Omid Scobie takes aim at ‘cold’ Kate in first bombshells from new book as it’s released in Australia: Biographer claims Princess ‘ignored Meghan’s cries for help and ‘jokingly shivered’ at the mention of her sister-in-law’s name

Omid Scobie has launched an astonishing and cruel attack on the Princess of Wales, branding her ‘cold’ and lambasting her for ‘advocating for mental health causes’ while ignoring Meghan’s cries for help’.

Harry and Meghan’s ‘cheerleader-in-chief’ took aim at The Princess of Wales in his new book Endgame, which has been published in Australia, claiming she ‘shivers’ whenever Meghan’s name is brought up and hasn’t spoken to her since 2019. 

He claims the Princess of Wales has never had interest in being friends with her sister-in-law and branded her a ‘Stepford-like royal wife’ and and the monarchy’s ‘last shiny thing for many years to come’.

In a scathing chapter dedicated to the future Queen, Scobie says the Princess of Wales earned the nickname  ‘Katie Keen’ and claimed the late Queen liked her because she was ‘coachable’ unlike the ‘strong-minded’ Princess Diana. 

He claims her workload is lower than other senior members of The Firm – which he says makes her ‘technically a part time working royal’.

Kate started carrying out official royal engagements in 2011, the year she married Prince William. 

Naturally she started off small with just 34 engagements after the wedding in April, but in her second year she made a huge jump to 111 – more, in fact, than her husband who did 88 that year.

In 2013, 2015 and 2018, the number of engagements naturally took a dip while she was on maternity leave, but she’s added more and more engagements every year since with a total of 138 last year.

Scobie, who wrote also wrote Harry and Meghan’s hagiography Finding Freedom,  added that Kate isn’t known for ‘leadership and outgoing nature’ like ‘Meghan’, who was ‘another shimmering ornament in the royal family tree’ before she stepped down.

This, according to Scobie’s recollection, meant coverage of Meghan’s engagements during her short time as a working royal, were ‘far less about fashion choices and more about her work or her role in the Firm’.

Despite thinly-veiled attacks on Kate, Scobie said that Meghan was the ‘star of the show’ and ‘the new Diana’ after marrying Prince Harry.

He believes that Harry and Meghan made the ‘Cambridges look a little dull’ as they’d shown the world ‘how to be modern royal’ during their short time as working royals.

Because Meghan ‘got things done fast’ William and Kate ‘took note and altered course’ meaning Kate was doing less ‘learning’ and more ‘doing’.

He added that despite Meghan and Kate having ‘nothing in common’ they ‘could have made things work in those early days if there was peace between the warring Windsor siblings’.

Scobie adds that Meghan found her time in the firm ‘lonely and isolated’ and that she hoped Kate would be ‘someone she could turn to for an encouraging word, including her emotional difficulties during her pregnancy as ‘were once both outsiders, middle-class women brought into the House of Windsor for unimaginably different lives’.

Kate, Scobie claims, was ‘uninterested in forming this kind of bond’ as ‘she can be cold if she doesn’t like someone,’ and ‘wasn’t a fan of Meghan’.

Scobie claims another source told him Kate ‘spent more time talking about Meghan than to her’ despite multiple photos of the sisters-in-law together during Meghan’s time as a working royal. 

‘This is a side of Kate that rarely gets written about. Advocating for mental health causes—the mental health of mothers, for that matter—but ignoring her own sister-in-law’s cries for help seemed out of character for someone the public knew as sweet and easy to get along with,’ Scobie writes in one of many acid-penned jabs.

He added that Kate ‘watched on in silence’ as stories were published about Meghan making her cry, and that she now ‘shivers’ when her name is brought up.

Scobie adds that ‘bar a few pleasantries’ Meghan and Kate have not spoken since 2019 and the Princess of Wales ‘looks back in fondness’ with the relationship she once had with Prince Harry.

Scobie also claims that Megxit saw the birth of ‘Kate 2.0’ where she became more approachable and appeared of the Happy Baby, Happy Mum podcast.

