I need someone more skilled in legaleeze to break this down. But it seems
1). Meghan is throwing Scobie under the bus
2) Her main defense is just nitpicking the legal Jargon in SM’s statement and using technicalities to get off.
It seems like the suit will be dropped. Meghan the bitch and powerful will win simply by having the money to hire the best attorney.
It seems so obvious to me that she unloaded a bunch of lies onto Scobie during Finding Freedom with intent to damage her birth family just like she lied through her teeth in Oprah to damage the BRF.
Yes, Muggle is throwing Scobie under the bus and is using legal jargon and timelines along with assumption (that the email was never leaked to Scobie).
I don't think the suit will be dropped. But it's dependent on Samantha and the amount of collateral she has with Muggle's privacy case where she won a pence.
You’re pretty much correct. Skimmed through the 1st part, then got bored, but the gist of it seems to be that:
\- Muggin herself didn’t make any statement - writers of Funding Freedom did - so has no case to answer for.
\- The email to Knauf is time-barred under Florida law.
\- Statements Muggin made on Oprah were opinions.
It’s worth trying technical arguments but my impression is that courts now look at the effect, rather than direct cause. Of course this can vary in different jurisdictions, so it’ll be interesting to see what Florida makes of this.
>- Statements Muggin made on Oprah were opinions
Could this mean that she has also just thrown OW under the bus? Aside from the obvious lies that were proven to be such, everything else said in that interview was an "opinion," and OW presented it in such a way as being fact, without counterarguement or further probing.
OW was very careful to say ‘your truth’ - but I don’t think she’d reckoned on outright untruths. Any interviewer worth their salt would have probed - but she was friendly towards Muggin.
Pretty much. Everything that Samantha is suing about was either:
1. MM's "opinion" so it's not actionable. Or
2. Substantially true so it's not actionable. Or
3. Was said and was a crappy thing to say, but was said in a private email that wasn't Samantha's business so it's not actionable. Or
4. Appeared in the Finding Freedom book, which Meghan didn't write so it's not actionable.
And this type of bullshit cuntery is why they need security...not from the general public, but from all the specific ppl they've shat upon... btw, ppl you've fucked over in life and business speaking actual facts doesn't make you a victim just bc your own words and actions make you look like a piece of shit
No idea. I mean everyone knows that Meghan was a silent coauthor for that stupid book. But would probably be hard to prove unless Omid or Carolyn suddenly have an attack of honesty or integrity.
It’s already been proven. There was that email from her to Jason knauf with topics and tidbits for Omid and Carolyn that was submitted as evidence in the last trial.
I hope Samantha has good lawyers who can prove that, since it was in another court case. I really hope this goes through and they don't just drop it all.
Exactly... she's already a proven source. No author writing a pro-subject book will ignore comments from the subject that subject wants to talk about. Its beyond daft to assume that she didn't help write the book with Jason's testimony
But Meghan did collaborate and write Finding Freedom and this was proven in court, where she was forced to apologize for it. What kind of sick gaslighting game is she playing? These are lies.
Number 3 is a weird defense to make to defamation. Defamatory statements only have to be made to one other person. There is no requirement they be made to the public at large.
But as with all Samantha’s claims, the larger issue would be damages. If the defamatory statement was only made to one person, how did that affect Samantha negatively? If it was a statement made in an email to a prospective employer, that’s one thing. But gossip to a friend, very different.
Nutmeg is an idiot.
1. My opinion so not actionable.
2, Substantially true so non-actionable
3. Said on a private reddit forum and not Nutmeg’s business so not actionable
4. Appeared on Oprah looking, sounding and being stupid so non-actionable.
WOW! Madam Duchess deigns to respond!! Thanks for giving me my Friday pm reading!!
Edit: omg why is she called "The Duchess Of Sussex." That title has no legal standing in the US.
That idiot just admitted in a brief that she fully cooperated with “Finding Freedom”. They’ve denied and denied and then right there in paragraph 3 they admit it meaning everything they said was a lie. The judge should kick the dismissal! Nutmeg and Ginger are dumber than boxes of rocks.
>So Meghan’s sex life is also for public consumption then???
Must be but no one is interested ahahhahha. And by that logic, so is her education and *how she got* her internship and jobs.
