Meghan Markle’s ‘special sisterhood’ told US celebrity magazine intimate stories

Earlier this year a group of five women – the Duchess of Sussex’s inner circle – resolved to ‘speak the truth’ about their royal friend to an American celebrity magazine. Exactly how they arrived at the decision to collectively ‘break their silence’ and fight what they called the ‘global bullying’ endured by Meghan will no doubt emerge in time.

It has been widely reported that the resulting article was sanctioned by the Duchess herself, something she and Kensington Palace has never denied.

To many Royal commentators, it seemed inconceivable that this well-meaning quintet would run to People magazine to ‘set the record straight’ and criticise her father without her blessing.

Clearly the women – identified only as a long-time friend, a co-star, a former colleague, a friend from Los Angeles and a close confidante – intended to make an impact with their anonymous attempt at reputation management.

With its blend of celebrity and human interest stories, People has a readership of 35 million. The five friends monopolised the February 18 edition, their words spread over eight glossy pages and heralded with the front cover headline: The Truth About Meghan.

They spoke of the Duchess being ‘guided by a deep sense of gratitude and humility’ and being someone who ‘personifies elegance, grace, philanthropy’. One friend said: ‘Forget the fact of who she is married to: she was royalty from the day I met her.’

The article included private details of the couple’s life at Kensington Palace, where they were then living.

Readers learned that the Duchess can knock up a ‘five-star meal’ from leftovers and how, far from being imperious and waited on hand and foot, she paints her own nails, does all her own make-up, treats staff to ice cream and sorbets and gives hand warmers to Palace guards because she doesn’t like the ‘guys to be cold’.

INCENDIARY: The People magazine cover story that reopened old wounds

One friend said: ‘There’s a false assumption that she lives in some gilded palace with staff and ladies-in-waiting and all those Royal perks. It’s simply not true. We’ve all been to their cottage. It’s small and she’s made it cosy. Meg cooks for herself and Harry every single day – there’s no chef or butler.’

Her Los Angeles friend described spending a couple of days with Meghan. ‘Her husband was out of town on work. In the room she made up for me, there was a candle, cookies by the bed, slippers and a robe. We were the only two in the house. She made the most lovely meals… It was raining and muddy outside, so the dogs got all dirty and she’s wiping them off with towels.’

In a similar vein, her ‘long-time’ friend added: ‘I was with her last month, and she was going on a public engagement. Harry and I were sitting with the dogs, and we were all chatty, and she was painting her nails… She’s very self-service.’

Recalling boxes she saw lining the couple’s Kensington Palace cottage, the friend adds: ‘[Meghan] said, ‘They’re hand warmers. Every time it gets cold like this, I take them to the guard stations. The guards are standing at their posts, and I don’t want the guys to be cold.’ ‘

The same friend reportedly caused consternation in Royal circles by revealing in the next breath the Duchess writes her own speeches and ‘many of Harry’s’. She added: ‘They do it together.’

The article included private details of the couple’s life at Kensington Palace, where they were then living

Of the claim that the Duchess fires off 5am emails to staff, another friend told the magazine: ‘The email thing is such a weird slant on someone who is actually an incredibly organised, focused, hard-working person.’

Significantly, it was also this article that alerted the world to the existence of a letter written by Meghan to her father, Thomas Markle – the letter that is now at the centre of a legal dispute between the Duchess and The Mail on Sunday.

One friend is quoted in the People article as saying: ‘After the wedding she wrote him a letter. She’s like, ‘Dad, I’m so heartbroken. I love you. I have one father. Please stop victimising me through the media so we can repair our relationship.’ ‘

The friend adds: ‘He writes her a really long letter in return and he closes it by requesting a photo op with her. And she feels like, ‘That’s the opposite of what I’m saying. I’m telling you I don’t want to communicate through the media, and you’re asking me to communicate through the media. Did you hear anything I said?’ It’s almost like they’re ships passing.

Significantly, it was also this article that alerted the world to the existence of a letter written by Meghan to her father, Thomas Markle

BEFORE THE RIFT: Thomas with Meghan at an American football match in 2002

‘He knows how to get in touch with her. Her telephone number hasn’t changed. He’s never called; he’s never texted.’

One unforeseen consequence of the friend’s description of the letter from Meghan to her father was that it spurred Mr Markle to defend himself against what was clearly a very public admonishment. Some Royal observers have suggested that, had Palace courtiers been consulted about the article, not blindsided by it, they might well have anticipated his likely response.

As it was, the repercussions were devastating.

Mr Markle, now 75, had kept the letter, which he received the previous August, three months after his daughter’s wedding.

He had no intention of showing it to anyone. That, at least, was the position until he read the People article six months later. It left him ‘devastated’.

In the magazine, the five friends – who are said to ‘form a special sisterhood’ – portray Meghan and Harry as ‘very grounded’ (the couple are pictured on October 2 in Johannesburg)

Elsewhere in the magazine, the five friends – who are said to ‘form a special sisterhood’ – portray Meghan and Harry as ‘very grounded’. One said: ‘She has a firm understanding of the things she can and can’t control. And she tries not to put any effort into the things she can’t control.’

It was reported at the time that the Palace was informed by magazine staff about the article only minutes before publication.

The following day former Buckingham Palace press secretary Dickie Arbiter, who worked as a media manager for both Prince Charles and the late Diana, Princess of Wales, observed presciently: ‘Assuming – and as these sources are anonymous we don’t know for sure – that this was done with her agreement, it has opened a Pandora’s Box, in my opinion.

‘The issue with her father is an open wound and I’m not entirely sure it is the best idea to aggravate that.’