Royal author Robert Jobson, branded Scobie ‘disgraceful’ for his attack on Kate.

Speaking to FEMAIL he said: ‘I know Omid Scobie personally..Our paths have crossed on TV punditry about the royals for a US network. He is sharp and smart and knows how to sell a book or two.

‘His last book Finding Freedom, trashing the royals while, claiming it spoke for Harry and Meg sold bucket loads.

‘I admire his gumption, but his latest broadside attack on The Princess of Wales is unwarranted – and worse than unfair.

‘It is a complete character assassination of a woman who has done nothing but try to serve her queen and now her King and country. And she’s done it very well.

‘The Princess has devoted herself to duty, to looking after her husband and looking after her young family. She should be looked up to, not denigrated.

‘Now we have this jumped-up, alleged insider hurling outrageous insults, describing her, for example, as some sort of grinning puppet.

‘Why would Scobie come up with this stuff? Is it to squeeze up to Harry and Meghan?

‘I know Harry and he’s not a mean guy – and he’s not a traitor, by the way – and probably won’t agree with this. His sister-in-law is a really nice woman and he knows it.

‘She was his friend. She looked after him and he looked up to her. 

‘The only winner in all this is Omid Scobie sitting at home in Canary Wharf and waiting to bank the cheque. Disgraceful.’

Royal expert Richard Fitzwiliam added that ‘Scobie was always likely to aim for sensation;

‘One sure way of getting headlines is to aim a few blows at the Princess of Wales. It is important to understand Scobie’s attitude to the institution of monarchy, which he claims faces a crisis that may mean extinction or, at best, irrelevance. 

 ‘He is, or at least, was, known as the unofficial spokesperson for the Sussexes. The review in the New York Times of Endgame, which is published tomorrow, was far from flattering. 

‘Scobie’s attack on Catherine’s workload shows how little he understands about what the Waleses are trying to do, as they balance their royal commitments and family life so well. 

‘He moans that Catherine ‘has no plan to increase her workload for 10-15 years’ or until her children reach adulthood. The Palace are currently reviewing royal patronages. Unlike the late Queen, Prince Philip and Charles when Prince of Wales who were attached to numerous institutions, the Waleses have selected a few and do a great deal for those they have chosen. Catherine’s focus is on early childhood. 

‘They are both enormously popular at home and abroad, with levels of support the Sussexes would envy! Scobie believes that the late Queen found Catherine “coachable” in contrast to Diana and he apparently regards Meghan as ‘ the new Diana’.

‘His prose is execrable, what”coachable”presumably means is that she was prepared, together with William, to dedicate herself to being the monarchy’s future. What better example to learn from than Queen Elizabeth who is iconic. 

‘Diana as we know was a genius at reaching out to those in need but also wilful. 

‘Perhaps Omid Scobie will provide examples in the book where Meghan actually does something worthwhile, other than talking about doing so and trashing the royal family. 

Scobie also claims that Kate ‘does not plan to increase her workload for 10-15 years’, or until her children reach adulthood, and added that she earned the nickname ‘Katie Keen’, because palace press release mitigate her doing less by saying she is ‘keen to learn’.

In a clear swipe, Scobie writes Kate’s lifestyle is something most parents could ‘only dream of’ and that Palace aides were afraid to push her do to anything that ‘makes her uncomfortable’ before the Queen died.

He claims that the future queen has been through five different private secretaries in six years, because they all found the role ‘uninspiring and frustrating’.

‘The late Queen, too, would take off blocks of time throughout the year to recharge, but she was also known to carry out at least three hundred engagements annually. 

‘Sources said Kate remains ‘laser focused’ on her duty to the family first, and then the Crown,’ he claims. 

 

Scobie added that Kate also ‘often stumbles on her words’ when speaking publicly and that she ‘didn’t want to make’ her widely praised Blue Peter performance in June 2019. 

Describing it as a ‘low-pressure, small-stakes’ appearance, Scobie says Kate was ‘a bag of nerves’ and ‘well out of her comfort zone’ before the taping’, which was suggested by then press secretary Christian Jones. 