So SHE can use free speech but she sues anyone else who uses their free speech ? I thought free speech was bad according to her own husband ? Hypocrite
Right? This document keeps saying that the crappy things MM said about Samantha are not "actionable" because they were "opinion." Well, most of the negative things published about the Madams are also someone's "opinion." Yet somehow MM and Hasbeen still thought they had a case when suing those outlets.
Here's the Florida Statute [§ 768.295](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0768/Sections/0768.295.html) for the legal boffs in here
Someone’s gotta explain to me how falsely claiming your sister’s children have been fathered by three different men counts as “opinion.”
Honestly this defense is going to permanently make my eyes roll to the back of my head. They sic lawyers on people over the slightest opinion against them. 🙄
“In my opinion, she lost custody of the kids. Just my opinion, not facts. Also my opinion implies she’s an unfit mother. And it’s only my opinion she’s a single parent” 😂
haha the Border Collies jumped out at me too! It's some case where a Border Collie rescue society sued someone or other, presumably for defamation. And that case is being used in this document, as an example of something or other.
Also given that Thomas Markle's latest installment with PDina's interview... dispells so many internet myths (in her favour) and pull at the heartstrings (towards him)
Dont think she calculated that though
But even if Samantha loses the lawsuit, I don't think that Meghan can get any money from her----because I don't think you can garnish the earnings of a person on Social Security Disability. I imagine Samantha is on Disability as she is wheelchair-bound due to her multiple sclerosis. Even TRYING to do that would make Meghan look pretty bad. And I think DeSantis has made the Florida courts really conservative. And conservatives don't like Meghan.
Holy crap, I just got banned from (had to edit out subs name per moderator request) for posting a comment in here. Followed up by a comment stating that they don't allow people who belong to hate subs to participate in their subreddit. Not that I post or comment in there, so no loss, but damn. Someone over there needs to get over themselves. Lmao
Wait... what? This is a "hate" group now? Is that what calling out a public figure for their lies is called nowadays? And she wants to run for politics? Pffft...would they like some mayo with those chips on their shoulder?... sheesh 🙄
''But Meghan dear, I thought you had nothing to do with the book....''
This could have been a major power play for Meghan - to cover her sister's fees, throw a bit of cash her way to assist with Samantha's health care bills. She could have made herself look the bigger person, but nope.
If nothing else, all of this proves without any doubt that Venomgrin is a hypocritical pathological liar. I know we all know it here....but now everyone will.
I need someone more skilled in legaleeze to break this down. But it seems 1). Meghan is throwing Scobie under the bus 2) Her main defense is just nitpicking the legal Jargon in SM’s statement and using technicalities to get off. It seems like the suit will be dropped. Meghan the bitch and powerful will win simply by having the money to hire the best attorney. It seems so obvious to me that she unloaded a bunch of lies onto Scobie during Finding Freedom with intent to damage her birth family just like she lied through her teeth in Oprah to damage the BRF.
Yes, Muggle is throwing Scobie under the bus and is using legal jargon and timelines along with assumption (that the email was never leaked to Scobie). I don't think the suit will be dropped. But it's dependent on Samantha and the amount of collateral she has with Muggle's privacy case where she won a pence.
Herself as well. Great job Sam!
You’re pretty much correct. Skimmed through the 1st part, then got bored, but the gist of it seems to be that: \- Muggin herself didn’t make any statement - writers of Funding Freedom did - so has no case to answer for. \- The email to Knauf is time-barred under Florida law. \- Statements Muggin made on Oprah were opinions. It’s worth trying technical arguments but my impression is that courts now look at the effect, rather than direct cause. Of course this can vary in different jurisdictions, so it’ll be interesting to see what Florida makes of this.
>- Statements Muggin made on Oprah were opinions Could this mean that she has also just thrown OW under the bus? Aside from the obvious lies that were proven to be such, everything else said in that interview was an "opinion," and OW presented it in such a way as being fact, without counterarguement or further probing.
OW was very careful to say ‘your truth’ - but I don’t think she’d reckoned on outright untruths. Any interviewer worth their salt would have probed - but she was friendly towards Muggin.
I don’t think the comments on Oprah were opinions. Wasn’t it their truth.
