Meghan Markle will be getting married for the second time when she weds Prince Harry later this month. But a new tabloid cover story claims she has a â€śsecret first husband,â€ť to whom she was married before ex-husband Trevor Engelson. This is made-up and not true. Gossip Cop can help set the record straight.
The new cover of the National Enquirer dramatically announces, â€śFound! Man-Eater Meghanâ€™s Secret First Hubby!â€ť According to the accompanying article, Prince Harry has been â€śblindsided by claimsâ€ť that his future wife is â€śhiding a secret marriage.â€ť Itâ€™s specifically alleged that, prior to her nuptials with Engelson, Markle â€śwed for the first time after a two-year relationship, but the union was brief, and the couple swept the record clean with a hush-hush annulment.â€ť
This so-called â€śother husbandâ€ť was â€śkept hidden from friends, familyâ€ť and even Engelson, contends the gossip magazine, which claims the â€śbombshell revelation has rocked the royal family to its core.â€ť A supposed â€śpalace insiderâ€ť is quoted as saying Prince Harry is now in a â€śdifficult spotâ€ť and â€śmust be completely embarrassed by this.â€ť But the phrase â€śmust beâ€ť suggests this alleged â€śpalace insiderâ€ť doesnâ€™t actually have first-hand knowledge of the alleged situation.
Still, this questionable source opines, â€śHarry knew about Trevor, of course, and he accepted that. But two ex-husbands? Thatâ€™s a lot to process just days ahead of his own wedding.â€ť The suspicious â€śinsiderâ€ť makes another assumption when maintaining Prince Harry has â€śgot to be wondering what else sheâ€™s hiding.â€ť Of course, annulments are a matter of public record, but the outlet conveniently theorizes that any â€śevidenceâ€ť was â€ślikely scrubbed from official records by agents from Britainâ€™s spy agency MI5.â€ť
But the â€śright to be forgottenâ€ť order referenced by the publication applies to internet records for individuals who are residents of the European Union. The legislation is generally not recognized in the U.S., nor would it erase a paper trail of an annulment that took place in the United States, where Markle was born and raised. Itâ€™s also worth noting that the tabloid doesnâ€™t name the â€śother husbandâ€ť in question, and instead merely claims he went to Northwestern University, like Markle, and now resides on the East Coast. To illustrate its story, the magazine features a blurred-out image of what appears to be a male, but with the identity obscured, it could very well be a photo of a person with no connection to Markle whatsoever.
The outlet asserts that â€śproof of an alleged annulment would tarnish Meghanâ€™s entry into the royal family,â€ť yet provides no actual proof at all. The publication doesnâ€™t even stand by its own claims, as its goes on to speculate what could happen â€śif the explosive claim of Meghanâ€™s hidden husband is proved to be true.â€ť That is the tabloid admitting that it canâ€™t actually prove anything, but it threw out these allegations anyway. And even if â€śevidenceâ€ť of this supposed secret marriage was â€śscrubbedâ€ť by MI5 agents when Markle became engaged to Prince Harry, that doesnâ€™t explain why no reporter, biographer or investigator made such a discovery beforehand.
After all, it was first revealed in 2016 that Markle and Prince Harry were dating, leading virtually every aspect and detail of her life to be covered ad nauseam. In fact, Andrew Mortonâ€™s new book about Markle delves deeply into her marriage to Engelson, but makes no mention of an annulment before that. Morton is famously known as Princess Dianaâ€™s biographer. It should go without saying that he is generally viewed more credibly than untraceable and unidentifiable â€śpalace insidersâ€ť quoted by the Enquirer.
Additionally, Gossip Cop first busted the tabloid back in November for concocting a story about MI5 agents â€śerasingâ€ť Markleâ€™s â€świld past.â€ť More recently, in February, we called out the magazine for an untrue cover story about Markle having a secret â€śhook-upâ€ť with Matt Lauer. Curiously, it wasnâ€™t explained how the outlet learned about that alleged dalliance if British agents had â€śerasedâ€ť the actressâ€™ â€śpast.â€ť Whatâ€™s actually telling is that cover featured a â€śHarry Rocked On Wedding Eveâ€ť banner, similar to the one on the front of this new issue that declares, â€śHarry Rocked On Eve Of Wedding.â€ť
Itâ€™s apparent that the outlet just wanted another outrageous narrative to run as the royal wedding draws near, even if its one it canâ€™t substantiate and one that will have no real impact on the impending nuptials. The publication even acknowledges in its article, â€śHarryâ€™s not going to back out of marrying Meghan.â€ť In other words, this is much ado about nothing. But Kensington Palace is still taking these falsehoods seriously. The palace is on record calling these â€śsecret first hubbyâ€ť claims a â€śfabrication.â€ť