He claims a Kensington Palace source said she ‘had never been pushed’ until that point as she was ‘naturally timid’.

‘Where other senior royals are out and about several times a week, meeting people across the length and breadth of the country, Kate has long maintained a smaller work schedule that helped her check off the required royal boxes while saving time for her roles as a mother and a wife,’ he writes.

Scobie adds that William manage to circumvent Kate’s lower workload by allowing her role to produce an heir, and spares, first.

He adds that Palace gatekeepers are ‘vigilant’ of Kate, never pushing her too hard ‘as the road to Queendom is a marathon, not a sprint’.

Prince William does not think his father is a competent leader, Omid Scobie claims in bombshell new book, and was baffled that King ‘lay awake many nights worrying about Prince Andrew’  

Prince William ‘doesn’t think King Charles is a competent leader’ and was baffled that the King ‘lay awake any nights worrying about Prince Andrew’, Omid Scobie has claimed in his bombshell book End Game.

The book, which hits shelves in the UK tomorrow, delves into the Royal Family’s handling of Prince Andrew’s involvement with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. 

Before Prince Andrew was stripped of his military affiliations and patronages in January 2022, the author says King Charles and Prince William grappled with the best course of action.

A source close to King Charles said: ‘You’d find it hard to believe but [Charles lay] awake many nights worrying about [Andrew].’

According to the author, Prince William was ‘baffled’ by why his father was agonising over the decision – and wanted him to take decisive action. 

A source said: ‘William [doesn’t’] think his father is competent enough, quite frankly.

‘Though they share similar passions and interests, their style of leadership is completely different’. 

Scobie claims Prince William felt the Queen would be ‘soft’ on Prince Andrew unless he voiced his concerns directly to her.

The author says a family friend told him that Andrew was the ‘one who would make [the Queen] laugh, keep her company, and because he was always a little bit lost, she coddled him’. 

The author claims that Prince William put the plan to oust Prince Andrew into action with his private secretary as the late Queen and the then Prince Charles were ‘not ready’ to start the process themselves.

As Prince Philip was no longer there to ‘take charge’, Prince William consulted his team about ‘the Andrew problem’ and then set up a meeting with his grandmother and her private secretary in her residential quarters at Windsor.

After allegedly speaking with Prince William for over an hour, the Queen then phoned Charles in Scotland to tell him that they needed to strip Andrew of his titles and duties.

The author claims it was a’ genuinely sad’ moment for the Queen and a ‘gut punch’ for the family following Prince Philip’s death. 

Prince Andrew resigned from public duties in May 2020 before he was then stripped of his military titles and patronages by the Queen in 2022. 

Elsewhere in the book, Scobie claims William admired the Queen’s political neutrality and wants to mirror her reign more than Charles’.

What’s more, a source close to the Prince of Wales claims he sees Charles as a ‘transitional’ King – who will ‘pave the way’ for his reign.

Princess Michael of Kent, 78, blasted Meghan Markle for making ‘it all about race because that’s all everyone does these days’, Omid Scobie claims in his bombshell new book

Omid Scobie has claimed Princess Michael of Kent said the Duchess of Sussex has ‘made it all about race because that’s all everyone does these days.’

Writing in his new book Endgame, which has been published in Australia, Harry and Meghan’s ‘cheerleader-in-chief’ wrote, seemingly quoting the royal: ‘”Well… we could already guess what someone like her would be like. I saw it coming from miles away.” 

‘At a March 2021 meeting in her Kensington Palace apartment, Princess Michael of Kent – wife of the [late] Queen’s first cousin Prince Michael of Kent – couldn’t stop herself from indulging in gossip with an aide about Meghan. 

‘Princess Michael has never been much of a fan of Prince Harry‘s wife,’ the author added, before claiming the 78-year-old royal said: ‘”Meghan’s made it all about race because that’s all everyone does these days.”‘

The comments were said to have been shared after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview.

Meghan had alleged in the TV special that an unnamed member of the Royal Family spoke about ‘how dark his (Archie’s) skin might be when he’s born’. 

