Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, announced their plans to depart from the Royal Family in January through an Instagram post. But biographer Nigel Cawthorne has said in wholly unsubstantiated claims Prince Charles and Prince William leaked details of their plans for departure following Prince Andrew’s appearance on BBC Newsnight. Royal commentators Rachel Bowie and Roberta Fiorito refused to believe the outrageous claims as they discussed the relationship between the royals.
Speaking on the Royally Obsessed podcast, Ms Fiorito, said: “There’s a rumour going around that Prince Charles and/or Prince William were the ones to orchestrate the timing of Harry and Meghan’s exit.
“Why on Earth would Harry’s dad want him to leave the family?
“I don’t think that’s possible.
“The background of this is biographer Nigel Cawthorne new book ‘Prince Andrew, Epstein and the Palace’, there are some pretty explosive claims to say Charles’ and William’s teams at the Palace decided to use the moment of Prince Andrew’s disastrous BBC Newsnight interview to start leaking stories that Harry and Meghan were about to depart their roles.
“Those leaks, I guess, eventually sparked the crisis talks organised by the Queen.
“I don’t see why this is a rumour and I think Harry and Meghan made it clear it was their choice.”
Co-host Ms Bowie added: “Prince Charles and Prince William both love Harry and Meghan.”
Ms Fiorito also noted: “Whatever bridges were burned seem to have mended, at least in the public eye.”
It comes as leaked court documents say Meghan was left “unprotected by the Institution” when attacked by the media and “prohibited from defending herself”, according to leaked court documents.
The papers form part of Meghan’s legal action against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline over articles which featured parts of a “private and confidential” letter from the duchess to her estranged father Thomas Markle.
Meghan is seeking damages for alleged misuse of private information, copyright infringement and breach of the Data Protection Act.
Associated Newspapers wholly denies the allegations and says it will hotly contest the case.
In the documents, seen by the PA news agency, the duchess’s five friends who spoke to a US publication criticising her father, are not named but referred to as A-E, although they are identified in an undisclosed confidential schedule.
And the papers claim the duchess’s royal wedding generated tourism revenue of more than a billion pounds for the public purse.
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry STILL receiving money from Charles [INSIGHT]
Kate sends royal fans into a frenzy as they notice striking change [ANALYSIS]
Prince Harry’s royal feud with ‘unfeeling’ brother William to erupt [INTERVIEW]
The court papers said: “The Claimant had become the subject of a large number of false and damaging articles by the UK tabloid media, specifically by the Defendant, which caused tremendous emotional distress and damage to her mental health.
“As her friends had never seen her in this state before, they were rightly concerned for her welfare, specifically as she was pregnant, unprotected by the Institution, and prohibited from defending herself.”
The five close friends of Meghan – with friend A personally known to Mr Markle for more than 20 years – were interviewed but not named in a People magazine article – something Meghan was not involved with, the papers stated.
In the article, published in February last year, they spoke out against the bullying they said the royal has faced.