In a shocking legal twist, Samantha Markle has reportedly filed new evidence in her ongoing defamation case against Meghan Markle, accusing the Duchess of Sussex of actively trying to “erase” their father, Thomas Markle, from her life — and from the public narrative altogether.
According to documents leaked from inside the Florida courtroom, Samantha claims Meghan not only misrepresented her childhood in interviews and media appearances, but also allegedly engaged in a long-term effort to rewrite her family history, particularly downplaying — or outright denying — the role her father played in her upbringing.
“She Tried to Erase Dad”
At the center of this legal escalation is a new batch of emails, private texts, and media transcripts submitted by Samantha’s legal team. These reportedly include correspondence in which Meghan allegedly instructed staff or media producers to “minimize references to Thomas Markle” in published materials and documentary content.
Samantha’s legal filing reads, in part:
“The Defendant has repeatedly and deliberately painted a false picture of her upbringing, including the suggestion that her father was absent or unworthy of mention. This is not only untrue — it’s defamatory.”
The documents also reference Meghan’s 2021 Oprah interview, where she described herself as being raised “as an only child.” Samantha says that line was part of a larger pattern of “erasure and emotional damage” aimed at silencing their shared family ties.
Meghan’s Camp: “A Desperate Attempt”
Sources close to Meghan have dismissed the new filings as “a desperate and vindictive attempt” by Samantha to remain in the spotlight. A spokesperson for the Sussexes reportedly called the claims “baseless, hurtful, and designed to distort Meghan’s truth.”
“This is not about truth — it’s about attention,” said one anonymous source close to the Duchess. “Meghan has been transparent about her upbringing from her perspective, and there’s no legal ground here.”
Still, legal experts say the new evidence could complicate Meghan’s defense, which hinges on the argument that her statements were protected personal opinions. If Samantha can prove a deliberate pattern of misinformation or image curation with the intent to harm, it may push the lawsuit closer to trial.