Prince Harry didn’t go into court yesterday for Day 3 of the pre-trial hearing in his lawsuit against ANL/The Mail. It doesn’t look like he’ll be in court today either, at least I haven’t seen any photos or videos yet, as I’m writing this. He attended the first two days, and it was on the second day that his witness statement was entered into evidence. Considering ANL is trying to get the lawsuit dismissed entirely, Harry basically had to preview his case and explain why it was important for this lawsuit to go to trial.

It’s been interesting to watch the British media, specifically the Mail, try to navigate their coverage of Harry’s surprise appearance in London and this lawsuit. The Mail has mostly ignored Harry’s words and instead used their platform to present their side of things, but only up to a point. Then this story dropped as an exclusive at the Mail yesterday – an explicitly punitive story about Archewell’s charitable arm, with the Mail heavily editorializing and doing a lot to imply that there’s something untoward happening with Archewell’s finances.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Foundation in 2021 gave out $3million in grants and raised $13 million from wealthy benefactors and $4,500 in public donations, tax records reveal. The humanitarian charity has released its latest tax return, which shows it was mostly propped up by two wealthy philanthropists who contributed a combined $13million, while taking in a meager $4,470 from the public.

In total, Archewell received a total $13,005,660 – with $10million coming from an individual donor as DailyMail.com first reported, $3million from another, and $4,470 from other ‘contributions and grants. The remaining $1,190 came from ‘investment income’, documents obtained by DailyMail.com reveal.

This has led to speculation that the larger donation was made by Oprah Winfrey in return for the interview the Duke and Duchess of Sussex gave in March 2021, which rocked Buckingham Palace, and the other $3million came from Harry himself, as part of the $20million advance he received for his controversial autobiography Spare.

The charity dished out $3,096,319 in grants, which amounts to 24 per cent of its income, and at the end of 2021 had $9,018,590 in reserves.

The document also reveals that Harry and Meghan worked one hour each a week at the foundation, thus, 52 hours a year. This is similar to one week’s full-time work, which begs the question how the couple have been spending their time when Archewell was said to have been their main focus.

The charity spent $163,085 on salaries, according to the filings. While Harry and Meghan don’t take a salary, CEO James Holt also works an hour a week and receives a $59,846 salary and $3,832 in other benefits, which means he’s earning $1,224-an-hour.

[From The Mail]

While I’ve never worked on the financial side of a charity, everything here looks above-board to me? We knew about the money coming into Archewell before, and it’s weird to see this presented as new information, or information which hurts the Sussexes. The new part of it is the assumption that Oprah “donated” $10 million to the charity as a way of paying them for the interview. If that’s what happened, so be it. They weren’t “paid,” but Oprah made a donation, and that was the work-around. The charity still has $10 million in its coffers to do good work and highlight important causes, it’s not like that money has disappeared. It rolls over into the next year. As for Harry and Meghan only working “one hour a week” – again, they’re not taking a salary, and I’m sure that calculation is some kind of tax thing. So… is this all the Mail has in response?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Nicolas Cage wore a great outfit to the premiere of Renfield. [Just Jared]
The White Lotus season 3 will be set in Thailand, oh good lord. [Dlisted]
Apple Martin testified in her mom’s ski trial. [Buzzfeed]
The artwork of Charles Demuth. [OMG Blog]
Sydney Sweeney & Glen Powell are making a rom-com. [LaineyGossip]
Trailer for Night of the Killer Teddy Bears. [Seriously OMG]
NatGeo’s Wild Life sounds really good? [Pajiba]
Cynthia Nixon wore a great coat on AJLT. [Go Fug Yourself]
Dakota Fanning wore a very strange Loewe. [RCFA]
Congressman Tim Burchett says they’re not going to do sh-t about protecting kids from gun violence & that his wife home-schools their child. [Jezebel]
Vanessa Hudgens took a hike in the Philippines. [Egotastic]
What police are learning about the Nashville school shooter. [Towleroad]

Even though Prince Harry is unexpectedly in London this week, King Charles and Prince William were apparently both in a snit about seeing him or talking to him. This family is utterly dysfunctional, so of course Charles and Harry couldn’t speak to each other in person about this stupid coronation invitation. Of course not! Why would Charles do that when his minions and press allies can continue to threaten Harry and Meghan? These people, I swear.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are on ‘thin ice’ with the Royal Family and have been warned to be on their ‘best behaviour’ if they attend King Charles Coronation in May. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed they have been invited to the Coronation, but haven’t announced whether they will attend the ceremony. The couple have reportedly been warned that if they step out of line during the historic event, they will be ejected from the proceedings.

