
Meghan Markle left a 'trail of evidence' so she could 'hijack the narrative' following Megxit, royal author claims
Indeed, those who worked closest with the couple - who called themselves the Sussex Survivors' Club - accused the couple of bullying during their brief period as working royals.
But they themselves then faced claims from Meghan that they had failed in their duty of care after the Duchess of Sussex said in her bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey that there was a point during that time when she didn't want to live anymore.
Writing in his biography about the staff who serve the royals - titled Courtiers - author Valentine Low said the palace 'needed evidence of the duty of care the organisation had showed them [the Sussexes]'.
And so Harry and Meghan's former aide Samantha Cohen and key courtiers Sir Edward Young - the late Queen's private secretary - and the King's private secretary Sir Clive Alderton agreed that evidence would be gathered by the aides to quash any claims Harry and Meghan had not been properly looked after.
But Mr Low wrote that Meghan was already leaving a 'trail of evidence behind, so that when the time came for them [Harry and Meghan] to leave the monarchy, she would be able to say: look how they failed to support me'.
Such as when Meghan went to HR for help and was given a 'sympathetic hearing' but the department was ultimately there to deal with 'employee issues, not members of the Royal Family'.
Samantha and the other courtiers were aware of bullying allegations lodged against the Sussexes as early as 2018. 'Samantha The Panther', as she was known, told Australian media last year that she was one of ten staff members interviewed by the Palace following the complaints.
Meghan during her Oprah Winfrey interview in 2021. Royal author Valentine Low claimed she 'hijacked the narrative' which at first quashed any complaints about her own behaviour
However, it was Meghan that won in the battle to air her grievances first when - according to Mr Low - she 'hijacked the narrative by making it all about her mental health' and all the things royal staff had done to help the couple succeed were forgotten, allowing Meghan to point out all the times they had failed her.
These failures were then singled out for millions to see during the Sussexes' interview with Oprah in 2021.
Among her claims that concerns about her mental health were not taken seriously by staff, the couple also said separately that the Royal Family was racist.
Pointing the finger at one member in particular, the couple alleged that the unnamed individual had speculated about the colour of their son Archie's skin while Meghan was pregnant with him.
She recalled 'concerns and conversations about how dark his skin would be when he was born. People were concerned with how dark Archie's skin would be.'
A tense looking Harry confirmed this, saying he was the one who'd heard these comments and had told his wife.
But while the royal staff members' shortcomings were broadcast for the world to see, Meghan's own behaviour has also been in the spotlight.
In 2018, royal aide Jason Knauf - who at one time was exceptionally close to Harry and Meghan - sent an internal email raising concerns about Meghan's alleged poor treatment of staff in the Royal Family, which was leaked after Megxit.
'I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X was totally unacceptable,' he allegedly wrote.
'The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.'
He also quit the royal household after accusing the Duchess of Sussex of mistreating two colleagues and undermining their confidence.
According to royal author Robert Lacey, when Mr Knauf presented the Prince of Wales with a 'dossier of distress' about their behaviour he 'went ballistic' and was left 'astonished' and 'horrified' by what he heard.
William's anger stemmed from the fact that a tradition of treating the staff 'like family' within the Royal Family had been broken and that he personally knew many of those named, Mr Lacey wrote.
Accusations that Meghan is difficult to work with have also plagued her career away from the Royal Family.
In May, MailOnline revealed that Meghan was 'banned' by Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour from being on the cover of British Vogue in September 2022 after the magazine boss became 'frustrated with all the Duchess of Sussex's team's micromanaging', one source said.
And before she was even the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan was already starting to build a bad reputation among other magazine editors.
In September 2017, two months before her engagement to Harry was announced, Meghan graced the cover of Vanity Fair.
Mr Knauf quit the royal household after accusing the Duchess of Sussex of mistreating two colleagues and undermining their confidence
Writing in his biography about the staff who serve the royals - titled Courtiers - author Valentine Low said that the palace 'needed evidence of the duty of care the organisation had showed them'
According to the then-editor of the magazine, Graydon Carter, the soon-to-be Duchess of Sussex challenged a reporter over why she was being asked about her relationship with the now-Duke of Sussex rather than her charity work.
Speaking to the New York Post, Mr Carter said Meghan asked the journalist: 'Excuse me, is this going to all be about Prince Harry?
'Because I thought we were going to be talking about my charities and my philanthropy.'
The former editor then admitted he had 'no idea' who Meghan was at the time and added that she was 'slightly adrift on the facts and reality'.
