An Heir for Albert with Charlene


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
A hypothetical question:
Let's say that Albert marries Charlene and they have two sons, and then their marriage ends (due to divorce or her death). Then Albert marries Alexandre's mother. Under current laws, such marriage would grant Alexandre succession rights. But would it make him heir apparent? Would he rank above his half-brothers (Charlene's sons) in the line of succession?

:ermm:
 
I know I am a little off topic here but on another Forum I saw where Alexander's mother launged her charity and she is also the patron of Ms. Afrique. Part of the money went to her charity and the other to the First Lady of I think Cameron. If you google Nicole Coste you will see it.
 
I saw NC. I thought that CW can't have a child.

I'm sorry, can you please translate this?

You saw NC - does that mean North Carolina? You think that CW - Charlene Wittstock - can't have a child?

Can you please provide the source of your data for the second statement? It's a rather extraordinary assertion.
 
I'm sorry, can you please translate this?

You saw NC - does that mean North Carolina? You think that CW - Charlene Wittstock - can't have a child?

Can you please provide the source of your data for the second statement? It's a rather extraordinary assertion.

Yes, I, too, wonder where she got her information. The hypothetical question is even more incredulous. If he has children with Charlene, they will be the heirs, otherwise it will be Caroline's children. Alexandre doesn't stand a chance.
 
A hypothetical question:
Let's say that Albert marries Charlene and they have two sons, and then their marriage ends (due to divorce or her death). Then Albert marries Alexandre's mother. Under current laws, such marriage would grant Alexandre succession rights. But would it make him heir apparent? Would he rank above his half-brothers (Charlene's sons) in the line of succession?

:ermm:


No to all the questions and it wouldn't give Alexandre succession rights anyway, according to my understanding. Before the constitution was updated/amended/re-written in 2002, marrying his mother would have done that. However that has since been altered. Now the only children that can inherit are legitimate children born to a marriage between Prince Albert and his wife OR Princess Caroline's children if Albert has no legitimate children. Marrying Alexandre's mother will not legitimize any claims the child may have to the Monegasque throne, as it were.
 
Some interesting flights of fancy....

The Monegasque constitution has dealt with all that, and I doubt that the French Government would agree to another change to it.
 
I'm sorry, can you please translate this?

You saw NC - does that mean North Carolina? You think that CW - Charlene Wittstock - can't have a child?

Can you please provide the source of your data for the second statement? It's a rather extraordinary assertion.
NC mean Nicole Coste not North Carolina if you take her first letter in her name it start with the letter N then you take her second last name letter it start with C. Now you understand what NC stand for it short for Nicole Coste. Just like CW stand for Charlene Wittstock. NOW YOU UNDERSTAND. I heard she was damage from accident swimming. OK!
 
NC mean Nicole Coste not North Carolina if you take her first letter in her name it start with the letter N then you take her second last name letter it start with C. Now you understand what NC stand for it short for Nicole Coste. Just like CW stand for Charlene Wittstock. NOW YOU UNDERSTAND. I heard she was damage from accident swimming. OK!


What bee flew into your bonnet?
 
A hypothetical question:
Let's say that Albert marries Charlene and they have two sons, and then their marriage ends (due to divorce or her death). Then Albert marries Alexandre's mother. Under current laws, such marriage would grant Alexandre succession rights. But would it make him heir apparent? Would he rank above his half-brothers (Charlene's sons) in the line of succession?

:ermm:
Yes, it would take some doing with an annullment from Charlene which would make any of their children illegitimate in the eyes of the Church. Tamara was married when Jazmin was born however, she was not married in the Catholic church and if they married the church could bless the marriage as with Nicole. This would place Jazmin or Alexandre in the line of succession. All hypothetical if it was going to happen it would have by now. I'm going to wait and see if Albert has a child with Charlene if he changes things so that child doesn't take the throne but passes it to his sister. He didn't want the position so its hard to believe he would want it to fall on one of his own. A reason I've said he hadn't married yet and had legitimate children.
 