Their invitation to the Kings Coronation comes after Harry’s bombshell memoir Spare made a series of serious allegations against members of his family, including Prince William and Queen Consort Camilla. If the Duke and Duchess attend, a royal insider claims the couple will be “watched like hawks” to ensure everything runs smoothly on the day, reports the Mirror.

Speaking to Heat Magazine, the insider said: “If they put even a toe out of line, they’ll be banned from future royal occasions,” adding that there are “only so many olive branches Charles can offer”.

The source alleged that some royals are “baffled” that the duo received invites in the first place following their brutal snipes at the monarchy.

Hitting out at the couple for the “stress and negativity” caused in the build-up to the day, the source continued: “Bad behaviour will not be tolerated. Meghan and Harry are on the thinnest of ice – even if they don’t seem to realise it.”

[From The Daily Record]

“We hate them both so much – PAY ATTENTION TO US – and we will punish them if they accept our invitation, if they dare step out of line – PLEASE COME, WE NEED YOU – they are on terribly thin ice and we will refuse to invite them to any event after this even though we will continue to make up reasons for why they must return, we demand their presence and we demand to treat them like sh-t.” Real class is being welcoming to your guests, that’s all I’ll say. Of course, these are the same people who evicted the Sussexes from Frogmore Cottage, a home they paid over $3 million to renovate, refurbish and rent.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

In Spare, Prince Harry made it abundantly clear that Angela Kelly was QEII’s attack dog, and a powerful person within QEII’s inner circle. Kelly was QEII’s longtime dresser and keeper of the Royal Collection jewels and she wielded her power vindictively. Honestly, Kelly always seemed like a trashy con artist who used her position to manipulate an elderly queen and “punish” anyone who tried to question her schemes. Before QEII passed away, Kelly conned the queen into giving her a grace-and-favor home in Windsor. The second that Charles became king, he and Camilla fired Kelly and literally changed all the palace locks. You could tell because Camilla and Kate began looting QEII’s jewelry immediately. But Kelly still had her grace-and-favor home. Except now she “fears” Charles will soon evict her too. LOL.

Angela Kelly, the Queen’s dresser and confidante for more than 20 years, fears she may have to leave her grace-and-favour home, The Mail on Sunday understands. Friends of Ms Kelly, a Liverpool docker’s daughter who became the Queen’s right-hand woman, worry she is another victim of the King’s ‘property merry-go-round’.

It had been understood that Ms Kelly, 65, would be given accommodation for life after her decades of loyalty to the late Queen. But sources said last week they believed she had to vacate her modest semi-detached home on the Windsor Estate ‘within weeks’.

Ms Kelly has just been recognised by King Charles in special honours awards marking the death of the Queen. However, she only became a Commander of the Royal Victorian Order, rather than a Dame Commander as might have been expected.

Many in the Royal Household were suspicious of her, and one insider pondered whether ‘scores were being settled’. A source said: ‘She’s been told she will soon have to move out. It’s a nice little place on the Windsor Estate and it was convenient for seeing her grandson, who was at college nearby. But the King has made it clear that under the new reign people will have to cut their cloth. The King is clearly not in the habit of providing homes for those no longer working for the Monarchy.’

A Palace insider said the ‘writing was on the wall’ for Ms Kelly after the Queen died in September. Within days, the locks had been changed on all the cupboards to which she held keys.

She was nicknamed AK47 – a play on her initials and the Russian assault rifle – because of her rapid-fire temper. Three-times-married Ms Kelly is said to have thrown a bag of rubbish at a member of the catering staff after her lunch was served late before an investiture.

[From The Mail on Sunday]

The Mail then tries to make this about Kelly vs Prince Harry, as if Charles would evict Angela Kelly simply because Kelly leaked a bunch of lies about Harry and Meghan. Please, Charles was fine with that. Charles and Camilla are evicting Kelly because she’s a giant pain in the ass who manipulated and conned a senile queen for years and because Kelly was probably the source of any number of terrible stories about C&C over the years. While I’m not on Team Chuck or Team Cam, I think it’s downright hilarious that they kicked her out of the palace, changed the locks and they’re now kicking her out of the retirement cottage she conned out of the queen. FAFO.