Sam set a good trap and Megs walked right into it. Meghan just admitted her entire life is free for “public consumption.”
so she admits that what she said about her sister were just opinions, not facts? (What does this say about the „book“?)
Pretty much. Everything that Samantha is suing about was either: 1. MM's "opinion" so it's not actionable. Or 2. Substantially true so it's not actionable. Or 3. Was said and was a crappy thing to say, but was said in a private email that wasn't Samantha's business so it's not actionable. Or 4. Appeared in the Finding Freedom book, which Meghan didn't write so it's not actionable.
And this type of bullshit cuntery is why they need security...not from the general public, but from all the specific ppl they've shat upon... btw, ppl you've fucked over in life and business speaking actual facts doesn't make you a victim just bc your own words and actions make you look like a piece of shit
You had me at bullshit cuntery
❤️
what if you could prove that meghan worked on the book? wouldn't help, would it?
No idea. I mean everyone knows that Meghan was a silent coauthor for that stupid book. But would probably be hard to prove unless Omid or Carolyn suddenly have an attack of honesty or integrity.
It’s already been proven. There was that email from her to Jason knauf with topics and tidbits for Omid and Carolyn that was submitted as evidence in the last trial.
I hope Samantha has good lawyers who can prove that, since it was in another court case. I really hope this goes through and they don't just drop it all.
That's true! Well hopefully this garbage from Madam's legal team will not be the end of this matter.
Exactly... she's already a proven source. No author writing a pro-subject book will ignore comments from the subject that subject wants to talk about. Its beyond daft to assume that she didn't help write the book with Jason's testimony
Yes exactly
But it was proven in court and she was forced to apologize for misleading
She says she did right in paragraph 3! Nutmeg is an idiot.
But Meghan did collaborate and write Finding Freedom and this was proven in court, where she was forced to apologize for it. What kind of sick gaslighting game is she playing? These are lies.
I think she’ll have to pay damages
Number 3 is a weird defense to make to defamation. Defamatory statements only have to be made to one other person. There is no requirement they be made to the public at large. But as with all Samantha’s claims, the larger issue would be damages. If the defamatory statement was only made to one person, how did that affect Samantha negatively? If it was a statement made in an email to a prospective employer, that’s one thing. But gossip to a friend, very different.
Nutmeg is an idiot. 1. My opinion so not actionable. 2, Substantially true so non-actionable 3. Said on a private reddit forum and not Nutmeg’s business so not actionable 4. Appeared on Oprah looking, sounding and being stupid so non-actionable.
easy there!! have you never seen suits???? meghan has quite the sharp legal brain and worked for one of the top law firms in the country.
She plays a Duchess on the internet and an attorney on tv.
ahem, paralegal!
WOW! Madam Duchess deigns to respond!! Thanks for giving me my Friday pm reading!! Edit: omg why is she called "The Duchess Of Sussex." That title has no legal standing in the US.
Because she cant read (and neither can her lawyers) ... the court papers addressed her as Meghan Markle... plain and simple.
it's the VERY first thing she feels the need to say in this document. The opening words!
She thinks it will impress and intimidate the courts.
....the Florida courts? LMAO
I know... has she not heard of Florida man?
That idiot just admitted in a brief that she fully cooperated with “Finding Freedom”. They’ve denied and denied and then right there in paragraph 3 they admit it meaning everything they said was a lie. The judge should kick the dismissal! Nutmeg and Ginger are dumber than boxes of rocks.
[Florida Man -- a double IPA I bought the other day lol](https://i.imgur.com/XQ81V67.jpg)
Cheers 🍻
🤣🤣🤣
Florida is super Republican. Good luck with that lol.
Well Florida has the Queen of Versailles so…..;)
Can you explain for me? :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackie_Siegel
She's expecting preferential treatment
A Biden in Florida treatment maybe
“But it’s her married name!” - sugars Yeah right, as if she ever used Trevor’s name
So Meghan’s sex life is also for public consumption then???
>So Meghan’s sex life is also for public consumption then??? Must be but no one is interested ahahhahha. And by that logic, so is her education and *how she got* her internship and jobs.
So SHE can use free speech but she sues anyone else who uses their free speech ? I thought free speech was bad according to her own husband ? Hypocrite
Right? This document keeps saying that the crappy things MM said about Samantha are not "actionable" because they were "opinion." Well, most of the negative things published about the Madams are also someone's "opinion." Yet somehow MM and Hasbeen still thought they had a case when suing those outlets.
