Martha-Louise Affair

[lashinka2002]

Does anyone know of the affair Martha Louise had with a married man prior to her marraige? I read about this sometime ago I think in Royalty Magazine. What were the details surrounding the situation? I understand she was given diplomatic immunity at one point, can anybody confirm if this is true?

 

[norwegianne]

As far as I remember (it was quite a long time ago), she was named "the other woman" in a divorce case in England when she was living there. (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3760/is_199601/ai_n8755601) But King Harald stepped in and her diplomatic immunity took effect before she appeared in court.

 

[sommone]

Wow...I had never heard this before.

 

[lashinka2002]

It doesn't seem fair that she did not have to appear in court. I believe King Edward VII had to appear in court for something similar years and years ago.
If she was guilty of being the other woman I wonder if she ever thinks of it now that she has her own family to worry about. As far as I know this married couple ended up splitting up because of the whole situation but then I also know that things are never as they seem.

 

[redeye215]

Why would she have to go to court? She didn't commit a crime.

 

[sm1939]

this is all news to me , what a dark horse

 

[Charlotte1]

Why would she have to go to court? She didn't commit a crime.

She was cited to go to court as she was named as 'the other woman' in a messy divorce. Martha-Louise testifying was to be proof that the man accused of having an affair which broke up his marriage, actually did.

 

[lashinka2002]

I read that the wife of the man was very angry that Martha-Louise did not have to testify because of her princess status. I guess this would have ruined her whole case.

 

[nat127]

marta

Excuse this that I am going to write, maybe seem to be a bit class, but I think that Marta Luisa should never have concentrated on a married man, she(it) is handsome(pretty) has many claimants, though in things of the love...

 

[norwegianne]

I think it also should be specified that we don't know whether or not Märtha Louise had an affair with the married man: all we know is that his wife named her a witness in the divorce case, which led to terms as "the other woman".

 

[Elspeth]

Unless the man's wife was some sort of known trouble-maker, King Harald's actions seem to me to be an abuse of diplomatic immunity.

 

[Mandy]

Unless the man's wife was some sort of known trouble-maker, King Harald's actions seem to me to be an abuse of diplomatic immunity.

I remember reading the story, but it was a while ago. It seems to me that Märtha Louise couldn't be granted diplomatic immunity and a fugitive's warrant was issued when she left for Norway. I don't remember the exact British terminology. That's the reason she couldn't attend Princess Alexia's wedding.

 

[norwegianne]

I suspect that if anybody still has back issues of Se & Hør, or other royalty magazines, from around that time, (Märtha Louise studied in England from 1990 to 1992, as far as I can tell from the Royal House's webpage, and it was when she was studying in England, I think... I do seem to recall that it was in the beginning of Harald's reign) we'll find out the exact wording.

Didn't Alexia get married in 1999? It seems to be an awfully long time for an warrant to be standing without sorting it out.

 

[Roxsteve]

I think that at this time and age, everyone should have the same status when it comes to the law. Whether or not she had an affair is not the important thing (princess or not she can do with her life what she wants--even though I don't approve) what gets me is that royals can basically do whatever they want and then get away with it. I think Maxima had a car accident once, before she had royal immunity, and was "very upset" when she had to go to court--even though she caused the accident. Had she had royal immunity, which she acquired after her marriage, then she would not have had to go to court.

 

[lil Princess]

We have all made mistakes in our lives that we are not happy what choice's we made. It's Called Learning from our Mistakes! We Can Forgive and Forget, and hindsight is Always 20/20!!!

I do Not have any problems with either Princess's at all in Norge!! Not only are they photographed a lot and their privacy is Always invaded. They all Need a little Respect in their difficult rolls!!

 

[redeye215]

It seems to me that Märtha Louise couldn't be granted diplomatic immunity and a fugitive's warrant was issued when she left for Norway.

A fugitives warrant? I still don't understand how that could be. Divorce cases are different to criminal cases in England and anyway, in the eyes of the law, it was the man who she was supposed to have the affair with that actually commited adultery. Not ML.

BTW, welcome to the board lil Princess.

 

[lashinka2002]

It doesn't seem like there's very much concrete information out there regarding this incident. I don't think that's a coincidence. I think King Harold did a very good job in protecting his daughters name. I'm sure he placed gag orders on everyone he could to save his daughters image. If this is true I think its very unfair, especially for the family that had the distress in thier lives.

 

[ysbel]

I read that the wife of the man was very angry that Martha-Louise did not have to testify because of her princess status. I guess this would have ruined her whole case.

