Morgan storms Spencer with lawsuit over explosive memoir claims

Piers Morgan has announced that he will take legal action against Charles Spencer, the brother of the late Princess Diana, over claims made in Spencer’s memoir *Swan Song*.

The book, which has dominated UK headlines for days, alleges that King Charles III told Diana’s family that she would soon be forgotten after her death. Morgan dismissed the allegation as false and has demanded that the offending passage be removed from the book.

In a separate claim, Spencer accused Morgan of publishing “intrusive” photographs of Diana in a gym while he was editor of *The Daily Mirror*. “ I come across in the despicable manner imaginable, there’s just one problem — it’s all bulls**.

And very easy bulls** for me to prove it.” Morgan countered that the photos were printed by *The Sunday Mirror* on 7 November 1993, and that he had joined *The Daily Mirror* in October 1995. “I was doing a showbiz column on ** at the time of the gym pictures.”

Morgan said he would have lawyers pursue the matter and added, “It’s all bullsh*t…you’ll be hearing from my lawyers.” He also demanded that the false statements be removed and requested a donation to the King’s Trust for the damage caused by his “complete lie”.

## Background & Context

*Spanner* first became public when Charles Spencer detailed a 1997 conversation with King Charles about whether Princes William and Harry should walk behind Diana’s coffin at her funeral.

Spencer claims the king responded with anger, saying, “Rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough.” The book’s allegations have drawn significant media attention in the UK. Buckingham Palace declined to comment on the book but noted that grief can color judgment and memory long after a loss.

The roots of this dispute reach back to the moment when Princess Diana’s life was abruptly cut short in 1997. Since then, her legacy has been fiercely protected by family members, charities, and a global fan base that sees her as a symbol of compassion and modern monarchy.

The emergence of *Swan Song*—a memoir that purports to reveal intimate royal conversations—has struck many as an intrusion into a private chapter of the nation’s history.

For Piers Morgan, who has long been a trusted journalist covering royal affairs, the book’s portrayal of his professional conduct and relationship with the family feels like an affront to both his career and reputation.

## What People Are Saying

Piers Morgan has stated that the book contains “fabricated inaccuracies” that strike at his credibility. “If Earl Spencer can be so incredibly defamatorily wrong about such basic facts involving me, well why should we believe anything else that he puts in this book?” Morgan said.

He has threatened legal action and requested a removal of the claim from the memoir, as well as a donation to the King’s Trust.

Fans of Princess Diana have reacted with a mix of indignation and concern. On social‑media platforms, hashtags like #DefendDiana and #SpencerDefamation trended, with many users urging Morgan to be “vindicated” and calling for accountability in the publication of sensitive royal material.

Some critics argue that Spencer’s narrative is part of a broader trend of sensationalist memoirs that prioritize profit over truth, while supporters of Morgan highlight the need for responsible journalism and accurate representation of public figures.

The Royal Family’s silence has only added to the tension. Buckingham Palace’s policy of not commenting on book content has been cited by both sides: supporters claim it protects royal privacy, whereas detractors argue that it allows defamation to go unchallenged.

As a result, the public debate now centers on the balance between freedom of expression and the right to protect one’s reputation.

## Industry Impact

This legal spat is already having ripple effects across the publishing and journalism sectors. Publishers are reassessing their vetting processes for memoirs that touch on high‑profile subjects, especially those involving royalty or public office holders.

Editors are being reminded that even a single inaccurate claim can lead to costly litigation. The case also highlights the evolving nature of defamation law in the digital age, where an online post can reach millions in seconds and damage reputations before any correction is issued.

For journalists like Morgan, the lawsuit underscores the importance of meticulous fact‑checking and maintaining transparent relationships with sources. Media outlets are now scrutinizing their editorial guidelines more closely, particularly when dealing with sensitive personal material.

The situation also prompts discussions about ethical responsibilities: to the subjects of stories, to readers seeking truth, and to the broader cultural memory that such stories help shape.

## What Happens Next

Morgan plans to involve his lawyers in pursuing a lawsuit against Spencer over the alleged false claims. He has asked that the disputed section be excised from future editions of the book and that a donation be made to the King’s Trust. Spencer’s publisher has not yet responded to inquiries, and no formal court filing has been announced.

Buckingham Palace remains silent, maintaining its policy of not commenting on book content.

The legal battle between Morgan and Spencer is expected to unfold over the coming weeks as each side prepares its position.

While the outcome remains uncertain, the dispute has already sparked renewed dialogue about how we remember public figures, how memoirs can shape collective memory, and what responsibilities we hold as writers and readers in preserving integrity.