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty, Avalon Red.

King Charles reportedly evicted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from Frogmore Cottage on January 11, the day after Prince Harry’s memoir was released. It was meant to look punitive because it was punitive, a petty, vindictive father punishing his son for writing about generational trauma. Once the news came out, we learned that Charles had already offered Frogmore Cottage to Prince Andrew, apparently free of charge, solely because Charles wants to get Andrew out of Royal Lodge. Keep in mind, the Sussexes and Andrew all had valid leases on their Windsor properties, but Charles clearly doesn’t care. The palace is now openly lying to the media about what the Sussexes “paid back” for Frogmore’s renovation and the money they paid in advance for the lease. I bring this up because the Evening Standard has a new piece about how the Frogmore eviction is just one piece of a larger effort to make Charles’s freeloader family pay market-rate rent and stay barely staffed. Some highlights from the Evening Standard:

The Frogmore eviction is just the start: The eviction of Prince Harry and Meghan from Frogmore Cottage in Windsor will be “just the start” of King Charles’s plans to slim it down and modernise, according to sources. Subsidised rents for royals — even for some working royals — will be eradicated over time, with the King expecting them to finance their own homes and “cut their cloth” over the next five years, it is understood.

Camilla’s assistance: Senior figures have told the Standard that after the period of transition following the coronation, the King, assisted by Queen Camilla, will move to tackle inefficiencies in what is being viewed as a largely overstaffed and outdated system. Vice-Admiral Sir Tony Johnstone-Burt, Master of the Household, and the Keeper of the Privy Purse Sir Michael Stevens, responsible for finance, will execute the shake-up of what is described as a “top-heavy royal household”. Camilla has been overseeing the fine detail of the King’s plan to ensure that after the coronation the royal household will be run the “Clarence House way”.

Less is more: One senior figure said: “It is not about cuts, it is about getting the best value for money from those on the payroll. Sometimes less is more.” Another source added: “The King is not some sort of housing association for distant relatives.”

Financial independence?? Harry and Meghan were given use of Frogmore Cottage, a five-bedroom mansion on the Windsor estate in 2018, by the late Queen. The couple’s loss of the cottage, their only British home, is said to be just the “tip of the iceberg”. It is understood Charles is keen to reduce the number of royals with a financial dependence on the crown, especially if they do not have an active role to play.

Value for money: He wants funds from the Duchy of Lancaster, the portfolio of land, property and assets held in trust for the King, and the sovereign grant that covers the cost of royal travel on official engagements, to be spent more effectively. He also wants to pay his staff competitive salaries and pensions so that he gets the best people for the jobs. “There will be staff cutbacks. That has already started. The buzz phrase is ‘value for money,’” said the source.

No more London pads?? Several members of the extended royal family have enjoyed subsidised palace accommodation, with some having apartments that are being used by their children as “London pads”. The source said: “Over time, that is going to change. Properties will be let at commercial rates going forward and to people outside the family. Where it is in a palace environment they will of course be security vetted.”

Royals must fund themselves: Privately, the King’s senior staff have made it clear to members of the extended family that if they cannot afford where they are living, they should “cut their cloth”. “A lot of practices that have evolved during the last reign will be changing. The King is not heartless or reckless, but if the family members are not part of the core family and not working for the crown, it is fair for them to house themselves and fund themselves,” a senior figure said. The King’s focus, key figures say, is on making the monarchy “fit for purpose” over the next five years. He is working closely with his son and heir, the Prince of Wales, to achieve this.

Staff culling: One insider said: “The staffing has been on the top-heavy side. That has built up over time, with advisers to advisers and so on. That’s all going to stop. The boss wants effective people in effective positions doing effective jobs being paid appropriately.” The senior source added: “Much of what was in place doesn’t make economic sense and will be changed during the new reign.”

