Met Police Says Letter Was Not Shared With Other Agencies
Constantvpn.com – The Met Police says letter containing allegations linked to Thomas Markle was received in January 2019 and reviewed by its Protection Command. The correspondence was passed to the office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for awareness, but the force says it was not shared with other law-enforcement agencies.
Scotland Yard is now reviewing the decisions made at the time. It is also considering whether the matter should be referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, which oversees complaints and conduct issues involving police in England and Wales.
“Following a thorough review of Met Police systems and records, we have confirmed that in January 2019, we received a letter containing a number of claims about alleged offending outside the United Kingdom.”
What the police review involves
According to the Metropolitan Police, the letter was sent to its specialist Protection Command because it raised issues connected with the Duchess of Sussex’s security. Officers assessed the information and decided that the Duke and Duchess’s office should be informed.
“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 Met Police says letter review will examine whether the information was handled appropriately and whether further scrutiny is necessary. The claims related to alleged conduct outside the UK.
Meghan’s response and the Philippines inquiry
Meghan said she became aware of “disturbing allegations” involving her estranged father in 2018. Her spokesperson said any difference between that timing and the force receiving the letter in January 2019 could be explained by the passage of time.
She said she had been told the allegations were under investigation and hoped the situation would help people understand her distance from her father and why he has not had contact with her children.
Thomas Markle, 82, has denied possessing child sexual abuse images. No criminal wrongdoing has been established against him through the information made public so far, and an investigation does not amount to proof of guilt.
Authorities in the Philippines have confirmed they are investigating allegations involving Mr Markle. The inquiry is being handled by a task force focused on anti-human trafficking and child sexual exploitation.
Interior Minister Jonvic Remulla said national police had secured Mr Markle’s computer and would conduct a digital forensic examination. His half-brother, Thomas Markle Jr, said he found material at their father’s former home in the Philippines and contacted the FBI in July.
Family estrangement and ongoing questions
Mr Markle moved to the Philippines after suffering a series of strokes. He is understood to be in a rehabilitation centre in Florida, learning to walk again after a leg amputation in 2025.
Meghan is his only child with Doria Ragland. Their relationship became the focus of public attention before her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, when Mr Markle withdrew from attending, citing ill health. They later became estranged.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex stepped down as working members of the Royal Family and moved to the United States in 2020. They returned to the UK with their children this year, ending a six-year absence from the country as a family.
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the Met Police say about the letter?
The Met Police says letter was reviewed in January 2019, passed to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s office, and not shared with other law-enforcement agencies.
Is Thomas Markle facing a criminal conviction?
No conviction has been established through the public information available. He has denied the allegations, while authorities in the Philippines continue their investigation.
Why is the Metropolitan Police reviewing the case?
The force is examining its original handling of the letter and considering whether a referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct is appropriate.