But it is now being claimed that a second member of the extended Royal Household – who may not be a member of the Royal Family itself – also made similar comments. 

The two people are not named in Endgame, which is subtitled ‘Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy’s Fight for Survival’. 

But Mr Scobie today claimed letters between King Charles III and Meghan reveal the names of two people who allegedly commented on Archie’s skin colour.

The royal author, whose book comes out at midnight tonight in Britain, said he could not reveal the identities of the two people for fear of legal reprisals in the UK.

But he said letters were exchanged between Charles and Meghan following the allegation in the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah. 

In an interview with ABC’s Good Morning America broadcast today, Mr Scobie was asked whether he knew who made the comments about Archie’s skin colour.

He said: ‘I do know who made the comments about Archie’s skin colour. The names were mentioned in letters between Meghan and Charles that were exchanged some time after the Oprah interview.

‘We know from sources that Charles was horrified that that’s how Meghan felt. Those conversations were, and that he wanted to, sort of as a representative for the family, have that conversation with her.

‘And it is why I personally think they have been able to move forward with some kind of line of communication afterwards. Though they may not see eye to eye on it.’

Mr Scobie’s claims threaten to reignite the ‘royal racist’ row that came about after Harry and Meghan’s interview.

Meanwhile, Princess Michael of Kent came under fire when she wore a controversial ‘blackamoor’ brooch to the Queen’s Christmas lunch in 2017, which was the first attended by Meghan. Some commentators claimed the piece was ‘racist’.

Princess Michael publicly apologised at the time and the palace released a statement saying she ‘is very sorry and distressed that it has caused offence’.

The royal could clearly be seen wearing the jewellery on her coat as she drove through the Buckingham Palace gates days before Christmas. 

She was not sat at the same table as Meghan but would have been introduced to her at the intimate, private gathering.

Blackamoor are a genre of figurines, small sculptures or jewellery which depict largely men, but sometimes women, with black skin usually from the 18th century. Many will be worth £10,000 or more.

Omid Scobie accuses Prince Edward and Sophie of ‘a royal screw up’ – and claims their remarks in the wake of Harry and Meghan’s Oprah interview made them seem ‘casually bigoted’

Omid Scobie has called Prince Edward and his wife Sophie, the Duchess of Edinburgh‘s ‘Oprah gaffe’ a royal ‘screw up’. 

During a June 2021 interview with the Telegraph, just days after Meghan and Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, Prince Edward and his wife the Countess of Wessex shared a laugh over Harry and Meghan’s controversial Oprah interview.

Speaking in their first major interview together since they married in 1999, the royal couple jokingly asked ‘Oprah who?’ and ‘what interview?’ when quizzed on whether they watched Harry and Meghan’s bombshell sit down with the US chat show host. ‘You know, if you’re not into chat shows, there’s no reason why you should know who she is. Certainly not this this country, anyway,’ Sophie said. 

But Omid has claimed that ‘the comments about the world’s most successful black woman and one of the biggest faces in entertainment made them seem stuffy or tin-eared at best, and casually bigoted at worst.’ 

‘Sophie’s Oprah gaffe is yet another page to add to the history of recent screw ups,’ Scobie said. 

For Scobie, Sophie and Edward’s apparent ignorance could be used as evidence that the monarchy is an ‘intolerant organization steeped in bigotry and privilege’. 

Scobie further claimed that Sophie ‘noticeably’ went out of her way to ignore Meghan Markle outside Westminster Abbey at the late Queen’s state funeral. 

According to Scobie, it wasn’t just the Duchess of Edinburgh who ignored Meghan, but Queen Camilla and Kate Middleton too. 

The Duchess of Sussex received ‘snubs and brush-offs’ and was victim to ‘the same old power trips’ during their stay, the author claims. 

The author further claimed that the media often fail to acknowledge Sophie and Edward to a desirable degree, even during their trip to the Cayman Islands in February 2023. 

According to Scobie, their excursion failed to reach western press, and instead only featured in the Cayman Compass and Cayman News Service. 