[From The Evening Standard]

First of all, King Charles has always been the most staff-heavy royal, followed by William and Kate. William and Kate have a HUGE staff and Kensington Palace, as a royal court, is famously dysfunctional and lazy. They literally couldn’t handle one American woman with a work ethic – they had to run her out because she was doing too much and making them look bad. Charles has barely fired anyone since becoming king – he’s still operating with most of his mother’s staff AND most of his Prince-of-Wales staff. I seriously doubt that Charles and William will cull their staff – this is about “the other royals” needing fewer staffers.

As for the whole “Windsors must pay their own way” thing… Charles is going to hate that when he sees it in practice. He’s doing to make Edward and Sophie pay market rate on Bagshot Park’s lease? What about Anne at Gatcombe? What about all of QEII’s cousins with their sweetheart deals on Kensington Palace apartments? And the Sussexes, who actually spent over $3 million to renovate, refurbish and lease one dilapidated shack in Windsor, are the first ones to be pushed out of their lease??? THAT is the signal Charles wanted to send? That even when Windsors pay their own way and pay a lot of money to keep a secure house or apartment, they’ll still be evicted? Charles is going to end up with absolutely zero family allies. And y’all know this is Camilla neighing in his ear too.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Reese Witherspoon and Jim Toth announced their separation last Friday. It was a perfect blend of surprising and not-surprising. Jim and Reese haven’t been seen out together (on red carpets or anywhere else) in years. Toth was always seen as happy to take a backseat to Reese’s fame and celebrity. They seemed solid, yet he wasn’t showing up for her events at all. So… yeah. For what it’s worth, my guess is still that Reese and Jim only announced their split now because they’re close to working out the terms of their divorce quietly. Reese’s team hasn’t bashed Jim in the gossip media (yet), but she does want to come out of this with her reputation intact. So here’s a lil’ sympathetic piece from People Magazine:

Reese Witherspoon never envisioned going through another divorce, a source tells PEOPLE. The Oscar winner, 47, revealed Friday that she and husband Jim Toth, whom she wed in March 2011, are separating.

“Reese is obviously disappointed and upset. She never saw herself getting another divorce,” a source tells PEOPLE. “They love Tennessee and this is their focus. They will continue to co-parent amicably. There is no drama.”

“After she was set up with Jim, their relationship moved quickly. Reese was thrilled by his attention and excited to marry him,” adds the source of the pair. “They are two very different people though. Reese is headstrong and focused. Although very hard-working, Jim is more laidback.”

The source adds, “It’s been very difficult for Reese to get to this point though. They both concluded this was right for them.”

[From People]

To me, her second marriage always seemed like a direct reaction to her first marriage – Ryan Phillippe was all drama, and that marriage really imploded and it was pretty messy for several years. Reese was looking for someone stable and dependable, and someone who would be happy, and not jealous, when she succeeded (unlike Ryan). She got all that in Jim, and then they grew apart over time. Anyway, it’s kind of nice that this split doesn’t feel super-messy. And Reese’s base of supporters and fans… well, they don’t mind that she’s getting a second divorce. Reese likes to think that her brand is high-end, old-money Southern but it’s not. She’s a messy Southern girl and we figured that out a long time ago.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kourtney Kardashian Barker (@kourtneykardash)

There was recent outrage over something a Kardashian posted so… it must be a day ending in Y. This one comes to us courtesy of Kourtney K, who posted a photo dump on Instagram. The Kollection of pix seemed random, although there was a dedication to bathroom shots. And that’s’ were the furor came in. The third pic was this:

[From Instagram via Buzzfeed]

People are outraged by the plates of food on the floor and especially the chicken sandwich on the toilet. Many a vomit emoji was smashed in the comment section of Kourtney’s post. People called her or the photo nasty, gross, disgusting and even suggested she was *gasp* not classy. I’m positive many of you will have several of the same sentiments. I’ll admit, I’m not as bothered by the pic as everyone else. Given what we know about Kourt and husband Travis Barker, I think we can guess what she’s trying to show us here. The bulk of the food is desserts and there’s a bucket of champagne. The water is colored from either oils or a bath bomb and bubbles. This was a sex bath. The food was a pawn in the whole thing and seeing how little was eaten, it worked. As for the sandwich on the toilet. I can tell you the logistics of reaching down to grab food with a wet arm/hand, it would have soaked the sandwich. I generally don’t put my coffee cup on the floor because the bathwater trickles into when I reach for it. So my guess is, that plate sat on that one corner until they were done and put on toilet when they got out.