It may not have. Adultery cases rarely go to court, at least here in the United States. The threat of an adultery case though can be enough to make the other side back down from some of their demands. I'm sure even without Marthe-Louise's testimony, the judge was able to see what was going on in the marriage and make the appropriate decision.

 

[hrhcp]

... Marta Luisa should never have concentrated on a married man, she(it) is handsome(pretty) has many claimants, though in things of the love...

I hope you aren't a hypocrite.

From the last part of your sentence, I know you aren't .... and that is exactly what happened. Martha Luise fell in love with a married man. He was also into the horse scene, like ML is.

ML was "named" because wify-dear caught hubby-dear at ir, or near it.

All the same, I think it took ML a long time, a very long time to get over the hurt of this relationship. I like to think that her affair with Ari (now her current husband) happened after she got over her hurt and got on with her life.

 

[Empress]

I think that at this time and age, everyone should have the same status when it comes to the law. Whether or not she had an affair is not the important thing (princess or not she can do with her life what she wants--even though I don't approve) what gets me is that royals can basically do whatever they want and then get away with it. I think Maxima had a car accident once, before she had royal immunity, and was "very upset" when she had to go to court--even though she caused the accident. Had she had royal immunity, which she acquired after her marriage, then she would not have had to go to court.

maxima in fact did not cause the accident. The other driver was driving the wrong way on a one way street, and Maxima was coming out of the drive way. It might have been careless to not have looked both ways, but she did not cause the accident.

As for Martha Louise, we do not know if she had the affair, and if she did, we do not know if she knew the man was married.

I think that the royal immunity is the proper thing for some one of her status, otherwise you might have people naming royalty in suits, papers, accusing them of crimes,etc just for the notoriety that it would being in the case.

It is a sad but true fact of life that people want their 15 minuts of fame, no matter if it comes at the expense of someone else's feeelings or life.

 

[Rebafan81]

I don't understand why this is even being talked about. No offense to lashinka222 but this happened over 10 years ago. Didn't everyone of us do stupid things when you were young and "thought" you knew everything. If her father used immunity to help get her out of this, I think it is just something that a father would do to help a daughter out when she is in trouble. Even if she did this terrible thing, she has certainly made up for it with all that she has done since then. I will bet growing up in the limelight is a hard thing to do and everyone is human and we all make mistakes. I say let it go......IMO

 

[Skydragon]

Why would she have to go to court? She didn't commit a crime.

She would have had to appear as 'the other woman', if it was proved that the man had an affair with her contributing to the breakdown of the marriage, he could have been ordered to give up the family home, various assets and pay a bigger maintenance amount to his wife and children.

I don't know if any of it was true but, she was named as the 'other woman'. It is not unusual for adultery cases to go to court here in the UK!

 

[lashinka2002]

I don't understand why this is even being talked about. No offense to lashinka222 but this happened over 10 years ago. Didn't everyone of us do stupid things when you were young and "thought" you knew everything. If her father used immunity to help get her out of this, I think it is just something that a father would do to help a daughter out when she is in trouble. Even if she did this terrible thing, she has certainly made up for it with all that she has done since then. I will bet growing up in the limelight is a hard thing to do and everyone is human and we all make mistakes. I say let it go......IMO

I am asking about this topic because it seems to be taboo. I am never able figure out what happened because there is so little in the tabloids. I'm not hanging on to or letting go of anything, I only want to know what happened simply because I am curious. It just seems that over the years I found maybe a paragraph of information on this situation which only fuels my curiosity even more.

 

[hrhcp]

...I only want to know what happened simply because I am curious.

Ok .... in a nutshell ... from what I remember....

Martha-Luise was part of the Norwegian horse-jumping team or otherwise sponsored. While in England, she fell in love - like really in love - with an English rider, who unfortunately was married.

For what ever reason, the English guy's wife found out about it (obviously the marriage was already on shaky ground), a divorce action was launched by the English guy's wife, and Martha-Luise was either named in the action, required to appear or was served so that she had to appear.

Consistent with many presidents of many countries, the royal heads of Europe are "above the law", so to speak. They can not be sued, etc. So, it came about that the ML's father, the King brought daughter home, and in doing so freed her from the onerous duty of having like a commoner in a commoner court of law. As I recall, a diplomatic note or something to that tune was also delivered to the court in question.

Inasmuch as it may be controversial, I think the King did his daughter a good turn .... of removing her from a situation where I'm pretty sure she had her heart broken, because she couldn't marry her love. If she had been anybody else, like a commoner, who knows what the future would have held then?

