Buckingham Palace’s shock announcement Wednesday that it was to formally investigate allegations that Meghan Markle bullied and humiliated at least three female members of staff means that a new front has been opened in the war between the Sussexes and the royal establishment.
Not since the days of the War of the Waleses, when Princess Diana and Prince Charles remorselessly briefed the press against each other, has there been such open disharmony in the royal ranks.
Wednesday’s accusations that Meghan systematically bullied her personal staff—carried in the British newspaper of record, The Times)—and Meghan’s rapid clapback accusing the palace of being behind the “smear” campaign, followed by the palace’s official declaration that it was “very concerned about the allegations” and would invite “members of staff involved at the time” to give testimony are extraordinary evidence of a family in a state of open warfare.
ADVERTISEMENT
The narrative being pushed a few weeks ago, that the final separation of the Sussexes from their royal duties—after they quit just over a year ago—would enable the burgeoning of a warmer family relationship, now looks hopelessly naive.
However, the accusations in The Times also pose the question—if one accepts Meghan’s side’s insistence that the palace orchestrated the attack (the palace denies it did any such thing, and The Times has backed them up)—of what the palace is so afraid that Meghan will reveal to Oprah Winfrey this Sunday?
What does the palace fear Meghan will say about royal life that provoked an unprecedented attack on her character in this way by, if not the palace, a clearly well-connected group of individuals inside it?
Friends of Meghan refused to be drawn on the controversy yesterday beyond the official statement, but her camp sought to telegraph a sense of calm. The Times didn’t provide any specific examples of the alleged bullying behavior.
While there is no denying that her former communications chief Jason Knauf wrote a letter raising concerns about Meghan’s treatment of staff, the complaint didn’t go anywhere; in fact, it emerged Wednesday that the people on whose behalf he was writing knew nothing of it and asked him to drop the matter.
Winfrey may not take such a sanguine view. It would go against everything the Oprah brand stands for to unquestioningly enable somebody under investigation by their former HR team for workplace bullying.
She has not jetted back to California to record a new segment yet, staff at her production company told The Daily Beast, but that may change by the time Sunday night’s bombshell interview finally airs. Oprah has a scoop, but it will be one that will be undermined if she does not get Meghan to respond in detail to the allegations made against her.
The question of why individuals within the palace would seek to portray Meghan as a bully and hypocrite remains.
A whole new level of political complexity is brought to bear here by the fact that Knauf, the sender of the email alleging bullying that the paper published excerpts from, quit the Sussex operation and now works for Prince William and Kate Middleton.
Kensington Palace did not respond to The Daily Beast’s request for information on whether Knauf co-operated with The Times.
Intriguingly, both Knauf and another senior former Sussex aide, Samantha Cohen, who was mentioned in Knauf’s email as being stressed out from working for the couple, had previously volunteered to give “strictly neutral” evidence in Meghan’s court action against the publishers of the Mail on Sunday. The Mail’s lawyers seemed to think their evidence would be useful to their cause and could “shed some light” on the circumstances surrounding the creation of the letter.
In the event, their evidence was not called for as the judge, in a surprise verdict, decreed that there was no doubt that the Mail had breached Meghan’s privacy by publishing a hand-written letter to her father, and used a procedure known as summary judgement to find unilaterally in her favor without a trial.
By a strange coincidence, on Wednesday the Mail was back in court, seeking leave to appeal the judgement, and one key plank of its argument was that evidence from the “palace four” could only be fully examined at a full trial.
In the past, this correspondent heard plenty of stories that suggested Meghan was a tough boss. (But then, women often get judged harshly for this, whereas men rarely do.) There is no doubt that several members of her staff decided they couldn’t handle it and left, including Meghan’s personal assistant Melissa Touabti, who resigned from her position after just six months, amid claims she was left “in tears.” I have heard stories of contractors complaining Meghan was rude or brusque with them.
But, guess what? High-handed treatment of staff by the royals is nothing new. Princess Margaret used to use footmen as human ashtrays. Prince Andrew used to roar at servants who came to wake him up, “Fuck off.” Princess Anne is said to have called a functionary a “fucking incompetent twat” when he messed up a minor task. Don’t get anyone who knows him started on Prince Charles.
And yet Meghan gets slammed for what? Sending pre-yoga emails at 5 a.m.? No-one ever suggested she bawled people out for not replying before they had their breakfast, so it’s hard to see the problem, beyond a dislike of driven women on Californian timetables starting work before dawn.
It’s not Meghan’s fault if people don’t know how to turn off their notifications.
When Harry and William described how Prince Charles fell asleep at his desk working late at night and woke up with bits of paper stuck to his face, it was held up as evidence of his devotion to duty.
It’s not hard, therefore, to have some sympathy with Meghan’s hunch that there is more at play here than a sudden outbreak of concern for the wellbeing of royal staffers.
What exactly provoked the remarkable attack on Meghan’s character, we shall have to wait till Sunday to find out—or perhaps until Buckingham Palace reports back the results of its investigation.
