Meghan Markle takes legal action to prevent Prince Harry from being impeached | Royal | News

Meghan Markle is working to thwart attempts to impeach Prince Harry, according to reports. The Duchess of Sussex responds to legal action from her half sister.

Samantha Markle is suing Meghan for her interview with American television host Oprah Winfrey.

The royal and her husband had an extensive discussion with Mrs Winfrey early last year.

Obviously, Samantha is also suing Meghan for material published in the “Finding Freedom” biography.

Newsweek reports that her lawyers want to impeach Meghan’s father, Thomas, between October 5 and 21.

They would also be looking for testimonials from Prince Harry and Oprah.

The Duchess’s legal team has hit back, arguing that she failed to make the statements in the biography, which was written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand.

They added that Meghan’s comments about her relationship with Samantha in the now-famous Oprah interview were “unworkable opinions that are also largely true.”

Her attorneys filed a file that read: “A statement from Mr. Markle at this time, along with other discoveries, would be an unnecessary spectacle and a waste of the parties’ time, money and resources.

READ MORE: Picardo calls for self-determination in Gibraltar

It added that “the list of potential witnesses is significantly longer than in the Prince Andrew sexual abuse lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre”.

The Duke of York has vehemently and vehemently denied the allegations leveled against him by his US prosecutor.

The paper quoted further submission by Meghan’s legal team about the long list of those Samantha’s legal team would like to depose.

It read: “Besides the parties, they [Samantha] identified as many as 19 non-partisan witnesses, including Prince Harry, Meghan’s mother, Oprah Winfrey, and several journalists/media personalities living in the UK, including Scobie and Durand, the authors of Finding Freedom.”

The Duchess’s legal team has also asked the judge to halt the process of collecting and releasing evidence known as discovery.

They argue that this should be passed until after a ruling on whether the legal action should be thrown out altogether.