The Metropolitan Police has confirmed that a letter containing claims of alleged offending by Thomas Markle Sr was passed to Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, in January 2019.
On Friday, October 23, the duchess released a statement claiming that she had been made aware of “troubling and disturbing allegations” made against her father in 2018. She said the allegations came to light in a letter that was sent to the Met Police and Royalty and Specialist Protection and subsequently shared with her.
Philippines investigation into Thomas Markle Sr
Authorities in the Philippines have confirmed that they are investigating allegations that Mr Markle Sr had a hoard of child sex abuse images. Nicholas Ty, undersecretary for the Philippines Department of Justice, told ITV News: “Our Anti-Trafficking and Online Sexual Abuse and Exploitation of Children taskforce in Cebu is currently investigating the matter.”
In an interview with the Daily Mail, Mr Markle Sr denied possessing child sex images, calling the accusations “sick lies” after Meghan’s half-brother, Thomas Markle Jr, alleged that he found a stash of inappropriate images at his former home in the Philippines.
Met Police statement on letter handling
On Saturday, Scotland Yard said that after a “thorough review of Met Police systems and records”, the force can confirm that it received a letter in January 2019 “containing a number of claims about alleged offending outside the United Kingdom”.
It said a decision was made to pass the letter onto the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “for their awareness”.
The Met Police said: “The letter was reviewed and a decision was made that it should be passed to the office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for their awareness. The details of the allegations in the letter were not shared with other law enforcement agencies.
“The MPS is reviewing the handling of this matter in 2019 and considering whether a referral to the IOPC is necessary to review our approach.”
Duchess's spokesperson on date discrepancy
A spokesperson for the duchess clarified that “any discrepancy” over the date of the letter was "an understandable consequence of that passage of time", according to the BBC.
