Who Is Meghan Markle? Wiki, Bio, Age, Career, Net Worth, Many More Facts You Need To Know

Meghan Markle Wiki – Biography

An American member of the British royal family and a former actress.

Born and raised in Los Angeles, California, Markle describes it as a mixed race. Mainly known for playing assistant lawyer Rachel Zane in the American legal drama Suits (Seasons 1-7), her acting career began while studying at Northwestern University. Markle’s lifestyle blog The Tig (2014–2017) featured a column profiling influential women. She was also known for creating and launching two fashion clothing lines in 2015-2016.

In 2017, Markle got engaged to marry Prince Harry. She became the Duchess of Sussex after her marriage in 2018. Their son Archie Mountbatten-Windsor was born in 2019. The following year, the couple resigned as senior members of the royal family and moved to Southern California, the Duchess’ hometown. In late 2020, they founded Archewell Inc., an American public corporation focused on non-profit activities and creative media ventures.
Markle and American filmmaker Trevor Engelson started dating in 2004. They got married on September 10, 2011 in Ocho Rios, Jamaica, and in August 2013 they decided to divorce without fail, citing irreconcilable differences. Markle’s relationship with famed Canadian chef and restaurant operator Cory Vitiello ended almost two years later in July 2016.
In June 2016, Markle became Queen II. She started a relationship with Elizabeth’s granddaughter Prince Harry. In November, the prince prompted the communications secretary to make a statement on his behalf to express his personal concerns about the humiliating and misinterpretations made about his girlfriend by mainstream media and internet trolls. In September 2017, Markle and Prince Harry made their first public appearance at the Invictus Games in Toronto, where Harry was his boss.

Marriage with Prince Harry
Meghan Markle’s engagement to Prince Harry was announced on November 27, 2017 by Harry’s father, Charles, the Prince of Wales. The announcement has led to generally positive comments on having a mixed race as a member of the royal family , particularly with regard to Commonwealth countries with mixed or indigenous noble populations.  Markle announced his retirement from acting  and started a long process of becoming a British citizen subject to strict immigration rules for living outside the UK for more than ninety days.

In preparation for the wedding, Canterbury archbishop Justin Welby baptized Markle and admitted him to the Church of England on 6 March 2018. Special ceremony with water from the Jordan River, St. James’ Palace. The marriage ceremony was held on May 19 at St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle. It was reported that the ceremony was agreed in advance that excess funding from the BBC broadcast would go to a charity selected by the newlywed couple. In April 2020, Feeding Britain (providing food packages to families suffering from food poverty) was nominated to receive £ 90,000 from the BBC.

After the wedding, the Duke and Duchess lived in Nottingham Cottage on the grounds of Kensington Palace in London. They later moved to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor Castle’s Home Park. The Duchess gave birth to a son named Archie Mountbatten-Windsor on 6 May 2019. The office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex has been moved to Buckingham Palace and officially closed on March 31. When Sussexes stopped “making formal deals to support the Queen” a few months later in Canada and the United States, the couple bought a house on the former Riven Rock estate in Montecito, California, in June 2020. The next month, the Duchess had a miscarriage.
Political Views
The queen is constitutionally obliged to act on the advice of the government; Therefore, members of the British royal family are politically neutral by convention. However, Markle was politically vocal before marrying Prince Harry. She supported Hillary Clinton during the 2016 United States presidential election and publicly condemned her rival Donald Trump. Markle expressed his disappointment on Instagram when the referendum on Britain’s European Union membership ended in favor of Brexit that same year. As an eligible voter in the United States, she posted a video with her husband encouraging others to register for the 2020 United States presidential election on National Voter Registration Day. Some media outlets accepted this as a tacit approval of Democratic candidate Joe Biden, which caused Donald Trump to reject his messages at a press conference.

Meghan Markle wins privacy case against Mail on Sunday and MailOnline over letter to father WITHOUT a trial

The Supreme Court today won the allegation that his privacy was violated due to the publication of a letter written by the Duchess of Sussex to his father, Thomas.

