Samantha Markle tried to sue her half-sister, the Duchess of Sussex, for humiliation and defamations following the Oprah Winfrey interview.
“Thus, the Court finds that Defendant’s statement is not objectively verifiable or subject to empirical proof…. Plaintiff cannot plausibly disprove Defendant’s opinion of her own childhood.”
In a filing submitted in March last year, Samantha Markle claimed that “demonstrably false and malicious statements” were made by Meghan to a “worldwide audience”.
Samantha has claimed Meghan defamed her to “cover up” her “false rages to riches” narrative, according to the Daily Mail.
Meghan Markle has successfully had her half-sister Samantha Markle’s court case dismissed
A Florida judge has thrown out the lawsuit saying that Markle’s statements were pure opinion
Prince Harry is ‘easy to mock’ because ‘he’s a bit stupid’ says author behind Spare parody
Prince Harry’s bestselling memoir Spare has been parodied in a spoof biography titled ‘Spare Us! A Harrody’ by author Bruno Vincent. The 42-year-old former book editor is best known for his series of humorous takes on Enid Blyton’s Famous Five collection but decided to try his hand at a parody of the Duke of Sussex’s book because “there was a lot of meat in there” to tear apart.
Samantha’s lawyer Peter Ticktin told the court that Meghan used Finding Freedom to “affirm this false narrative that she supposedly lived this rags to riches thing”.
He said: “She got caught. She was lying about her education, that she was getting all these scholarships. Her father paid for her education for goodness sakes, and she got caught with this lie.
“Why else is she putting her sister down? Why else is she putting her father down?
“Why else is she denying her family who has done nothing but good to her all her life? She never had a problem with them at all.”
Harry and Meghan ‘absolutely cannot be on that balcony’
“Probably never realizing this would put an innocent person into the fray where all of a sudden she has hundreds of threats on her life coming at her, a stalker she had to deal with.”
Meghan’s lawyer Michael Kump hit back at Ticktin’s comments branding them “inappropriate” and “quite frankly offensive to my client”.
He noted: “Don’t make a federal case out of it.
Samantha had accused the royal of spreading “malicious lies” during the Oprah Winfrey interview
“Not every perceived slight ought to be litigated and that’s true here. Plaintiff is taking issue with Meghan’s own impressions of her own childhood growing up but that’s not a proper subject matter for a court of law.
“The statements at issue here are not defamatory as a matter of law….the right to voice opinions and even criticize are guaranteed by the First Amendment.
“Courts have held pretrial dismissal is necessary in defamation cases because of the chilling effect these cases have on first amendment rights.”
Kump went on to argue that the first seven of the 10 statements cited by Samantha as defamatory were from Finding Freedom and should be excluded since Meghan did not write the book nor publish it.
He said: “The law in Florida is clear – publication requires that the defendant made or published the false statement.”
Source: EXPRESS CO UK