The ‘Five Friends’ face a public guessing game over their identities
IN FEBRUARY 2019, five “best friends” of the Duchess of Sussex “broke their silence” to an American celebrity magazine, promising to reveal the truth about “the woman they know and love”.
Yesterday, those loyal confidantes found themselves at the centre of a court battle, as the Duchess fought to prevent them being named in a tabloid newspaper.
Their descriptions, in legal papers from the Duchess’s own team, confirms they are all young mothers with small children, inadvertently allowing what lawyers call the public “guessing game” as to their identities to move one step further.
The “Five Friends”, as they are now described in official court papers, gave their interviews anonymously, having reportedly been frustrated by what they had seen as unfair coverage of the Duchess at the time.
People magazine, which ran a cover story sharing their perspectives, named them only as “Meghan’s inner circle – a long-time friend, a former costar, a friend from LA, a one-time colleague and a close confidante”.
The piece included specific details of their visits to Kensington Palace and anecdotes about their time together, making elements immediately identifiable to those involved including, in some cases, palace staff who would have been present.
The article was, at first glance, a love letter to the Duchess, detailing her kind nature, down-to-earth lifestyle and personal faith.
For royal-watchers, it was a clear sign of things to come: the Duchess’s side of the story that she herself could not tell.
Critically, it contained details of a hitherto unknown letter, the Duchess to her father.
Sent after the wedding, a source named as a “long-time friend” relayed how the Duchess told him: “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.” Friends claim that the long letter in reply had closed with a request for a photo opportunity. “He’s never called; he’s never texted,” said one.
The Duchess has since contested that description, insisting she knew nothing about the People interview ahead of time and had neither encouraged nor consented to the existence of the letter being shared.
Shortly afterwards, Thomas Markle, her father, provided the full letter to the Mail on Sunday, saying he was “devastated” by its contents, which he felt had been misrepresented.
The newspaper published extracts from the letter, which is at the centre of the High Court battle.
The Duchess of Sussex is now seeking an injunction to prevent the publication of the names of the “Five Friends”, arguing that they are private and the friends spoke to People magazine on the condition of anonymity.
They are named in public court papers only as A, B, C, D and E, with A – described as the “long-time friend” – being the one to detail the letter to People magazine.
A and C knew of the letter’s existence, the Duchess has admitted. The latest legal submissions from Schillings, the consultants acting on behalf of the Duchess, say the case has already inspired a “guessing game” in the media and social media as to their identities, with known friends of the Duchess named as potential candidates.
Papers now give away further about the lives of the “Five Friends”, confirming all are young mothers with small children, allowing curious members of the public to go one step further in the speculation.
In the People interview, the “longtime friend” said she had been with the Duchess “last month” – January 2019 – ahead of a public engagement. The “former co-star” said of a visit to Kensington Palace: “I came by there one day, and she had ordered an incredible ice cream and sorbet stand for the office. They were remarking how it was the ‘best day of work ever’.”
The “friend from LA” stayed with the Duchess while Prince Harry was out of town, she said, and enjoyed making home-cooked meals and taking muddy dog walks.
The “former colleague” mentioned how the Duchess had rallied to support her as her son was undergoing a medical diagnosis, saying they still spoke daily.
And the “close confidante” disclosed: “We’ve all been to their cottage [then at Kensington Palace].”
Addressing rumours around the wedding, she said: “She didn’t throw a fit about a tiara or ask for fragrance to be sprayed in the church.”
‘The friend from LA stayed with the Duchess, enjoying home-cooked meals and taking muddy dog walks’
‘The former colleague said how the Duchess rallied to support her as her son was having a medical diagnosis’