Scobie recalled a conversation with a ‘top Fleet Street Editor’ about Sophie and Edward who apparently claimed: ‘I’d have more luck putting my mum on the front page.’ 

The author further made a series of shocking claims regarding Sophie and Edward’s March 2022 trip to Antigua- where they supposedly ‘smiled’ and ‘waved’ to audiences ‘demanding apologies and reparatory justice’ for Britain’s colonization of the Caribbean.

According to the author, the public were, instead, greeted by a ‘disinterested’ Edward.  

Furthermore, the author additionally claimed that Edward went on to offend Antigua’s prime minister, Gaston Browne. 

Browne supposedly asked Edward to bring about ‘open discussions’ on the topic of colonization, to which he allegedly responded: ‘I wasn’t keeping notes’. 

The late Queen had ‘a slight lack of faith’ in Charles to take over The Firm and hired ex-MI5 boss to be her ‘new CEO’ when she knew her health was declining, sources tell Omid Scobie

The late Queen had a ‘slight lack of faith’ in her son Charles to take over The Firm and hired someone to act as ‘eyes and ears’ in the final months of her life, sources have claimed.

A passage in Endgame, by royal biographer Omid Scobie , claims Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth, who passed away at the age of 96 in September 2022, began to accept her health was declining towards the end of the Covid pandemic.

It details how she hired Andrew Parker, Baron Parker of Minsmere as the new Lord Chamberlain (the post for the senior officer of the Royal Household) in the Spring of 2021; as the ‘slow transition’ to King Charles’s rule was underway.

Mr Scobie quotes royal sources who claimed that the decision to hire Baron Parker; the former head of MI5 , whom she reportedly referred to as ‘my new CEO’ of The Firm during a conversation with a senior member of the royal family, pointed to the Queen’s ‘slight lack of faith’ in her son.

The claims come in the passage of the royal book which is published at midnight in the UK; and which also contains details inside the late monarch’s final days at Balmoral before she died on September 8.

Such details include that members of the royal family were each allowed a private moment alone with Queen Elizabeth following her death in September 2022.

In Scobie’s description of September 8 when the Queen passed away, her two eldest children, Charles and Anne, had been by her side overnight; while Prince Andrew, Prince Edward , Duchess Sophie and Prince William made the journey to Scotland on the day; shortly before 4pm and were each allowed a private moment with her following her death.

Elsewhere in the book, the author details how the Queen’s last summer at Balmoral was largely peaceful; but despite ailing health she remained committed to her duty – particularly when it came to overseeing a change of UK prime minister two days before she died.

Scobie writes that, despite several palace aides encouraging the monarch to allow Prince Charles (who was staying less than 10 miles away) to accept Boris Johnson ‘s official resignation and perform ‘the kissing of hands’ with incoming prime minister Liz Truss , the Queen insisted she carry out this important duty, telling aides: ‘It’s my job.’

Scobie writes that, in private, the late monarch was in ‘crippling pain’, but insisted in public that she must carry out her royal duty.

He quoted people close to the palace who said the late Queen’s final summer at Balmoral was filled with ‘walks, picnics and barbecues’, and the monarch enjoyed sitting in the sunshine much of the time.

However despite a much slower pace of life due to her declining health, the monarch ensured her red box full of government papers was up to date every day, and carried out her duty to the best of her ability.

‘Like a press release cooked up by ChatGPT’: New York Times gives withering verdict on Omid Scobie’s ‘Endgame’ in one of first reviews for the new book that hits shelves tomorrow 

The usually Sussex-sympathising New York Times is withering about Omid Scobie‘s new book, comparing his writing to an AI bot and declaring that Harry and Meghan’s favoured journalist does them ‘no favours’.

In a pithy review of Endgame, the liberal US newspaper claims a chapter on the couple even ‘reads like a press release cooked up by ChatGPT‘.

It also says the book, out tomorrow, ‘is not all that different from what Harry presented in “Spare”,’ and ‘is devoted to setting the record straight on petty slights against the Sussexes’.

America’s first review of the book adds: ‘Readers hoping for a final death blow of gossip will be disappointed. We’ve heard much of it before. From Fergie, from Diana, from Charles, from Harry, from Harry, from Harry again.’

