In recent days, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have found themselves at the center of intense scrutiny, not for responding, but for not responding. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have chosen to remain publicly silent while their friend Tyler Perry faces serious allegations of sexual assault from actor Derek Dixon. Critics are now accusing the couple of prioritizing their own safety and image over supporting a longtime ally.
Kinsey Schofield—host of the To Di For Daily podcast—has emerged as the most vocal critic of the Sussexes’ silence. In a wide‐ranging interview with Fox News Digital, she sharply challenged Harry and Meghan’s refusal to comment on the Perry case. “Harry and Meghan’s refusal to get involved is clearly an act of self‑preservation,” Schofield stated, pointing to what she sees as a pattern of selective engagement on issues they deem safe.
The criticism grows sharper when contrasted with Meghan’s Instagram activity, where she frequently shares personal or business updates. As Schofield observed, “their avoidance of the Perry scandal feels amplified,” precisely because the Duchess maintains such an active presence on social media. It raises a pointed question: how can one post a four‑year‑old video of oneself—“doing the ‘Baby Mama Dance’”—but remain entirely silent when a friend faces grave accusations?
Schofield’s critique then shifted tone, emphasizing the depth of Perry’s past generosity toward the couple. “A friend who showed you so much kindness that measuring it would be impossible? A man who gave you a private plane, a luxury home, and—most importantly, an exit strategy?” she asked, referencing the support Perry provided during Harry and Meghan’s departure from royal life.
That history, she contends, makes their silence all the more telling. “Tyler Perry says he’s innocent—maybe he is. But the fact that Harry and Meghan haven’t even [told] the press that they stand by him is just another example of the Sussexes’ all‑about‑me mindset,” Schofield concluded, laying bare her view that the couple’s reluctance to take a public stance reflects a broader pattern of self‑focus.
To date, neither the Sussexes’ official channels nor their representatives have issued any statement regarding the allegations or the legal dispute. Perry himself has denied all wrongdoing. But Schofield and others argue that issuing even a brief message of support—or at least acknowledging the situation—would go far in demonstrating loyalty to a friend who once helped them in a moment of crisis.
As this public debate unfolds, observers are left wrestling with two questions: What is expected of high‑profile figures when friends face legal scrutiny? And, equally pressing, is silence in this case an act of prudent discretion, or a revealing display of self‑preservation at the expense of personal allegiance?