I assume this photo is part of their sponsorship deal with Daring Foods vegan chicken. I’m going with this, because there are so many things inconsistent with a Kardashian shot. First of all, that’s not Kourt’s tub. Maybe it’s one of the kids tubs, but the champagne suggests it’s not. Secondly, as I mentioned before, none of the food, save for the chicken burger, has been touched. Even the champagne glass in the corner is clean. Lastly, with the general disarray, there would be wet food somewhere. So someone fancies themselves an art director and thought this was a great way to promote vegan chicken. Because it makes sex baths hotter until you forget the food and jump out of the tub to ravage each other. Anyone who has had this sex bath knows that that tub would be the reason you abandoned your sex bath, not because your macrons paired so beautifully with your raspberry dessert taco. It’s a lovely soaking tub, but not a sex tub. So I’m fine with folks taking Kourtney to task on this pic because I don’t find it aesthetically appealing. And it’s a logistical nightmare. But was I young enough that I thought bringing food to a sex bath was clever? Yeah. And those plates had to go somewhere. We didn’t eat off them again (nor did we need that much food) but I won’t say I never needed to dump a plate on a bathmat in a hurry.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Daring. (@daringfoods)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Daring. (@daringfoods)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kourtney Kardashian Barker (@kourtneykardash)

Photo credit: Instagram

Here are some photos of Prince Harry leaving the High Court in London on Tuesday, after the second day of the four-day pretrial hearings in his lawsuit against ANL/The Mail. A quick note about how Harry is coming and going – on Monday, he arrived at the front entrance of the courthouse with his lawyers and security, and the media scrum was all abuzz. When he left court on Monday, he left by the back or side exit, which is still accessible to media but (I think) the back exit is a bit more secure and the media is less lucky to advance on him. On Tuesday, he arrived and exited by the same back door. As he left on Tuesday, he gave a cheeky smile to photographers. He looks happy and free. Probably because he’s finally getting to tell his side of things – Harry provided a witness statement to the court, because ANL is trying to shut down this lawsuit before it goes to trial. Here’s some of what Harry told the court (it was a written statement, but you get the idea):

The Duke of Sussex — who is in London this week for a legal case in which he and other prominent figures are suing Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday, for illegal information gathering — submitted a witness statement in which he says he was made to adopt his family’s policy to “never complain, never explain” when dealing with the media.

“Following the death of my mother in 1997 when I was 12 years old and her treatment at the hands of the press, I have always had an uneasy relationship with the press. However, as a member of the Institution the policy was to ‘never complain, never explain.’ There was no alternative; I was conditioned to accept it. For the most part, I accepted the interest in my performing my public functions.”

However, Prince Harry said dating Meghan Markle made him “increasingly troubled by the approach of not taking action against the press in the wake of vicious persistent attacks on, harassment of and intrusive, sometimes racist articles concerning Meghan.” He added that “the situation got worse” with Meghan’s pregnancy and the birth of their first child, Prince Archie, in May 2019. Prince Harry said he became aware that he had a claim against News Group Newspapers over phone hacking that he could bring in 2018.

“The Institution was without a doubt withholding information from me for a long time about NGN’s phone hacking and that has only become clear in recent years as I have pursued my own claim with different legal advice and representation,” he said.

Harry added: “It is not an exaggeration to say that the bubble burst in terms of what I knew in 2020 when I moved out of the United Kingdom…To this day, there are members of the Royal Family and friends of mine who may have been targeted by NGN and I have no idea whether they have or have not brought claims. There was never any centralised discussion between us about who had brought claims as each office in the Institution is siloed. There is this misconception that we are all in constant communication with one another but that is not true.”

Prince Harry said the claim was “not just about me…I am bringing this claim because I love my country and I remain deeply concerned by the unchecked power, influence and criminality of Associated,” he said. “The evidence I have seen shows that Associated’s journalists are criminals with journalistic powers which should concern every single one of us. The British public deserve to know the full extent of this cover up and I feel it is my duty to expose it.”