It came as the similarly left-leaning Independent news website in the UK claims ‘he paints Meghan and Harry in a relentless saintly light’.

The NYT’s writer Eva Wolchover, who co-hosts its Windsors & Losers royal podcast, is critical of Endgame after receiving an advanced copy.

She says: ‘Whether or not Scobie actively collaborated with Meghan and Harry for this book, he does them no favours. Their chapter reads like a press release cooked up by ChatGPT, and does little to shed light on them as humans.

‘He says the couple — who used to focus on coverage of themselves — now remain blissfully unconcerned. Harry’s next chapter will focus, among other things, on philanthropic efforts in the “military space,” while Meghan (and here Scobie quotes an unnamed source) is “building ‘something more accessible … something rooted in her love of details, curating, hosting, life’s simple pleasures, and family.’”

Ms Wolchover also says of the author’s warnings that the Royal Family faces ‘extinction’: ‘It’s hard not to find Scobie’s dire predictions a tad hyperbolic.’

She writes: ‘Scobie defines the term “endgame” as “the final stages of a chess game after most of the pieces have been removed from the board”, adding: ‘Unless Charles and his heirs act quickly, Scobie underscores, they risk losing the crown, or at the very least, any remaining cultural relevance. But there’s a paradox here: As long as people are buying books like Scobie’s, they’re buying the whole lousy operation.’

The Independent has the first British review of Endgame, giving it three-stars.

Writer Anna Pasternak says that Mr Scobie ‘is unfailingly sympathetic to the Sussexes’.

She writes: ‘He does not hold them accountable for anything – he does not, as I had anticipated, demonise Charles or denounce Camilla. I was expecting something different – him possibly laying into evil monarch King Charles and wicked stepmother, Queen Camilla. The real royal villain here is William’.

Scobie also has choice words for the Princess of Wales. She says: Scobie points out that Kate has had “several rounds of elocution lessons” and now sounds “posher” than her husband. And he waspishly writes out that you’ll be unlikely to read in any British newspaper that Kate has had “five different private secretaries in six years” adding that one found the role “uninspiring and frustrating”.’

She adds: ‘Scobie fully anticipates that he and his book will be discredited in the British media. He is probably right, and he will certainly not be helped by the fact that he paints Meghan and Harry in a relentless saintly light. Harry is very much presented as the happy prince in his happy place “biking and hiking and taking ice-baths”; mornings are “for family only – no staff” and the hands-on parents “take turns in school drop-offs and pick-ups every day”.

‘Scobie’s only criticism is their unwise commercial deals which were made in haste.’

Omid Scobie hurls more truth bombs in new interview to promote Endgame: Biographer claims he knows identity of royals who ‘commented on Archie’s skin colour’ and calls rift between Harry and William ‘irreparable’ – but hints at thaw with King Charles

Omid Scobie today claimed letters between King Charles III and Meghan Markle reveal the names of two people who allegedly commented on Archie’s skin colour.

The royal author, whose new book Endgame comes out at midnight tonight, said he could not reveal the identities of the two people for fear of legal reprisals in the UK.

But he said letters were exchanged between Charles and Meghan following the allegation in the Sussexes’ bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey in March 2021.

In an interview with ABC’s Good Morning America broadcast today, Mr Scobie was asked whether he knew who made the comments about Archie’s skin colour.

He said: ‘I do know who made the comments about Archie’s skin colour. The names were mentioned in letters between Meghan and Charles that were exchanged some time after the Oprah interview.

‘We know from sources that Charles was horrified that that’s how Meghan felt. Those conversations were, and that he wanted to, sort of as a representative for the family, have that conversation with her.

‘And it is why I personally think they have been able to move forward with some kind of line of communication afterwards. Though they may not see eye to eye on it.’

Mr Scobie’s claims threaten to reignite the ‘royal racist’ row that came about after Harry and Meghan’s interview.

Meghan had alleged in the TV special that an unnamed member of the Royal Family spoke about ‘how dark his (Archie’s) skin might be when he’s born’.

