‘She did not ignore him afterwards'
Meghan Markle has had a difficult couple of years since becoming a royal, with her strained relationship with the estranged Markle side of her family making headline news on the regular.
Meghan’s father, Thomas Markle, is the most talked-about family member, from his continuous interaction with the tabloids to his reported launching of a clothing line.
Thomas Markle made the most news however in the run up to Meghan’s royal wedding to Prince Harry, an event that the 75-year-old wasn’t able to attend last minute due to heart surgery.
The Duchess of sussex - a victim to a constant stream of abuse - was attacked online for her father’s absence, with cruel rumours circling, accusing Meghan of neglecting to look after Thomas Markle.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced that they would be taking legal action against the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday for the false claims made and the publication of an excerpt of a letter Meghan sent to her father – something she has since explained was not published in full.
This week, Meghan Markle finally set the record straight, with reports that her lawyers filed court papers, telling Meghan’s account of how only certain parts of her letter were published, misleading readers.
‘The omitted parts demonstrate the Claimant’s care for her father and others, as well as her concern about the UK tabloid media exploiting her father, and the fact that she addresses untruths previously published by the Defendant,’ the court papers reportedly read. ‘Those elements did not fit the Defendant’s narrative within the Articles.’
Going on to respond to the Mail on Sunday’s claims that Meghan did not care for her father, Meghan’s legal team responded: ‘The true position is that the Claimant has a long history of looking after her father’s welfare and trying to find solutions to any health problems … she did provide extensive financial support for him.’
Meghan also used the court papers to respond to the rumours around the run-up to her wedding day.
‘Her father did not telephone her to explain that he was not coming to her wedding,’ the papers read, also stating that ‘Her team in Los Angeles did provide him with continued support for which he had expressed gratitude’ and that ‘She had reached out to him prior to the wedding and sought to protect him, as well as to ensure that he would be able to come to the wedding’.
The papers reportedly continued: ‘She did not ignore him afterwards.’
Well, that’s that.