I’ve been a long time lurker, especially here in the Monaco forums and over in the British ones…and finally gave in to join the discussion after the big announcement.
1. Charlene will be Alexandre and Jazmin’s stepmother as she is married to their father. Now, given Jazmin’s age and the fact that she probably doesn’t see her father often she probably won’t refer to Charlene as her stepmother, but as many of my friends who have stepmothers refer to their stepmothers-as her father’s wife as that is exactly what Charlene is.
US definition of Stepmother (according to dictionary.com):
1. the wife of one's father by a later marriage.
2. The wife of one's father and not one's natural mother.
There’s nothing legal about it-unless you count Albert’s and her marriage being legal. She does not have to adopt them to be considered their stepmother. All Charlene has to do is marry their father.
But like NotAPretender said, what that exactly means and what her role will be with both kids depends on all the parties involved: Albert, Charlene, Nicole, Tamara, Jazmin, and Alexandre.
2. If Something WERE to happen to Charlene after the birth of hers and Albert’s heirs, and for some reason he marries Alexandre’s mother after that, I do believe that the answer is YES, he would be included as heir apparent due to article 10 of the revised constitution. However, that scenario is highly unlikely.
3.Potential Albert-Charlene heir Names:
GIRLS:
1. Marie Elisabeth Grace (with Steph as the godmother. :) )
2. Louise Marguerite Lynette (with Caro as the godmother :))
BOYS:
1. Charles Louis Rainier Michael (after Albert’s great-great grandfather, Charles III; grandfather, and both the grandfathers)
2. Henri Pierre Rainier Michael (a name I liked, plus Albert’s grandfather, father and Charlene’s father)
 
Last edited:
I saw NC. I thought that CW can't have a child.
You thought CW could not have children and my granmother rides a motorcycle. Albert would have had her pass a fertility tests I think.What kind of swimming injury would disable her from having children?
 
I think that we have different definitions of "stepmother" working here. I am using "stepmother" in the aspect of "the wife of the biological father who is not the biological mother of the child in question."

My grandfather remarried well after the death of his first wife, who was my father's mother. Although my own father was, at that time, himself married and raising a family, my grandfather's wife became my father's stepmother.

"Stepmother" in no way implies, suggests, confers or provides legal responsibilities on an individual. It is an appellation, nothing more and nothing less.

"Stepmother" does not mean a "plus mom" or "extra mom."

Charlene, as the wife of their biological father, becomes the stepmother to these two children. Exactly what that means in this situation is entirely up to the parties involved. In particular, it will be the decision of the primary parent, the mother of each of the children, to decide the level of involvement of Ms. Wittestock in the life of her child.

(Right now, the turgid little drama of Jude Law and Sienna Miller is following this line, vis a vis Jude's children with former wife Sadie Frost, and Ms. Miller's liberties with Ms. Frost's children playing out on these lines. One all can't be as adult about these things as are the Crown Princely couple of Norway, sadly.)

If this is in any way unclear to you, please let me know. I've tried to amplify my post so as to avoid confusion.
OK you are in the United States and a different jurisprudence holds true there- under British common law inCnada CW would not be the stepmother unless she adopted. SO you are correct but in the US and as for Monaco I guess I will have to double check.The elucidation of your post needs me to research European Law a bit more.
 
The US uses British common law as well. That's what the basis of our judicial system comes from. The only exception is Louisiana, which uses civil law; it has its basis in France -- not that surprising considering it was once a French territory. In fact, I believe it's the only state in the union that uses civil law, rather than common law.
 
I can't be the only poster cross-eyed with boredom over this whole stepmother debate...I just know I can't be. :sad: Can we PLEASE move on??

How about Charles as the name of Charlene's first son? The names Charlotte, Caroline and Charlene are all derivatives of "Charles" so it would sort of be keeping with family tradition....
 
I believe that if a stepmother adopts a step-child, that child is no longer legally a stepchild but a full, legal child of the woman who adopts. This happened in my family, when my father's first wife died and left a three-year-old daughter. My mother adopted his child, and she's legally my half-sister's mother.

Doesn't Quebec follow civil law?

OK you are in the United States and a different jurisprudence holds true there- under British common law inCnada CW would not be the stepmother unless she adopted. SO you are correct but in the US and as for Monaco I guess I will have to double check.The elucidation of your post needs me to research European Law a bit more.
 
I can't be the only poster cross-eyed with boredom over this whole stepmother debate...I just know I can't be. :sad: Can we PLEASE move on??