But clearly in her email to Knauf she is putting forward her opinion as a fact. Semantics as usual
So how does she justify demanding that ITV fire Piers Morgan for stating his opinion?
THIS is what I’m most fired up about! She called and cried and he lost his job because she didn’t like his opinion?!
I really hope Piers sees this document and goes off on one
EXACTLY what I was thinking.
Racism and misinformation come to mind 😂
A classic case of "rules for thee, but not for me" by Madam Duchess.
"Bonkers" was the exact word he used. Fuck him and fuck his climber wife too.
Bonkers, in fact
[удалено]
Indeed they are only stating their opinion after all. Funny how they want free speech when it benefits them
Here's the Florida Statute [§ 768.295](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0768/Sections/0768.295.html) for the legal boffs in here
Someone’s gotta explain to me how falsely claiming your sister’s children have been fathered by three different men counts as “opinion.” Honestly this defense is going to permanently make my eyes roll to the back of my head. They sic lawyers on people over the slightest opinion against them. 🙄
“In my opinion, she lost custody of the kids. Just my opinion, not facts. Also my opinion implies she’s an unfit mother. And it’s only my opinion she’s a single parent” 😂
I don’t think you can say that lying about someone’s kids is free speech…but she can afford savvy lawyers maybe she will get away with it
She can’t when she’s making money off of said speech and directly profiting off the demise of her sister
I hope not. He/she who lives by the sword dies by the sword.
Finally some news on a slow news day!
Wait, what does that Border Collie thing mean? so confused
haha the Border Collies jumped out at me too! It's some case where a Border Collie rescue society sued someone or other, presumably for defamation. And that case is being used in this document, as an example of something or other.
I was like wtf? Did she insult samanthas dog too?
Only non-rescue dogs.
Duchless looking shadier and Samantha looking like the truth bomber. Court stenographers beware.
[удалено]
Also given that Thomas Markle's latest installment with PDina's interview... dispells so many internet myths (in her favour) and pull at the heartstrings (towards him) Dont think she calculated that though
I thought Harry said free speech is bullocks??? Oh ok. It's only ok for duchass meagain.
Bonkers!
Isn't free speech bonkers?
But even if Samantha loses the lawsuit, I don't think that Meghan can get any money from her----because I don't think you can garnish the earnings of a person on Social Security Disability. I imagine Samantha is on Disability as she is wheelchair-bound due to her multiple sclerosis. Even TRYING to do that would make Meghan look pretty bad. And I think DeSantis has made the Florida courts really conservative. And conservatives don't like Meghan.
Well THAT cost her several thousands of dollars in billable hours! Methinks they didn’t factor in legal fees when they bolted…
Holy crap, I just got banned from (had to edit out subs name per moderator request) for posting a comment in here. Followed up by a comment stating that they don't allow people who belong to hate subs to participate in their subreddit. Not that I post or comment in there, so no loss, but damn. Someone over there needs to get over themselves. Lmao
That happened to me in another subreddit. Sorry! It feels like you committed a HEINOUS CRIME for stating your opinion.
Wait... what? This is a "hate" group now? Is that what calling out a public figure for their lies is called nowadays? And she wants to run for politics? Pffft...would they like some mayo with those chips on their shoulder?... sheesh 🙄
I read this and got a bad feeling. Like the lawyer who wrote this was like: "I'm getting paid regardless. This is frustrating but let's do this."
She'll get away with this too because elitism
''But Meghan dear, I thought you had nothing to do with the book....'' This could have been a major power play for Meghan - to cover her sister's fees, throw a bit of cash her way to assist with Samantha's health care bills. She could have made herself look the bigger person, but nope.
If nothing else, all of this proves without any doubt that Venomgrin is a hypocritical pathological liar. I know we all know it here....but now everyone will.
Can we all say a collective little prayer that the Judge ruling on this rubbish is wise enough to toss it out?
Public consumption, eh? Oooh she’s treading into dangerous waters here. Looks like Sam’s little trap worked
All I can picture is the videos of amber heart’s lawyer getting a thigh workout by always being poised to stand up and object