab bawak masuk orang gini. Haih hanat why you so dumbarton haha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 01:18 AM
u know what sis.. si smeg punya demand sebenarnya nak duchy of cornwall dibagi dua between PW da ...
Kalau nak jadi independent, takyah la amik duit duchy gak hmmpphhh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 01:58 AM
renew balik? dia nak buat apa nie dani?
ke dia nak upkan dedek kwaci dia kat the tig tu.. deng ...
I dah nampak future dedek kwaci untuk jadi senjata for the dumbartons. Jual anak kat media untuk dapatkan duit. Macam yang artis kita sekarang banyak buat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 02:51 AM
yeap.. jgn percaya mulut snake tu..
yg keluar dr mulutnya racun semata..
Please lah brf amik dedek kwaci dari diorang. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eva replied at 15-1-2020 01:39 AM
sbb soho ada kat London je. kat scotland x de so dia nak market kat sana la tu.. sleazy business n ...
Jessica Mulroney tu pun dah kena markle cursed. Duk associate dgn smeg sekarang selalu kena bash kat IG sampai konon2 new year resolution dia taknak marah2 nak letgo negativity. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When you marry someone, kenalah tahu background family betul2. Si meret ni kahwin dengan Prince kot, mesti la dia kena buat royals punya kerja and privacy pun susah sikit. Ni nak demand privacy konon. Kalau dari awal taknak bersusah payah, takyah lah kawen dengan prince. Ni nampak sangat nak cetuskan huru hara dalam brf. Eeiii geram betuull |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 15-1-2020 06:37 AM