But it is now being claimed that a second member of the extended Royal Household – who may not be a member of the Royal Family itself – also made similar comments.

The two people are not named in Endgame, which is subtitled ‘Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy’s Fight for Survival’.

The book makes a series of claims about the royals and looks at its future following the death of Queen Elizabeth II in September last year.

And Mr Scobie added to ABC: ‘I think before people assume that I’m calling this the end of the Royal Family, I’m simply declaring that we’ve reached a sort of pinnacle moment where the royal family as we know it, is at stake.’

He also makes claims about Prince William leaking stories about Harry.

Mr Scobie said: ‘He’s sharing private information about his brother that ended up on the front page of a newspaper not long later. These are things that have cause irreparable damage in the relations between each other.’

Describing William as a ‘company man’, he said: ‘We have seen the emergence of a man who is much harder, who seems to have embraced and embodied the royal institution’.

The ABC report also said Harry is willing to end the rift between William, had tried to reach out to his brother and that relations with his father Charles ‘may be on the mend’.

Mr Scobie said: ‘There is a steady open line of communication between the two, where they are able to talk with each other. Where Harry, I would say, clearly understands that his father probably isn’t the most emotional or open person’.

The report on ABC said its interview with Mr Scobie also saw him claim he felt he was caught up in a family drama – and that Meghan contacted him to check he was OK.

ABC claimed Mr Scobie also says that he is not that close with Harry and Meghan and he ‘never chose Team Sussex’.

Meghan and Charles have a ‘pleasant but distant relationship’ after a ‘respectful back and forth’ via letter over two Royal Family members who made comments about Archie’s skin colour

The King and Meghan Markle have a ‘pleasant but distant relationship’ after a ‘respectful back and forth’ via letter over two Royal Family members who made comments about Archie’s skin colour, Omid Scobie has claimed.

Writing in his new book Endgame, which has been released in Australia, Mr Scobie said Charles first reached out to Prince Harry ‘s wife in spring 2021 to share his ‘disappointment’ that the couple ‘chose to go so public with their words.’

The Duchess of Sussex ‘s allegation in her and the Duke’s TV special with Oprah Winfrey that an unnamed member of the Royal Family spoke about ‘how dark his (Archie’s) skin might be when he’s born’ is said to have ‘upset’ the monarch.

Mr Scobie claims that sources said Charles wanted to tell his daughter-in-law that he felt there was ‘no ill will present’ when two people allegedly commented on Archie’s skin colour.

The letters, a source told the author, were apparently ‘respectful back and forth’ but ‘serious’, adding: ‘I don’t know if either saw completely eye to eye in the end, but there was at least a feeling that both had been heard.’

Mr Scobie penned: ‘Since then, said a source close to the two families, the pair have had pleasant, if occasional exchanges. “There are no hard feelings about this specific incident, but there is distance, and everything else remains unaddressed”, said the source.’

Elsewhere, Mr Scobie today claimed the notes between the King and Meghan reveal the names of two people who allegedly commented on Archie’s skin colour.

The royal author, whose new book comes out at midnight tonight in the UK, said he could not reveal the identities of the two people for fear of legal reprisals in the UK.

But he said letters were exchanged between Charles and Meghan following the allegation in the Sussexes’ bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey in March 2021.

In an interview with ABC’s Good Morning America broadcast today, Mr Scobie was asked whether he knew who made the comments about Archie’s skin colour.

He said: ‘I do know who made the comments about Archie’s skin colour. The names were mentioned in letters between Meghan and Charles that were exchanged some time after the Oprah interview.

‘We know from sources that Charles was horrified that that’s how Meghan felt. Those conversations were, and that he wanted to, sort of as a representative for the family, have that conversation with her.

‘And it is why I personally think they have been able to move forward with some kind of line of communication afterwards. Though they may not see eye to eye on it.’

Harry and Meghan are ‘still hurt’ about the delay in giving Archie and Lilibet their Prince and Princess titles, Omid Scobie claims 

The Sussexes are still hurt over the row about Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet’s titles, a royal book has claimed.

