A former head of Scotland Yard’s Royal Protection Command has questioned the Metropolitan Police’s handling of historic allegations made against the Duchess of Sussex’s father, Thomas Markle, describing aspects of the situation as “bizarre to put it mildly.”
Dai Davies, the former Chief Superintendent who previously oversaw royal security for the Met Police, spoke out following reports surrounding a letter reportedly sent to Scotland Yard by Thomas Markle’s ex-wife, Roslyn Loveless. GB News understands the letter was sent anonymously, but multiple publications that claim to have seen the letter, including the BBC, have reported it was sent by Ms Loveless.
Speaking to GB News, Mr Davies questioned why protective security teams at Scotland Yard did not immediately cross-check the validity of the claims with American law enforcement authorities when the letter was supposedly received.
“From my perspective, why my former colleagues didn’t do what I would do… I would obviously have had a meeting with my senior team, and my position would be to get in touch with the authorities, either the FBI or in the States where this was alleged to have happened, to check out the validity of the person writing it, and as we now know, that is reported to be Thomas Markle’s ex-wife,” Mr Davies said.
“That’s the first thing you always do when you get a letter like this: see what evidence you can confirm before you take action, unless it’s so immediate.”
Addressing the timing of the events when the Duchess of Sussex was still a senior working member of the Royal Family, Mr Davies expressed surprise that royal private secretaries were seemingly not engaged with police over the matter.
He said: “I find that aspect a bit curious because this is broken into two areas now, hasn’t it? One, what is alleged to have been done in the past by Thomas Markle, and I repeat, alleged. And secondly, the Philippine factor: that he moved there a couple of years ago and took four alleged boxes full of stuff. It’s just bizarre, to put it mildly.”
The former protection chief explained that due to the seriousness of the situation, the matter should have been escalated to senior figures within the Royal Household and Scotland Yard leadership.
“Given the nature and the seriousness, I would have at least alerted Prince Charles because Harry and Meghan would come under his protection team, i.e., Prince Charles, as he was,” Mr Davies stated. “But I’d want to ensure that there is some credibility. And what I would do is obviously confer with him or her.
“Probably I would go up the food chain to my bosses, as I did with Diana when she went with Fayed. I went to the commissioner and said, ‘I think that’s a dreadful idea.’ So my experience was I’d pass it up my food chain, but there was a dialogue with the Prince’s private secretary, and he had a team. I think it would be sensible to inform him.
“I would also have an audit trail of my actions, and it’s always so important at my level that if you have a serious case, you have minutes of any discussion meeting that you have; it’s important if you’re challenged as to why you did X, Y, and Z.”
Mr Davies highlighted the difficulties in establishing what internal communications took place at the time, noting that Ms Loveless has since passed away.
LATEST ROYAL DEVELOPMENTS
- William’s Commonwealth stance ‘hasn’t changed’ as King faces delicate Caribbean tour
- William’s Duchy of Cornwall insists ‘every tenant is being supported’ amid backlash
- William declares Kevin Sinfield ‘should have been made a Sir years ago’
“Meghan was being protected by the Metropolitan Police. I don’t know what communication had gone on between – Roslyn Loveless is dead now, so we can’t ask her. But it was time-sensitive to actually find out the validity,” he said.
“I haven’t seen the letter. So there are questions to ask, aren’t there? I have to ask, as a former senior policeman and an investigator on global issues worldwide. I would have thought discretion was the best part of valour until you have validation on the allegations.”
Outline the investigative steps he believes should have been taken by law enforcement, Mr Davies said: “Check it out, FBI. Check it out, Scotland Yard. Then tell me it’s too dangerous because this could have been totally malicious.”
Commentating on the involvement of the police watchdog regarding the handling of the case, Mr Davies voiced scepticism over the length and nature of internal investigations.
“It’s the same hoo-ha and nonsense again. Scotland Yard has a global reputation, or did in my day,” Mr Davies said, adding: “It will take as long as possible – they always do.”
Thomas Markle Sr. has categorically denied any child sexual abuse image claims.
In an interview with the Mail on Sunday, Mr Markle Sr told the paper that when he was single he travelled to the Philippines at least twice and “slept with prostitutes” but insisted he has “never had sex with anyone under the age of 18”.
He said he would also welcome any forensic examination of his computer, telling the Mail on Sunday: “If there is anything bad on there, it was put there by someone else.”
The Metropolitan Police declined to comment when contacted by GB News, pointing to their statement issued on Saturday, which reads: “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.
“It was sent to the MPS Protection Command to raise concerns in relation to the security of the Duchess of Sussex.
“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.”
GB News has contacted the Duchess of Sussex for comment.
Our Standards:
The GB News Editorial Charter