This is a very interesting article about some documents that have been filed in the H&M DailyMail case and what they are highlighting as false stories like some about the Frogmore renovations, etc. I think we all know that some of the DM stories are made up or exaggerated but what I found really interesting was that by not claiming all of them are absurd, are they confirming some of them?
WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Meghan 'Rides Royal Coach And Horses' Through Mail Newspaper 'Lies' - Court Doc — Byline Investigates
For example:
"3. “How Meghan Markle’s Australian aide Samantha ‘the Panther’ Cohen rose from a Brisbane home to Buckingham Palace – before becoming the second aide to walk out on the ‘difficult Duchess”
What the Duchess’s lawyers say:
“The suggestion that Samantha Cohen (who was private secretary for both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex) walked out on the Claimant or that she did so because the Claimant was “difficult” to work for (a word used six times in this article) is untrue, as well as damaging.
“Ms Cohen, who was a highly respected and dedicated member of Her Majesty the Queen’s staff for sixteen years, personally chose to come out of retirement in order to work for the Claimant.
“Far from walking out on her, Ms Cohen even extended the original year which she had intended to work for as she wanted to carry on helping the Duke and Duchess with their office.
“Further, the Claimant’s “personal assistant” was in fact assistant to both the Duke and Duchess, and, contrary to what the Defendant stated in the article, she did not ‘quit’.”
So does that mean that they're confirming the DM claim that all the other staff (secretary, nannies etc) that they alleged left because MM was difficult to work for is true?
They're also bringing stuff like the baby shower and the guest list for the baby shower in to question, surely they will be asked to provide a guest list and cost breakdown for the baby shower etc to disprove the DM's allegations etc.