Meghan, 39, is suing Mail On Sunday and MailOnline publishers Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) for misuse of private information and copyright infringement for publishing excerpts of a letter to her 76-year-old father, Mr Markle, after the royal family. Wedding in 2018.

After today’s verdict, The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline said they would consider appealing, she said.
A spokesperson said: ‘We were very surprised by today’s summary verdict, and we were disappointed that we were denied the chance to have all the evidence heard and tested in open court in a full trial. We are carefully reviewing the content of the decision and will decide over time whether to file an appeal. ‘

Mr. Justice Warby decided that the issue of ownership of copyright in his letter to Mr. Markle could be decided at the trial.

In his verdict, he said that Meghan had ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’ and ‘imaginary to think otherwise’.

The Supreme Court’s decision to make a summary verdict means that Meghan will no longer have to go to the witness stand to testify in a confidentiality case, thereby avoiding ‘confronting’ her estranged father, who is also expected to meet with the publisher’s behalf.

Referring to the letter, Mr. Justice Warby said in his verdict: ‘In short, it was a personal and private letter. Much of what was published was about the plaintiff’s own behavior, his feelings of anguish about his father’s behavior – the way he saw it – and the rift between them.

These are private and personal matters by their nature.

The judge added: ‘The plaintiff had a reasonable expectation that the contents of the Letter would remain confidential.’

He said that the only “reasonable justification” for any intervention would be to correct “some inaccuracies in the Letter in the People’s Article”.

But Justice Warby added: ‘According to an objective examination of the articles in light of the surrounding circumstances, the inevitable conclusion … The statements made were not a necessary or proportionate means to serve this purpose. Often they did not serve this purpose.

Taken as a whole, disclosures are clearly excessive and therefore unlawful. There is no possibility that a different judgment will be made after the trial. ‘The interference with freedom of expression represented by these results is a necessary and proportionate means of pursuing the legitimate aim of protecting the claimant’s privacy.’

The case will return to court on March 2 for ‘next steps’, including consideration of damages, all unresolved issues and costs to be settled at the hearing.

Parts of the 1,250-word letter Meghan wrote to her father were published in February 2019 with a series of articles in the newspaper and on the internet.

During a two-day trial on the summary verdict last month, Meghan’s lawyers argued before Mr Justice Warby that the publisher’s case should be filed on the grounds that ‘there is no real possibility of success’.

The Supreme Court’s decision to admit this also means that one of the authors of Finding Freedom, a Royal biography on Meghan’s life and marriage to the Duke of Sussex, will also not provide evidence.

The newspaper claimed that Meghan was collaborating with Omid Scobie and co-author Carolyn Durand, or letting her friends speak to them on her behalf. He also claims to allow them to share the details of the letter with the authors.

Meghan denied the allegations – it had been a full trial, just like Mr Scobie, whom the newspaper’s lawyers wanted to question from the witness stand. However, in order to avoid further misrepresentation, she admitted that she had given a friend permission to share the details of the letter with the authors.

Meghan’s five close friends, who interviewed People Magazine in a February 2019 article that included the details of the letter, will no longer have to provide evidence.

They were expected to travel from the USA to be sworn to test how the article came about.

At last month’s hearing, Meghan’s lawyers argued that the letter was “ intrinsically private, personal, and sensitive ” and was never intended to be made public.

Justin Rushbrooke QC, on behalf of the Duchess, said that the publication of excerpts from the letter was a ‘three-shot’ attack on ‘private life, family life and correspondence’.

He said the letter sums up the Duchess’ ‘constant love’ for his 76-year-old father, Thomas Markle, and his fears for his health.

He described the letter as ‘a heartfelt request from a grieving girl to his father’ and said he had no intention of making it public.

Rushbrooke added: ‘It is such a good example that anyone with ordinary sensitivities can find a letter that they would not want disclosed to third parties.