Don’t forget to scroll all the way down for EXCLUSIVE Bonus Content!

It has been just four days since Jo and Katie recorded an emergency episode on the allegations that Meghan Markle’s estranged father is a paedophile who hoarded child porn.

In those 96 hours, disturbing new details have come to the fore. They concern not only the alleged crimes committed by Thomas Markle, but also who knew about them and, crucially, when they knew. 

“Most observers are rightfully disturbed that, at the moment, it seems as though a lot of people who were privy to these heinous allegations did not make any effort to follow up with investigating,” says Jo Elvin, co-host of The Royals Uncensored.

“Time will tell who did what, if anything, and when. But for now, it feels every new piece of information about this thoroughly grim situation only raises more questions and confusion,” Jo adds. “And the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s reactions to the whole affair are under intense scrutiny.”

First, though, here is what we know.

Thomas Markle, 82, has a home in the Philippines. He lived there with his adult son Thomas Markle Jr, Meghan’s half-brother, until a few months ago. 

In May, Markle returned to the United States after a blood clot led doctors to amputate his left leg. He is currently in a rehab centre in Florida.

Thomas Jr, however, is still in the Philippines and recently needed a replacement phone. Knowing his father owned several, he went to get one. But when he turned on the phone, he allegedly saw child porn on it. “It was contaminated with the worst images I had ever seen,” Thomas Jr told The Sun. “It’s the kind of thing you just can’t unsee no matter how hard you try.”

In a state of shock, Thomas Jr rummaged through his father’s belongings. It was like “open[ing] the gates of hell,” he said. Markle’s hard drives allegedly contained a “vast stash” of photos and videos depicting the sexual abuse of “children as young as toddlers”.

However abominable it is to fathom, there was reportedly more sickening material. Slipped between the pages of a book on “Hollywood lolitas”, Thomas Jr claims, was a 35mm negative showing his father “having sex with a girl who appears underage”.

Thomas Jr immediately contacted the Filipino authorities. They have opened an investigation, and a forensics data analysis is underway. “Right now, all signs point to a possible sex offender of the grossest kind,” said Filipino Interior Minister Jonvic Remulla.

Markle, it is worth remembering, is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. He denies all the allegations, dismissing them as “sick lies”. 

“I could never do what I’m being accused of,” Markle said. He claims he has been “set up” by his son and the material has been planted. (According to The Sun, the photos and videos were downloaded in 2014 and 2020, years before Markle and Thomas Jr lived together in the Philippines.)

On Friday, shortly after the story broke, Meghan released a statement. “I am deeply distressed at the news,” she said, adding that “my thoughts are with any children who may have been harmed”.

But the Duchess of Sussex also hinted that she had been aware of her father’s alleged paedophilia since 2019. That year, she said, “a letter was sent” to the Met Police in London that “made troubling and disturbing allegations against my father”. The Met shared the letter with her, she continued, and “I was given assurances that these were being investigated”.

We now know that the letter was written by Markle’s first wife, the late Roslyn Loveless. She reportedly wrote that Markle told her he liked to visit Southeast Asia “because 12-year-olds are legal there”. Markle admits he has “slept with prostitutes” but insists he has “never had sex with anyone under the age of 18”.

The existence of Loveless’s letter raises important questions. Why didn’t the Met open an investigation back in 2019? If it didn’t have the jurisdiction, why didn’t it share the letter with authorities in Mexico, where Markle resided at the time, or in the US, where he is a citizen?

But that’s not the only unanswered question in the case.