The comic potential of Adele guiding the cloven hoofed one round Malibu is too delicious. I wonder who they are going to suggest next as her latest bff? Julie Goodyear? Chrishelle from Selling Sunset? Nancy Pelosi (those two so deserve each other)?
Meantime to Aunty's proper role as legal soothsayer:
A significant deadline has passed in the soon to be landmark legal case of Kuntmer v Kuntmer (as someone memorably said about Christine Hamilton v Al Fayd: "What a pity they cant both lose") in that no Appeals or further Applications have been lodged (as far as I can tell) and its now settled into a very "simple" dispute:
Is that letter legally "Private" and was it deliberately misused by the mail OR had she (or others) made it public already; or did Daddy have the right to do so; and is there a legitimate public interest in its publication anyway?
Its legally and legally-politically a radioactively hot potato.
Under British Law there never was an automatic right of privacy. It was always seen as contrary to free speech etc. Then Lady Hale (I hate to piss on peoples cornflakes but she is no champion of the people but an over-promoted, self-regarding, grandstanding, intellectually shallow, and widely disliked ex Supreme Court Justice) invented one as the Tort (civil wrong) of Invasion fo Privacy which many sensible voices at the time said would lead to bad people hiding their misdeeds from scrutiny.
In her Judgement in "Jameel" of which we will be hearing much if it goes forward she distinguishes between "The public interest" and "Tittle tattle about the lives of footballers which is of interest to the public.." Sounds good but its dripping in snobbery, legally wrong in principle and a new Supreme Court purged of Euro Human Rights bollocks (which you may have noticed always seems to be of use to bad people and rich bad people) will be itching to overturn it.
So the fundamental law is unclear and if it goes forward it will of course be a humungous Legal Grand Opera with the 5 stooges having to be cross examined (there is simply no way to clear up if and why and what they disclosed it to People Magazine, without ALL of them appearing - imagine the expense and risk of that element alone); and a great deal of grubby undergarments being hung out by the no doubt cruelly well armed Associated who will have been mining a rich seam of filth. It doesnt really matter if its relevant and they can use it - but they will want Her Megisty to know they have it, for later....It will be spectacular. Probably in the long-run her only purchase on history.
It is impossible to exaggerate just how gloomy the advice is she will now have been receiving. In such circumstances, where, it might uncharitably be thought, the Lawyers have a nightmare client and they have fucked up, they will be just as concerned about being sacked and sued, as their no doubt over-arching priority of trying to win her case. So now we wait for the mandatory Settlement Negotiations. The next tactical game being played out almost certainly as we speak is whether these should take place before or after the expensive business of exchanging written evidence in the form of Witness Statements. The Mail will be saying Yes and she will be saying No.
Meantime the monthly Bills will be slowly climbing towards infinity and beyond; and Aunty's gagging for her Sunday Gin...we keep a godly house here.