The Sussexes’ Docuseries: A Closer Look at the Controversies

In the latest episode of the Sussexes docuseries, “Harry and Meghan,” a keen observer from The Royal Grift has raised eyebrows over several curious editing choices.

The second episode kicks off with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in a car, but it seems like Harry might have been reading from a script.

This revelation hints at a carefully orchestrated narrative that some viewers find hard to swallow.

What caught the observer's attention was not just the scripted feel but also the glaring editing flaws.

Clips showed Meghan speaking without any movement of her lips, creating an odd disconnect for the audience.

At one point, Harry's dialogue abruptly cuts off, leaving viewers wondering if there was more to be said.

It begs the question: doesn't the production team review their footage before releasing it?

Such inconsistencies raise doubts about the professionalism behind the scenes.

Adding to the intrigue, there are whispers that filmmaker Liz Garbus may have been tailing the couple in another vehicle.

This could explain the seemingly staged moments that have surfaced throughout the series.

According to Petronella Wyatt, a well-connected journalist for The Sun, Meghan has specific filming preferences.

She reportedly insists on being captured in a three-quarter profile, and she doesn't shy away from expressing her displeasure if she feels the camera isn't doing her justice.

One particularly revealing moment involved Meghan wrapped in a towel, which was filmed by her own crew.

Wyatt notes that Meghan spent three whole days reviewing this footage before giving it the green light for use.

While Wyatt stops short of directly accusing Meghan of staging scenes, the implication is hard to ignore.

If Meghan is meticulously curating what makes the final cut, it raises questions about authenticity.

As the series unfolds, claims made in the earlier episodes are coming under scrutiny.

Critics have pointed out numerous inconsistencies in the couple's narratives, especially concerning how they met and their engagement story.

Former royal courtiers have openly dismissed some of the Sussexes' assertions as outright fabrications, further complicating the public's perception of their journey.

One of the most controversial claims involves Harry's portrayal of his experiences with the paparazzi.

In the docuseries, he likens his encounters with photographers to a predator-prey scenario, painting a picture of relentless harassment.

However, the reality appears to be quite different.

Reports suggest that Harry has, on occasion, posed for photos to promote his friends' nightclub ventures.

A source close to the situation revealed that Harry willingly exited the nightclub through the main entrance to be photographed.

This move was strategically planned to boost the club's visibility, thanks to his friend Guy Pelly, who co-owned the venue.

Harry's appearances at the club were frequent, and his presence significantly elevated its profile.

The documentary also features claims about Meghan being pursued by the press during her time filming “Suits.”

Silvertree, a producer on the show, asserts that paparazzi would invade her trailer space and hide with long lenses.

However, the image used to illustrate this claim has come under fire.

It turns out that the photograph depicted is a stock image available for purchase online, raising further questions about the authenticity of the documentary's claims.

This pattern of misleading imagery and questionable narratives continues to unfold as the series progresses.

With each episode, viewers are left to sift through the layers of potential embellishments and staged moments.

The discrepancies between the Sussexes' accounts and the realities reported by insiders create a complex web of intrigue that keeps audiences engaged.