Are there verified sources or documents that suggest a relationship between Prince Andrew and Meghan Markle?

1. What the reporting actually documents: a single anecdote and family ties

Contemporary accounts repeatedly cite Prince Harry’s recollection that Meghan once misidentified Prince Andrew when she first met the Queen at Royal Lodge — a social faux pas described in Harry’s memoir and retold in the Channel 5 documentary; outlets including Edinburgh Live, The Mirror and The News International report the anecdote ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Beyond that awkward meeting, mainstream reports note Meghan’s only direct relation to Andrew is that she is married to his nephew, Prince Harry — not a personal friendship or partnership ^[4].

2. Where claims of a wider relationship arise: tabloids and a biographer’s probe

Speculation linking Meghan and Andrew surfaces most often in tabloids and popular-feeding platforms; examples include an IMDb news aggregation about a “royal biographer” probing ties and various opinion pieces suggesting mysterious connections ^{[5] [6]}. These items promote insinuation without citing documentary proof; the sources in the search set that raise such questions do not publish primary evidence of a sustained relationship ^{[5] [6]}.

3. What reputable outlets say about photographic or vacation claims

Reports responding to social-media conspiracy claims about images or vacations explicitly deny verified proof. The News International piece states the 2010 images being circulated are of a model, Alexandra Escat, not Meghan, and reiterates that Meghan “has no relationship to Andrew other than that she is married to his nephew” ^[4]. That passage functions as a debunking claim in available reporting ^[4].

4. Why the story keeps resurfacing: proximity, family networks and sensationalism

Multiple sources link the persistence of the narrative to family proximity (Meghan joined the royal circle by marrying Harry) and to the broader news cycle around Prince Andrew’s legal and reputational troubles, which drive renewed interest in anyone tangentially connected to the House of Windsor ^{[7] [8]}. Commentators say media attention on Andrew’s fall has created openings for speculation about others in the family network, including the Sussexes ^{[7] [8]}.

5. Diverging perspectives in the record: anecdote vs. implication

Reporting contains two competing tones: factual recounting of a single personal anecdote (Harry’s memoir/Channel 5 retellings) and tabloid-driven implication of an undefined “mysterious tie.” News outlets focused on facts emphasise Meghan’s familial tie-by-marriage and debunk photo claims; entertainment and tabloid outlets push the more suggestive framing ^{[1] [4] [5]}.

6. Limits of the available reporting and what remains unverified

Available sources do not publish or cite verified documents—emails, flight logs, guest lists or contemporaneous correspondence—showing any sustained private relationship between Meghan Markle and Prince Andrew; those kinds of primary-source proofs are not in the supplied reporting (not found in current reporting). Where sources make assertive claims, they rely on secondary reporting, biographer conjecture, or tabloid sourcing rather than disclosed documentary evidence ^{[5] [6]}.

7. How to interpret this record as a reader

Treat the anecdote (the early awkward meeting) as documented in Harry’s memoir and retellings ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Treat broader suggestions of a secret or transactional relationship as unproven in available, mainstream reporting; those suggestions are driven by tabloids and speculation and have been countered by reporting that corrects misidentified images and stresses the marital relation only ^{[4] [5]}.

If you want, I can catalogue each cited piece above with publication date and full quote excerpts from the items listed in the search results so you can judge the tone differences between tabloid and mainstream coverage.