Earlier this year, Mr Carter gave a simple but scathing takedown of Meghan during a discussion with Interview Magazine.
When asked about his thoughts on the Duchess, he called her 'The Undine Spragg of Montecito'.
His reference was to the main character in The Custom Of The Country - a tragicomedy by author Edith Wharton published in 1913.
The book tells the story of Spragg, a social climber who moves from the Midwest to New York to experience the high life.
Spragg then marries a man from Manhattan's high society, but she's never satisfied because of her greed and ambition, with some readers describing her as 'vain, spoiled, and selfish'.
Two years later, Meghan guest-edited the September 2019 Forces For Change issue of British Vogue, which featured 15 'trailblazing change makers' on its cover.
It became the fastest selling issue in the magazine's 103-year history, selling out in ten days.
Among the advocates featured on the cover were Greta Thunberg, Sinead Burke, actors Gemma Chan and Jameela Jamil and New Zealand's then-prime minister Jacinda Ardern.
But critics pointed out that the Queen was not among the 15 'women she admires' featured, and neither were there any nurses, doctors, lawyers or teachers.
Three years later, the Duchess was due to appear on the cover of British Vogue at the same time as Meghan's keynote appearance at the One Young World Summit in Manchester in September 2022.
But insiders from Conde Nast, Vogue's parent company, claim it was abruptly pulled and scrapped completely.
An insider told MailOnline that Meghan was being 'difficult about making it a cover' and her team were 'insisting on particular straplines'.
She then found herself at loggerheads with not only the editor of British Vogue, Edward Enninful, but the Queen of fashion magazines Anna Wintour.
The insider said: 'Anna heard about it, and just like banned her and said: "That's it. We don't want to do this."
'And so [Meghan] didn't get the cover, and I guess she didn't even get the story. [British Vogue editor-in-chief Edward Enninful] probably agreed with Anna that you don't get to call the shots on who's on the cover. That's absolutely an editor's decision.
'Anna was p***** off. Anna was like frustrated with all the micromanaging, and just was like: "All right. That's it. She can't have the cover and we're not doing the story".'
The source added that Meghan's 'level of desire for detail and control on the media is almost like Beyonce level... but she's not Beyonce'.
However, the Duchess is said to have been relaxed with 'no expectations', although her team had 'high expectations for the piece' in Vogue.
'Enninful was not in a position to meet those expectations. He already had a magazine cover in the bag for that month,' Conde Nast insiders told the Mail On Sunday.
Shelving the project is said to have damaged Mr Enninful and the Duchess's friendship. 'Edward was furious to have lost the project, as were the powers that be at Conde Nast,' a source told the MoS.
However, reports are conflicting.
Producer and journalist Jane Marie, who worked with Harry and Meghan during the development of Archewell Audio projects, insisted to Vanity Fair that Meghan is 'just a lovely, genuine person'.
Other staff members have claimed that she would send her employees gifts ranging from dog leashes to skincare products.
These wildly varying accounts of the work culture Meghan presides over are supported by a source that worked with her in the run-up to her wedding in 2018, who said she was 'lovely when it is all going her way but a demon when the worm turns'.
The Duchess of Sussex has always denied the allegations of bullying, which she described as an orchestrated smear campaign against her.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
26 minutes ago
- BBC News
Charity shreds 'irreplaceable' adoption files to save space
A charity has apologised for the "inexcusable" destruction of around 4,800 personal records linked to adoptions in Scotland, including irreplaceable photographs and handwritten letters from birth Birthlink has been fined £18,000 after shredding the files to free up space in its filing cabinets four years Information Commissioners' Office (ICO), which imposed the fine, described the lost material as "deeply personal pieces in the jigsaw of a person's history, some now lost for eternity".The charity's board said it was "deeply sorry" and that it was impossible to say how many people were affected. A statement added: "We want to assure everyone who's interacted with Birthlink that we will do everything in our power to ensure this does not happen again."A spokesperson for the Movement for Adoption Apology Scotland campaign said: "These items weren't stored out of administrative duty, but held in the hope that one day, someone would come looking. "That hope has now been shredded, quite literally."Birthlink did not keep a log of what was destroyed but it believes only "a very small proportion" of the records included personal documents, which do not exist in any form elsewhere. Files destroyed Since 1984, the company has operated the Adoption Contact Register for enables adopted people, birth parents and others to register their details with a view to being "linked" and potentially a connection was made, Birthlink retained what were called "linked records" - closed paper files stored in filing cabinets - in case they could be of further use in the by January 2021, the charity was running out of space and reviewed whether