Naturally there would have been a stigma if she had married the English guy, because that would confirm she was the cause for the divorce. And naturally marrying a divorced guy would have been an awkward situation for the King, seeing I just read he is sworn to uphold the Norwegen Lutheran faith.

The King is not alone in this, QE2 is sworn to uphold the Church of England, and so on through Europe.

Trust the above goes some way to satisfy your curiosity.


As an addendum .... Martha-Luise's "high-jinks" of back then, seem not to have been tolerated by the advisers to the Royal Household and/or the government. There is naturally an element of politics in everything.

But it is another 'thing' when the Crown Prince comes along and threatens to surrender his crown if not allowed to marry a single-mom.

In ending, its too bad that the politics of changing the constitution at or before Martha-Luise's time weren't as liberal as the Danes who allowed Margrethe to become Queen, or later as the Swedes did to allow their first-born (a gal) to have the opportunity of becoming the future Queen.

 

[norwegianne]

And naturally marrying a divorced guy would have been an awkward situation for the King, seeing I just read he is sworn to uphold the Norwegen Lutheran faith.

Considering that the King's sister married a divorced man back when it was really a scandal - I think the awkwardness wouldn't have been the divorced part, but the fact that ML was named in the court case. The Norwegian Church hasn't had a major problem with divorcees remarrying in quite some time.

Not that it's anything but an interesting tidbit now, considering that she married another man.

 

[hrhcp]

Considering that the King's sister married a divorced man back when it was really a scandal - I think the awkwardness wouldn't have been the divorced part, but the fact that ML was named in the court case.

You're right. I forgot about the King's sister. Thanks for succintly summarizing the nub of the situation.

 

[lashinka2002]

thank you hrhcp for the info. It answers alot of questions.

 

[HRH Abigail]

Yes, I mean let's be FAIR, here, shall we?

I think it also should be specified that we don't know whether or not Märtha Louise had an affair with the married man: all we know is that his wife named her a witness in the divorce case, which led to terms as "the other woman".

Quite right, Norwegianne.

I say, let's be fair to Martha-Louise here, please.

We simply don't know the facts of the matter, here.

Still, I don't think that Royals or nayone rich and famous, SHOULD be granted immunity nor automatically excluded from giving testimony in cases in which ANYONE ELSE would have to participate!
Currently, in the US there is much Bally-hoo about whether or not The Heiress, Paris Hilton should have to serve out her sentence of 45 days. She's asked to be pardoned by the Governour of California (her Home State) which many people think is ludicrous, as do I.
I say, let's not let the Rich and Famous "get off".
IF they truly did something wrong, for which they should be repentent, then they should be called to do what anyone else should have to do.

Hence, if the facts of the case (and we really don't know the full facts, do we?) point to Martha-Louise having done something for which she should have to testify, then ... of course, she should have to testify.

I hope I am using Common Sense, here.

-- Abbie

 

[Mandy]

The cases of Paris Hilton and Märtha Louise are like comparing apples and oranges. Paris Hilton is serving time for having committed a crime whereas Märtha Louise hadn't been accused of any crimes, but rather she was asked to testify in court. Moreover, as this happened in the early 1900's, this case has already been resolved without her testimony.

 

[HRH Abigail]

Alright Mandy, I appreciate your input ...

The cases of Paris Hilton and Märtha Louise are like comparing apples and oranges. Paris Hilton is serving time for having committed a crime whereas Märtha Louise hadn't been accused of any crimes, but rather she was asked to testify in court. Moreover, as this happened in the early 1900's, this case has already been resolved without her testimony.

Yes, your points are well and truly taken, Mandy.

Howevere, I wasn't meaning to compare Paris to Martha-Louise in terms of anything else but to merely point out that People who are called upon to appear in Court (for whatever reason, be it Criminal or not) should never be exonerated due to their Rank and Status in society.

Sorry but, I wasn't intending to compare Paris with ML in terms of crimes committed, classiness, or, what-have-you.
I was only opining that ANYONE should be subject to the same rights and rules as anyone else, regardless of who they are or where they came from. I was merely using Paris Hilton as another example of someone very rich perhaps "getting off" because of her wealth and status and then stating how unfair I feel that this is ... top everyone else, who is ever called upon to appear in a Court of Law.

I also want to stress that ... I don't know all the facts in the Martha-Louise Divorce case (or what-have-you) and ... because of this, feel that until all the facts are (or were) known, that the case should not be overly-judged not overly-thought.

I apologise for not being as articulate as I might have been.
I apologise for causing anyone any confusion, here.

-- Abbie