Have Prince Andrew and Meghan Markle met privately even if not publicly photographed?

1. The one documented private encounter that reporters keep returning to

Reporting anchored to Prince Harry’s account records a private introduction of Meghan to the Queen at Royal Lodge in which Meghan met Prince Andrew and momentarily mistook his role — an episode repeated in media coverage and a Channel 5 documentary summarizing the family encounter. These contemporary retellings establish a clear, attributable private meeting: Meghan and Andrew were in the same private room at a royal residence during an introduction, and Sarah Ferguson’s quick coaching on curtsying was reported as part of the incident ^{[1] [2] [3]}. This evidence is consistent across multiple outlets and dates, indicating that any claim of them never having been together privately is inaccurate if it denies that introduction occurred. The cited accounts do not, however, provide evidence of subsequent private meetings beyond that initial introduction, leaving the scope of their private contact limited to a documented moment rather than a pattern of interactions ^{[1] [3]}.

2. Rumours and new probes that fans and writers are pursuing

Royal biographer Andrew Lownie has publicly pursued leads suggesting a potential earlier link between Andrew and Meghan — speculative avenues include meetings in Thailand or interactions during Meghan’s acting career — and this inquiry has been covered as a developing story without conclusive findings to date ^[4]. These lines of investigation are investigative rather than evidentiary; they reflect the biographer’s sourcing and hypothesis rather than newly produced primary documentation. Journalists covering Lownie’s probe emphasize that his work could reveal previously unknown connections, but present it as a lead requiring corroboration. Media outlets have framed this as a potentially newsworthy thread precisely because it remains unconfirmed, and the distinction between inquiry and proof is central: ongoing research does not equal established fact ^[4].

3. Outlets saying “no evidence” — and why that matters

Several recent pieces, including reporting focused specifically on Meghan’s New York activities and commentary from other royal insiders, either make no claim of a private Andrew–Meghan relationship or explicitly note absence of evidence for meetings beyond the Royal Lodge introduction ^{[5] [6] [7] [8]}. These articles are important because they demonstrate that mainstream coverage has not produced corroborating photographs, contemporaneous visitor logs, or multiple credible eyewitness accounts that would substantiate a pattern of private meetings. The lack of corroborative documentation in public records and standard journalistic sources means that claims of secret or repeated private meetings remain unproven, and responsible coverage highlights this evidentiary gap rather than treating rumor as confirmation ^{[5] [8]}.

4. Assessing source reliability and potential agendas

Sources here range from memoir-based recollection and documentary summaries to active biographical probes and routine news reporting; each carries distinct reliability characteristics. Prince Harry’s memoir and documentary recounting provide firsthand narrative of the Royal Lodge meeting but are colored by personal perspective and memory ^{[1] [2]}. Biographers like Lownie specialize in digging up archival leads; their publicizing of theories can prompt further checking but may also amplify unverified claims ^[4]. Tabloid and opinion pieces sometimes emphasize salacious angles or family drama, reflecting editorial incentives to attract readers rather than to vet new facts; such coverage requires cautious interpretation ^{[6] [3]}. Recognizing these differing motivations clarifies why corroboration from neutral primary records would be decisive.

5. Bottom line: what is established and what remains open

It is established that Meghan Markle and Prince Andrew met privately during Meghan’s introduction to the Queen at Royal Lodge, as recounted in Prince Harry’s account and repeated in reporting and documentary summaries — a single verified private encounter ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Claims of additional private meetings, earlier ties in Thailand or Hollywood, or an ongoing private relationship remain unconfirmed; they are the subject of investigative interest but lack corroborating evidence in public reporting to date ^{[4] [5]}. Readers should treat new allegations cautiously: investigative leads may produce new documentation, but until independent records or credible eyewitness accounts are presented, the responsible conclusion is that only the Royal Lodge introduction is verified while other claims remain speculative ^{[5] [4]}.