Omid Scobie ‘s Endgame, which is published at midnight in the UK, claims Harry and Meghan are ‘genuinely happy’ in their new life in California , but that they are still scarred by the fact it took several months for their children’s titles to be updated to ‘prince’ and ‘princess’.

According to royal convention, Scobie says, the titles of the Sussexes’ children should have been automatically updated when King Charles ascended the throne.

However, it was six months before Prince Archie, four, and Princess Lilibet, two, had their titles updated on the Buckingham Palace website.

Scobie claims that King Charles had ‘initially avoided the subject’ of the children’s titles, but told Prince Harry that he would ‘make it official’ in early 2023. He reports that the subject was then ‘casually mentioned’ to Prince Harry by the King’s press secretary the following month.

Eventually, the official changes were made on the Buckingham Palace website, but the delay in doing so reportedly led the Sussexes to compare themselves to the Prince and Princess of Wales and their children.

A friend of Harry and Meghan’s told Scobie the couple ‘see the way their children are treated differently’ to Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis , which is ‘hard to feel comfortable with’.

It comes amid several claims about the royal family in the transition from Queen Elizabeth’s to King Charles’s reign, including details said to represent the last days of the late monarch’s life.

A passage in the book details Her late Majesty’s final days at Balmoral after spending the summer in the Aberdeenshire residence as she did every year.

In Scobie’s description of September 8, 2022, when the Queen passed away, her two eldest children, Charles and Anne, had been by her side overnight; while Prince Andrew, Prince Edward , Duchess Sophie and Prince William made the journey to Scotland on the day; shortly before 4pm and were each allowed a private moment with her following her death.

Camilla has ‘no relationship’ with Prince Harry despite her ‘great sympathy’ for what Meghan went through, because she has ‘no respect for the way they handled themselves’, Omid Scobie book claims 

Queen Camilla has no relationship with the Sussexes, according to Omid Scobie’s new book Endgame.

According to the tome, while the queen has ‘great sympathy’ for what Meghan went through, a royal source told the author that she has ‘no respect for the way they handled themselves’.

Conversely, while her relationships with Harry, 39, and Meghan, 42, is non-existent, the book claims that Camilla and her husband King Charles, now enjoy ‘laugh-filled’ lunches will William and Kate. 

Prince William ‘has only read passages of Spare’, but rejected two attempts by Harry to set up a meeting via a mutual friend in the months after publication, Omid Scobie book claims

Prince William has ‘only read passages’ of Prince Harry’s memoir Spare and ‘ignored’ his brother’s attempts to set up a conversation via a mutual friend, Omid Scobie has claimed.

In his new book ‘End Game’, royal author Omid Scobie delves into Prince William and Prince Harry’s relationship in the wake of the Duke of Sussex‘s memoir – which hit shelves in January.

In a chapter about the Prince of Wales, Scobie recounts meeting one of the royal’s former aides and asking them whether William and Kate have made note of the ‘difficulties of being the spare to the heir’.

The source said: ‘[Prince William] has read passages but not the full thing… 

‘Harry’s experience is very different to [that of William’s] own children.’ 

Elsewhere in the book, Scobie claims that Prince Harry tried to reach out to his brother on two separate occasions while he was in London. 

At the time, the royal’s memoir had only been out for a matter of weeks – and his attempts at contacting Prince William fell on deaf ears.

Scobie claims: ‘In February and March, the Prince turned to a mutual friend in London to try to set up a conversation with his brother, but the attempts were ignored. 

‘Harry, said a source, chose to “keep focused on the future, not the past.”‘ 

While promoting his memoir in January, Prince Harry invited The Daily Telegraph‘s Bryony Gordon into the family’s Montecito home – where he revealed he ‘worries’ about the Prince and Princess of Wales’ children. 

He said at the time: ‘And though William and I have talked about it once or twice, and he has made it very clear to me that his kids are not my responsibility.

‘I still feel a responsibility knowing that out of those three children, at least one will end up like me, the spare. And that hurts, that worries me.’