Meghan’s real relationship with Charles laid bare: The rumor is true Uncategorized hanhchi — January 7, 2025 · 0 Comment Meghan’s real relationship with Charles laid bare – report (Image: (Image: Getty Images)) Fresh claims have been made about the real state of King Charles’s relationship with his daughter-in-law Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. The monarch once had a close bond with the former actressWhen Meghan Markle officially became the Duchess of Sussex, it was King Charles who played a major role in welcoming her into the Royal Family, walking her down the aisle on her wedding day.Meghan often spoke in glowing terms about her father-in-law, but a new report has claimed that their once-close relationship is an utterly different state today.A source claims that the pair have absolutely no contact now, and that a “sticking point” in Charles’s relationship with Meghan and his youngest son Prince Harry has been the Duke of Sussex’s decision to launch legal action against the UK Government for removing his official police security, which is taxpayer funded. “Harry’s decision to sue the King’s government in the King’s courts is the sticking point, I am told,” wrote Kate Mansey for The Times. “Harry is challenging a decision by Ravec, the Royal and VIP Executive Committee, which decides what security is provided for the royal family and other VIPs. The royal household is represented on the committee and would have had a seat at the table when the decision was made to remove Harry’s automatic right to police protection in Britain.The expert also noted that “It places the King in a tricky position because Harry has been granted leave to appeal. Until the case is concluded, there is little Charles feels he can say to his son. As for Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, there is no communication with the King and Queen.”This is a far cry from the warm relationship Charles and Meghan once shared, which Harry detailed extensively in his bombshell memoir Spare. According to Harry, when Meghan and Charles first met they got on well, and his father was “impressed” by Meghan when they first met. “We talked about acting and the arts generally. What a struggle it could be to make your way in such a trade, Pa said. He had a lot of questions about Meg’s career, and he looked impressed by the way she answered. Her confidence, her intelligence, I thought, caught him unawares.“And then our time was up. Pa and Camilla had another engagement. Royal life. Heavily regimented, overscheduled, so forth. I made a note to explain all this later to Meg. We all stood. Meg leaned towards Pa. I flinched; like Willy, Pa wasn’t a hugger. Thankfully, she gave him a standard British cheek-to-cheek, which he actually seemed to enjoy. I walked Meg out of Clarence House, into those lush, fragrant gardens, feeling exultant. Well, that’s that then, I thought. Welcome to the family.”And according to the book, after Harry and his wife took a trip to Scotland to spend time with his father shortly after their 2018 wedding in Windsor, the pair grew even closer.“The bond between Meg and Pa, always strong, grew even stronger,” Harry wrote, explaining that when Charles found out Meghan shared a birthday with the late Queen Mother – with whom Charles was exceptionally close, he became “buoyant”. “At the memory of Gan-Gan, and the link between her and my bride, he suddenly became buoyant, telling stories I’d never heard, essentially performing, showing off for Meg,” Harry wrote.In 2023, it was reported that Meghan had written letters to Charles expressing concern over “unconscious bias” in the Royal Family after her and Harry’s explosive sit down with Oprah Winfrey in 2021. Meghan was, according to reports, not satisfied with the responses she received from Charles in that correspondence, and The Telegraph claimed this factored into her decision not to attend his coronation.However, representatives for Meghan denied that this correspondence was the reason behind her not attending this event, saying: “The Duchess of Sussex is going about her life in the present, not thinking about correspondence from two years ago related to conversations from four years ago. Any suggestion otherwise is false and frankly ridiculous.”