[From People]

“It is not an exaggeration to say that the bubble burst in terms of what I knew in 2020 when I moved out of the United Kingdom.” I think that too – I remember being so frustrated with Harry and Meghan in 2018 and 2019 as we could see, as outsiders, how the collusion between palace and press grew stronger and more focused on driving Meghan to self-harm or to simply drive her to divorce Harry and move out of the country. But, as Harry said, they were being siloed, they were never being told the whole story of who knew what and what was being recorded and why this paper had certain information. It’s crazy that it took Elton John saying “you should hire your own lawyers” for everything to start moving – Harry was stuck in this Stockholm Syndrome-esque situation where he just accepted that if the royal lawyers told him nothing could be done, then that was it.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Embed from Getty Images

Taylor Swift wore Alexandre Vauthier to the iHeartRadio Awards. [RCFA]
More photos from the iHeartRadio Awards. [Jezebel]
Information about the Nashville school shooting. [Buzzfeed]
Lady Gaga’s grunge Harley Quinn. [LaineyGossip]
Quoting Snoop Dogg can get you fired. [Dlisted]
Succession recap: the Roy children are idiots. [Pajiba]
Chanel West Coast is leaving Ridiculousness for her own show. [Starcasm]
I would break these fug Loewe shoes in about two minutes. [Tom & Lorenzo]
So many actors got their start on Young & the Restless. [JustJared]
Coach Kim Mulkey’s outfits are bonkers. [GFY]
I wish I had a pool, I would do this too. [Towleroad]
Bar Refaeli is on vacation. [Egotastic]

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Here are some photos of Prince Harry leaving the High Court in London on Monday. He looked so good – he is healthy and clear-eyed and well-dressed. He has a big stride and a cheeky smile. Bless him. Harry stayed for the whole hearing, and clearly, there was some coordination with his co-plaintiffs. Elton John, Sadie Frost and Doreen Lawrence all attended the hearing even though none of them were testifying. This was a message. It also enabled the international and domestic (British) media to write about exactly why Harry and the others are suing the Mail and what’s happening in the case. The Mail wanted this hearing buried and even now, they’re underreporting what happened and who was there. But other British outlets are… actually doing some straight reporting, without editorializing, without making everything about Harry and his f–ked up family. The Guardian had an interesting piece about the Mail trying to hide the names of the “journalists” involved in the case:

The Daily Mail’s parent company has successfully invoked the Human Rights Act to stop other media outlets naming its journalists in a phone hacking court case. Lawyers working for the Daily Mail said publishing the names would breach the journalists’ right to a fair trial under the Human Rights Act. This is despite the Mail long using its editorial pages to campaign against the European-derived legislation.

Barrister David Sherborne, representing Harry and other claimants at the high court, noted it was surprising to see a newspaper that has campaigned for press freedom object to the publication of the names: “They say different rules apply to their journalists suspected of wrongdoing, as opposed to others suspected of wrongdoing.”

Catrin Evans KC, acting for Associated Newspapers, successfully argued there was no justification for publication of the journalists’ names at this stage. She told the court that publication of the names could cause “immense reputational damage” to the 73 individuals who worked for the Mail and invade their privacy.

The company did confirm that the former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre and former the Mail on Sunday editor Peter Wright are named in the allegations. The allegations of illegal behaviour are strongly denied by the Mail’s parent company and it is not clear in what capacity the 73 individuals are named. The judge, Mr Justice Nicklin, agreed and temporarily blocked identification of the Mail journalists pending his interim judgment, partly because the individuals have not had the opportunity to offer up a defence.

He told the court: “Although I do recognise I am preventing the reporting of the journalists’ names at this stage, this is in the interests of fairness and the administration of justice.”

[From The Guardian]

When I first glanced through this article, I thought “wow, the fix is in, wonder how much the judge got paid.” But reading the whole thing in context, I sort of understand why the judge is blocking the names for now, when they’re still in pre-trial motions. It will likely (and hopefully) be much different if and when they go to trial. Still, the hypocrisy is always notable – as you can see, the Mail actively campaigned against the Human Rights Act which they are now using as a shield to protect their blagging, hacking journalists. I’m also reminded of the Mail’s attempts to publish the names of Meghan’s friends who spoke to People Magazine in early 2019, as part of Meghan’s lawsuit against the Mail.

How it started How it’s going pic.twitter.com/Cj20fOfi9H

— R.S. Locke / Royal Suitor (@royal_suitor) March 27, 2023

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.