Prince Harry and Meghan Markle did not sign a "$500 million prenup" on the day of the royal wedding, despite a new tabloid cover story. Gossip Cop can bust the report. Like royal couples before them, the bride and groom did not sign a prenuptial agreement at any point, nor did Queen Elizabeth demand one, as falsely alleged.
But a headline in the latest issue of Star declares, "Prince Harry's Wedding Secret Exposed: The $500 Million Fight!" The magazine contends that "behind closed doors" at the nuptials last month, there was "plenty of royal intrigue and secret schemes taking place." It's specifically alleged that before the ceremony, a "calculating Queen Elizabeth forced Harry and Meghan to sign an ironclad prenup to protect the royal family's $500 million fortune."
"The word is that when Harry and Meghan slipped into the antechamber before the ceremony... to sign the marriage registry, they also signed the prenup," a so-called "palace insider" is quoted as saying. It should be noted that the phrase "the word is" is one of the telltale signs that an outlet does not have any independent confirmation or direct knowledge of what's being claimed, nor does the "insider." Additionally, there are two glaring factual errors here: Prince Harry and Markle signed their marriage registry during the actual wedding, not before it. Furthermore, Prince Harry first saw Markle when she walked down the aisle in her wedding dress, not in some "antechamber before the ceremony."
But according to the publication's narrative, it was during this supposed pre-wedding meeting that Queen Elizabeth "put her foot down" and demanded the bride and groom sign the purported prenuptial agreement. "Harry's hands were tied and he had no choice but to cave in, and so did Meghan. When Her Majesty gives an order, Harry has to obey," asserts the questionable "insider." The tabloid goes on to claim that waiting for them in the antechamber was attorney Fiona Shackleton, who was pictured at the wedding and has worked for the royal family in the past.
Speculates the magazine's supposed source, "It only makes sense for her to draft the prenup since she's already saved the royals a lot of money" in other legal matters, such as Prince Andrew's divorce. An alleged "spy" cited in the article also assumes the attorney "may have been there to make sure the paperwork went off without a hitch so Meghan doesn't get a dime if they do end up divorcing." As for the queen's motivation, the misguided "insider" maintains she wanted to be "extra careful about keeping the royal assets intact" because Markle has been divorced before. Did Prince Charles get a prenup because he and Duchess Camilla have both been divorced? No, he did not.
The outlet concludes its article by asserting the newlyweds have "already put the prenup drama behind them," with Markle described as "gracious about the whole thing and smart enough not to put up a fuss." What's not very "smart" is this cover story. On top of the factual errors Gossip Cop pointed out above, the publication is apparently unaware that it was known months before the wedding that Markle and Prince Harry would not have a prenup. Not only are they uncommon in the UK, but historically speaking, royal couples don't sign them. In fact, Prince William and Kate Middleton did not sign a prenup agreement seven years ago, either.
It makes little sense to contend the queen suddenly mandated one now, and no reputable outlet has reported that she did. And as opposed to her expecting the marriage to fail, Queen Elizabeth has invited Markle to join her in official appearances this week, a sign of confidence in her grandson's relationship. It's also worth remembering Gossip Cop previously busted Star's sister tabloid, OK!, for falsely claiming Markle and Prince Harry had a prenup-related "fight" back in December.
Conclusion: Star claims Queen Elizabeth forced Prince Harry and Markle to sign a prenup right before their wedding ceremony, but the couple did not actually see one another until the bride walked down the aisle. The magazine also inaccurately claims they met up to sign the marriage registry before the nuptials, when that really took place during the formal proceedings. Plus, Gossip Cop and other credible outlets reported months ago that they would not have a prenuptial agreement, just as the royal couples who came before them did not.
There is also ample evidence of Queen Elizabeth's support for the marriage. And while the publication insists "so much drama was going on behind the scenes" of the wedding due to this (nonexistent) prenup debacle, a Kensington Palace spokesperson told Gossip Cop that people can simply "watch the footage" of the historic event, since it was captured on live TV, to see there was no drama whatsoever. For all of these reasons, Gossip Cop has rated this untrue cover story about a purported "$500 million fight" a zero on our fact or fiction meter.
Gossip Cop has determined this story is totally false.