it could destroy the a board meeting, it was agreed that only replaceable records could be disposed of. A few months later, the contents of 24 filing cabinet drawers were bagged up and has estimated that personal data from around 4,800 individuals was destroyed and that less than 10% of the lost files contained "cherished items". These include photographs, handwritten letters from birth mothers and fathers to their children and handwritten letters from birth families to 8,300 files survived the process culling of the records only came to light two years later, after the Care Inspectorate carried out a short-notice inspection at Birthlink in September internal investigation, ordered by Birthlink's interim chief executive, found that a member of staff had expressed concern about shredding photographs and other records at the they were told "it needed to be done".Birthlink reported itself to the ICO, who said the charity could have prevented the destruction with "cost effective and easy to implement" policies and regulator imposed a £45,000 fine, later reduced to £18,000, to promote compliance with data protection and deter others from "making similar mistakes". 'Poor understanding' Sally Anne Poole, the ICO's head of investigations, said: "The destroyed records had the potential to be an unknown memory, an identity, a sense of belonging, answers."It is inconceivable to think, due to the very nature of its work, that Birthlink had such a poor understanding of both its data protection and records management process."The ICO welcomed the steps taken by Birthlink to ensure it does not happen again, including new policies and the appointment of a data protection officer. Birthlink's interim CEO Abbi Jackson told BBC Scotland News that the charity mainly worked with people affected by "historic forced adoption" between 1930 and said: "We want to reiterate our deepest and most sincere regret that this happened."We have failed people who put their trust in us. We want to urge anyone who thinks they should have had information on file to phone our helpline."We have a number of very experienced, knowledgeable staff who're there to help on each individual case."In 2023, the then First Minister Nicola Sturgeon issued a "sincere, heartfelt and unreserved" apology to people affected by the practice of forced Movement for Adoption Apology Scotland campaign said: "The emotional and historical significance of what was lost cannot be overstated."These were not administrative items, but the last remaining traces of relationships shattered by policies and practices that many now acknowledge as unjust and highly traumatising."Anyone worried about the loss of personal information can contact Birthlink's support service through dataprotection@


The Sun
2 hours ago
- The Sun
Lottery results LIVE: National Lottery Set For Life draw tonight, August 4, 2025
THE National Lottery Set For Life numbers are in and it's time to find out if you've won the top prize of £10,000 every month for 30 years. Could tonight's jackpot see you start ticking off that bucket list every month or building your own start-up as a budding entrepreneur? 1 You can find out by checking your ticket against tonight's numbers below. Good luck! The winning Set For Life numbers are: 11, 26, 28, 32, 39 and the Life Ball is 02. The first National Lottery draw was held on November 19 1994 when seven winners shared a jackpot of £5,874,778. The largest amount ever to be won by a single ticket holder was £42million, won in 1996. Gareth Bull, a 49-year-old builder, won £41million in November, 2020 and ended up knocking down his bungalow to make way for a luxury manor house with a pool. £1.308 billion (Powerball) on January 13 2016 in the US, for which three winning tickets were sold, remains history's biggest lottery prize £1.267 billion (Mega Million) a winner from South Carolina took their time to come forward to claim their prize in March 2019 not long before the April deadline £633.76 million (Powerball draw) from a winner from Wisconsin £625.76 million (Powerball) Mavis L. Wanczyk of Chicopee, Massachusetts claimed the jackpot in August 2017 £575.53 million (Powerball) A lucky pair of winners scooped the jackpot in Iowa and New York in October 2018 Sue Davies, 64, bought a lottery ticket to celebrate ending five months of shielding during the pandemic — and won £500,000. Sandra Devine, 36, accidentally won £300k - she intended to buy her usual £100 National Lottery Scratchcard, but came home with a much bigger prize. The biggest jackpot ever to be up for grabs was £66million in January last year, which was won by two lucky ticket holders. Another winner, Karl managed to bag £11million aged just 23 in 1996. The odds of winning the lottery are estimated to be about one in 14million - BUT you've got to be in it to win it.


BBC News
3 hours ago
- BBC News
Fire breaks out at BIC Bournemouth entertainment venue
A fire has broken out at the Bournemouth International Centre (BIC) entertainment and conference Fire and Rescue Service said it was dealing with a fire affecting the exterior of the building on Exeter Road, which started shortly after 19:30 on social media show smoke and flames coming from the coast-facing side of the BIC opening in 1984 and is Bournemouth's main entertainment complex, regularly hosting large-scale events including concerts and the main political party conferences. You can follow BBC Dorset on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.