Lapsus Memoriae
Apparently, a false statement (a proven intentional one is perjury) submitted under oath can be classed as an unfortunate memory lapse...
What kind of mad circus do we find ourselves watching? A Court of Appeal has said;
"This was, at best, an unfortunate lapse of memory on her part..."
This was in reference to the numerous inaccurate, false, and misleading statements that TW had pleaded and submitted under oath in a court of law during the ANL case. How many sane people actually believe that is the case? Should the public accept this as a ‘truth’ because three judges deemed her to have had a lapse of memory for more than a year, where that memory was reignited when Jason Knauf delivered a series of emails and messages that she had sent him?
ANL appear to have come out as the heroes, despite technically losing the appeal due to the judges opting to decide the case with a narrow scope, for they have the support and backing of the People, it appears the government support their quest for the truth and the freedom to express those truths, and legions of lawyers have furrowed brows and have shared their concerns and the need to balance in the law. They have the support of the majority of the Nation, and that matters, for few support TW or her husband. While TW and her team may well be declaring a ‘victory’, was it a level playing field? Did the royal style, and ducal title help persuade the judges that she had been afflicted with a long bout of lapsus memoriae when it came to submitting witness statements? Were their silent whispers in their ears, with the subtle twisting of an arm here and there?
The question to ask in all honesty, is whether TW was worth ‘saving’ or in her mind ‘protecting’ in order to save the reputation of the Monarchy? While she married into the family, many do not consider her royal or worthy of saving, nor did she ever truly represent the Monarchy – therefore, saving her does not save the Monarchy. Some aides and Men in Grey, might be patting themselves on the back, thinking they have averted another Royal scandal, but in truth they have made it worse. During a period where the People are more informed, and have more options to speak their mind, they have failed yet again. What do the public think?
The judges were persuaded to deny the appeal to save the Monarchy from further damage.
That BP suppressed the evidence that they had all this time, and denied the defendant a fair trial.
That the RF, and multiple aides were aware of TW’s false statements (for 2 years) that were perjourous and failed to act in the public interest, and in the interests of justice.
That the judges were ‘got to’ and were biased, as they dismissed the false statements as ‘not relevent’ to the matter in hand.
Many believe that due to the title and style, TW had preferential treatment and that there is one rule for ‘them’ and another for everyone else.
How can the judges ignore the evidence that showed that TW’s case appeared to be based on embellished facts, and half truths, and consider a summary judgment was acceptable when there was more evidence to be submitted?
The judicial system is a farce and there is no real justice for the people, and that the system cannot be trusted to be fair or impartial.
The Men in Grey appear to have tunnel vision, for they might well believe that this saved the reputation of the Monarchy, but in fact what it has done is turned more people away from supporting the Royal Family. The People are not supporting TW, but are supporting and willing ANL to go to the Supreme Court, with people even offering to donate money to the cause. Even the government made a swift comment that alluded to the fact that the decison did not appear to follow the legislation in the manner that Parliament had intended, and restricted the laws that existed by making their own laws.
While the government cannot as yet do anything about removing the ducal title or the HRH style, they can do something about restrictive laws that may have been brought about through bias in the case at hand. From a public perspective, we see a judge allowing a summary judgment, despite the fact that not all the evidence in the case was presented, and then an appeal court that dismisses evidence that proves that the claimant had submitted under oath a series of false and inaccurate statements, which the summary judgment was based upon. Why didn’t anyone hand out free clown hats in the courts, for this is a freakish clown act?
I believe the judges would have ignored the ‘lapse of memory’ if they could, but the entire world knows that TW had fibbed, but the court has done nothing about it, yet they had to address it somehow. What kind of message does that send to the public? That you can claim you forgot that you made numerous inaccurate and false statements and not get punished, and still win your case? The judges couldn’t ignore it, due to the media coverage and TW’s grovelling apology, no doubt written by her legal team. However, the world cannot and will not ignore it, just because three judges wish to.