How about Charles as the name of Charlene's first son? The names Charlotte, Caroline and Charlene are all derivatives of "Charles" so it would sort of be keeping with family tradition....
That would make him Charles IV
 
What matters is the CURRENT status quo.

PA has acknowledged his two offspring, and he makes sure they have a good life, commensurate with his wealth.

Nothing will change legally through PA's wedding.
 
NC mean Nicole Coste not North Carolina if you take her first letter in her name it start with the letter N then you take her second last name letter it start with C. Now you understand what NC stand for it short for Nicole Coste. Just like CW stand for Charlene Wittstock. NOW YOU UNDERSTAND. I heard she was damage from accident swimming. OK!

And your source - other than "I heard" - is?

Please be very specific. As you can tell, I can't understand you unless you speak clearly and SHOUT.
 
Yes, it would take some doing with an annullment from Charlene which would make any of their children illegitimate in the eyes of the Church. (remainder snipped)

Pardon me, Lady MacAlpine, but an annullment does not render children illegitimate.

Tamara was married when Jazmin was born however, she was not married All hypothetical if it was going to happen it would have by now. I'm going to wait and see if Albert has a child with Charlene if he changes things so that child doesn't take the throne but passes it to his sister. He didn't want the position so its hard to believe he would want it to fall on one of his own. A reason I've said he hadn't married yet and had legitimate children.

Agreed! Hypothetical in the extreme.
 
Lets give them a chance to get married first, before the endless speculation about future heirs to the throne and conspiracy theories about who should or should not sit on Monaco`s throne after Albert.
 
Well said, NGalitzine, but you won't stop the speculation, I fear.

There's a kind of delicious pleasure in imagining people's futures - something which must drive the moderators mad....
 
Lets give them a chance to get married first, before the endless speculation about future heirs to the throne and conspiracy theories about who should or should not sit on Monaco`s throne after Albert.

I agree wholeheartedly. The poor couple isn't even married and already talking about heirs.:)
 
While all this hype about an heir for Albert and Charlene is going on, most people are unaware that Prince Albert is not the de jure Prince of Monaco. The original Lordship of Monaco -later a Principality- was founded by the Grimaldi dynasty around 1297. This aristocratic family from Genoa actually possessed several fiefdoms scattered through Provence and Savoy. Monaco is the only one to survive the French Revolution. The House Laws of the House of Grimaldo state that only a male agnate of the Grimaldi family can inherit their various possessions, including Monaco. If a Prince of Monaco has a daughter, but no sons, then he is legally required to marry her to her nearest Grimaldi cousin. This law was adherred to until 1715. In that year Prince Antonio I married his eldest daughter, Princess Louise Hippolyte to Jacques de Goyon Maintenon, a wealthy French nobleman with the approval of France's King Louis XIV, but in violation of the Grimaldi House Laws. She was previously engaged to a Grimaldi cousin, but since his family had no money the proposed marriage was set aside. Her husband became Prince Jacques I, and their decsendants reigned till 1949.
This family is correctly called the Grimaldi-Maintenon dynasty. Then once again, the Grimaldi house laws were violated when Prince Louis II legitimated his illegitimate daughter Charlotte, under pressure from France, and married her to another French nobleman , the Comte de Polignac- not a member of the Grimaldi family. Their son succeeded Louis as Prince Rainier III, and he was the father of Albert II. In compliance, then, with the proper and historic house laws of the Grimaldi Principality of Monaco, Prince Albert should marry his daughter by Charlene to the current agnatic Grimaldi dynastic Head, Henri de Grimaldi, Comte de Puget, who would then succeed Albert as Prince Henri I of Monaco. In this way, Monaco would be restored to it's lawful princely family, and it's historic house laws would once again be vindicated. See the Grimaldi dynastic website www.grimaldi.org.
 
In compliance, then, with the proper and historic house laws of the Grimaldi Principality of Monaco, Prince Albert should marry his daughter by Charlene to the current agnatic Grimaldi dynastic Head, Henri de Grimaldi, Comte de Puget, who would then succeed Albert as Prince Henri I of Monaco.
Excuse Me?? That law was years ago, now is impossible for him to marry his daughter, it's not moral! If Albert has a daughter, she will be the Princess of Monaco someday, except he has a son later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom