Prince Harry appears to have been 'completely brainwashed' says Katie Nicholl

Netflix's series Harry & Meghan will be released later this week

Allegations against the Royal Family in the Netflix series Harry & Meghan are both damaging and “defamatory”, according to a leading royal commentator.

Katie Nicholl told GB News: “A lot is riding on this. We're coming hot off the heels of The Crown. Watching that trailer almost looks like you're watching a trailer for the next series of The Crown. There's something that smacks of parody about all of this.

“It's highly partisan. Okay, this may be their story. This may be their truth, but it may not be the real story or the truth.

Allegations against the Royal Family in the Netflix series Harry & Meghan are both damaging and “defamatory”, according to a leading royal commentator.
Allegations against the Royal Family in the Netflix series Harry & Meghan are both damaging and “defamatory”, according to a leading royal commentator.

“There are always two sides to a story. And my greatest fear in all of this is, is we will be saying once we've watched it where was the other line of questioning? Where was hauling them over the coals about this or this?”

She told Isabel Webster and Martin Daubney: “I was covering this story [Harry and Meghan's relationship] in great detail for the British media as well as for Vanity Fair, I never saw a calculated smear campaign against them.

“The British media were behind them from the outset...but it turned because other stories started coming out, stories by the way that a lot of their press had tried to stem and curb.

“I think this suggestion as well, of leaking stories and of planting stories is defamatory. Yes, it's damaging, it's not something that the Palace are going to take lying down.”

Ms Nicholl added: “I think the truth is there were probably tears on both sides. But again, there are two sides to every story and this is clearly very much through their lens. Are the Palace going to comment? Are they going to get engaged?

“I mean, I think let's see what they've got. If they've got texts, or emails or anything that categorically proves there was a briefing campaign against them, then we're in very, very different territory, but I think they'll try and ride it out without going there.”

“That juxtaposition of Diana…is clearly incendiary. It's clearly designed to pull in, I think, American audiences who still have a real love affair with Diana. But actually, it's just not the case.”

She told GB News: “When they got married, when they had Archie, there were no paparazzi pictures of them at all. The Queen gave them Frogmore Cottage, partly so that they could be on the Royal estate, so that they would be protected.

“I remember hearing about them going to the local pub once and having lunch and Archie was there…no pictures taken, nothing published by the British media, we were incredibly respectful of their privacy.

“Look back to the Duchess of Cambridge, then Kate Middleton, the treatment that she had. Yes, all right, there was some unacceptable levels of intrusion, and when that happened Prince William intervened and it stopped. To compare either of their treatments to what Diana went through is, in my opinion, it's just wrong.”

She joined Isabel Webster and Martin Daubney on Breakfast
She joined Isabel Webster and Martin Daubney on Breakfast

Asked if money was an overriding consideration for Harry and Meghan, she said: “I think money is a massive part of this. Clearly, this is all about making big bucks.

“They were paid a huge amount of money, so a docu-series about their philanthropic work was never going to cut it. But I do think that Harry and Megan are so in their own world, this whole narrative that they've built up of us against them.

“That's what happens when you're in your own microcosm, your own world, it’s all you see, you can't see any other perspective. It's like Harry's sort of just been completely brainwashed and this is his truth.

“I’m sure he and Megan believe everything that they're saying because they see it solely through their prism. What would be great to see is some more independent, less partisan voices in this.”