The delayed evidence that Knauf delivered does serve a purpose, and that is to throw the public a bag of bones for them to pick at. Everyone knows that BP and KP gave Knauf the green light, but they are 2 years too late, and have allowed damage to be done over the years. Only a full disclosure can save the Monarchy now, rather than throwing piecemeal bones, but what is it they are afraid of? They have already lost the respect and loyalty of the masses, and these little steps to try to amend things simply isn’t enough. The People support ANL in this matter, for at least they are trying to tell the truth. When will the Men in Grey and the RF realize that without the support of the People, they have nothing. The evidence presented confirms some rumours as facts, but also proffers more questions that the public should be asking…
The email time stamped 6.14 a.m. confirms the rumours that TW would email staff early in the morning, with non-urgent matters.
Knauf stated that the book ‘Finding Freedom’ was to be published around (April-May 2019) the time of the birth of the child known as ‘Archie’, and appeared to have been timed for that reason. The book was not published though until 15 months later in August 2020. What was the delay? Is it because it coincided with the ANL case that had just begun in February 2019, and the existence of the book would not have helped the case that TW expected to have been wrapped up with an out-of-court settlement? Why wait until August 2020 – did TW expect the case to have ended by then, as it should have done had it not been for the amended and Re-Amended statements from requests for further information.
As Samantha Cohen was copied into the emails (2018) regarding the Sussexes assisting on FF, we must assume that Cohen had informed other members of the RF and BP of this as they are her ultimate boss. Therefore, it is highly likely that numerous parties were aware of the Sussexes actions, and that all these parties were aware of the false statements made under oath in 2020, but did nothing, thus enabled the lie.
We know that Jason Knauf provided input for the letter in the form of topics that would appeal to a public audience, therefore, he was aware that the letter was being written with the express purpose of it being made public by whatever means.
The exchanges indicate that both Harry and TW had lied when they denied they had anything to do with FF, where the emails prove that they were aware of the book and were eager to assist since 2018.
TW was keen to play the victim, claiming her mother was being harassed by the paparazzi, but images of her mother are not profitable, and no one was interested in her. Were they hired via dial-a-pap, via her PR agent for effect as she has done before, and was it part of the victim plan?
While the Court of Appeal may have dismissed Knauf’s evidence, it has put certain elements into the public domain, mainly to clarify that some of the alleged rumours and speculation are actually verified truths. It also has proven that Harry and TW have misled the public (if not the thre judges in the Court of Appeal) for a sustained period of time, and if TW had submitted a number of inaccurate statements to the court due to her lapse of memory, then we should consider all of her statements as inaccurate, including her claim that she didn’t know her friends were going to speak to People magazine, and that she had no idea of the article or the content. Few believed it then, and the masses don’t believe it now – however, the communications to prove that she was not a party to the People article were not handed over (or ANL would have used them) due to a sudden application for a stay, and a summary judgment.
The truth is a single version of a story, and when a story chops and changes, doubt arises as to the credibilty of a witness. TW and Harry have lost any credibility they had left, for who wishes to be associated with those who consistently lie in order to support a personal agenda? A memory lapse doesn’t change elements of a story, but omits them, so how many holes were there in the amended and Re-Amended statements? When something smells rotten, then it usually is. Why is TW afraid of a trial if she and her witnesses have nothing to hide? Doesn’t the defendant have the right to cross-examine the witnesses, in light of the fact that more than one statement has been found to have been false and inaccurate? Isn’t that a violation of their basic due process rights, for as it stands, false and inaccurate statements form part of a summary judgment in a court of law that remained unchallenged.
At times, truth and justice takes time and it is wholly unjust to lose the right to a fair trial as is the case here. The People want to see justice, and so be it if this must go to the Supreme Court, but the BP aides, the Men in Grey, and the Royal Family should know that the masses do not support them, but ANL in this matter.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Sussex-v-Associated-News-judgment-021221.pdf