Markle her words…
Duke and Duchess of Sussex , Issue 1561

JUST four days after the Duchess of Sussex had to apologise to the high court for falsely claiming not to have had any involvement with the biography Finding Freedom (when she had in fact provided briefing points for an aide to pass on to its authors), her husband Prince Harry issued a statement urging action on "the mis- and disinformation crisis, which is a global humanitarian issue". Anyone imagining that this would be the full extent of the couple's brass neck over the issue would be wrong.

Where the Sussexes go, Schillings inevitably follows, and a number of media outlets have received letters from the rapacious law firm on Meghan's behalf, complaining about their coverage of her humiliating legal reverse ferret.

The defamation-detecting duchess takes issue with the suggestion that she had admitted misleading the court, on the grounds that her new witness statement in the case of Sussex v Associated Newspapers merely says "I apologise to the Court for the fact I had not remembered these exchanges [with her communications secretary Jason Knauf] at the time", and makes clear that "I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the Defendant or the Court". The apology, and the undeniable fact that the court was misled by her evidence, are therefore entirely separate issues.

Finding fee-dom
At this rate, much of the $125m the couple received from Netflix and Spotify will be eaten up by fees from Schillings alone. In addition to their ongoing cases against the Mail on Sunday, Mirror Group Newspapers and News UK, so far this year the Sussexes have called in Schillings to tell the BBC that its report on the naming of their daughter was "false and defamatory", and to demand corrections to "false and inaccurate" press commentary on the paperback edition of Finding Freedom – the biography it turns out they did collaborate with after all.

In the latter case, Schillings told the Daily Mail that the claims the paper chose to highlight "were from the authors of the book, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, who do not speak for the Sussexes and rely on unnamed sources". Given that two of those sources have now been named, will Schillings now demand a correction from itself? And if so, to whom will it send the bill?

More top stories in the latest issue:

SACKWATCH AT THE MAIL
So. Farewell then Geordie Greig, editor of the Daily Mail. And, er, hello again Paul Dacre, who left three weeks ago and is now suddenly coming back!

STICKY WICKETS
Tough times for cricket columnist Michael Vaughan, suspended by the BBC in the Azeem Rafiq racism affair, and waiting to see if the Telegraph follows suit.

CASH FOR COLUMNS
The Daily Mail really hates the idea of Matt Hancock cashing in with a book on Covid… as the Mail on Sunday bungs him £2,000 for 1,000 words on vaccines.

SUN SPOTS
Press coverage of footballer Jack Grealish's love life reminds Sun columnist Ulrika Jonsson of her own treatment by a tabloid she's far too polite to name.

SOUR GRIPES
Sun showbiz writer Clemmie Moodie sneers at Adele's media blitz, citing ten of her high profile appearances – not one of which is in the neglected Sun. Fancy!

WITH KNOBS ON…
Telegraph and Spectator columnist Toby Young wins the Contrarian Prize – the sculpted award for which makes him look, well… like a dick three times over.

CAMPBELL'S SOUP
Former spin doctor Alastair Campbell reinvents himself as an anti-corruption champion against Tory sleaze. But is he really the right man for the job?