Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon (1930-2002)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
LadyGabrielle said:
So I am curious, what ever happened to the Princess Margarets supposed love child? He was supposedly given permission to see her will or something? Anyone hear what the outcome was?
Click to expand...

He won the right to go to court to fight to be able to see the will in February 2008 but lost that case.

He was reportedly going to then try to use Freedom of Information to access the wills.
 
Margaret was cheated out of a good life. Of course, she should have said good-bye and married Peter Townsend. Status was too important to her. Her, "supposed", child should run. Except the money would be great.
 
Osipi said:
Wow. While scrolling up to the top of the page after reading the latest posts in this thread, I had to do a double take on this picture. Is it just me or is there a remarkable resemblance between Margaret and Anne?
Click to expand...

Oh, yeah, I see it.
 
Thanks Iluvbertie. Whatever happened to him then? Is he still around and is he still trying to get something out of all of it?
 
It seems that Mr Brown has had some success Robert Brown wins legal victory in bid to see Princess Margaret's will | Mail Online

He has been granted permission to seek judicial review of a refusal to allow him access under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOI) to documents he says show there was a 'secret judicial process' for sealing Royal wills. Giving him leave, Mr Justice Phillips said at London's High Court that there were 'compelling' constitutional reasons to allow Mr Brown's legal challenge to go ahead - and that was not altered by a past Court of Appeal observation that Mr Brown's claim to be Princess Margaret's son was 'scandalous and irrational'. The Judge said the case gave rise 'to important points of principle and practice' regarding open justice and the public interest.

Further reading of the article makes it clear that this is not saying that he has any claim but rather that the sealing of the wills and the ruling of other courts etc may not have been correct.

Mr Brown can now appeal to have a judicial review of his application to see the wills - no guarantee that he will have that application granted but he can now basically apply again.
 
This has to be about the stupidest thing I've ever seen, IMO. :D
 
There are two issues here though:

1. the man making the claim to be Margaret's son - probably a little 'mad'

2. the legality of the way in which the wills are dealt with - and that is what the courts have ruled on - that maybe the wills shouldn't have been sealed and should have been made public like everybody else's wills

This decision has nothing to do with #1 and all to do with #2.
 
Iluvbertie said:
There are two issues here though:

1. the man making the claim to be Margaret's son - probably a little 'mad'

2. the legality of the way in which the wills are dealt with - and that is what the courts have ruled on - that maybe the wills shouldn't have been sealed and should have been made public like everybody else's wills

This decision has nothing to do with #1 and all to do with #2.
Click to expand...

I agree Iluvbertie - sometimes the easiest way to shut someone up is to let them see they have not been deceived. Sun Tzu calls it letting water flow downhill.
 
It seems to me a simple DNA test could end this discussion permanently. If he wont take it that tells you something. If the Palace wont give M's DNA that tells you something else!
 
The Palace cannot place themselves in a position whereby they find it necessary to respond to every nut job out there. It was one thing to prove the connection with the DOE and the Russian royal family but quite another to set a precedent where they must respond to every cuckoo in the land. :)
 
scooter said:
It seems to me a simple DNA test could end this discussion permanently. If he wont take it that tells you something. If the Palace wont give M's DNA that tells you something else!
Click to expand...
If Mr. Brown won't take the DNA test, this would tell really a lot.
But if the Palace refused to give Princess Margaret's DNA sample, I don't think it would tell so much; after all, they can't allow themselved to set such a precedent.
 
Margaret was cremated so the palace doesn't a ready source of her DNA. They would have to test it against Sarah, David or the Queen. But why open yourself up to every crackpot requesting DNA from various royals.
 
The palace not giving a DNA sample doesn't say anything about the legitimacy of this claim - it says that they're not going to open themselves up to every person who claims to be a long lost child of a royal.

This guy has to know that he's not going to get a DNA sample from Margaret's family, so it doesn't really matter if he's lying or not in his claims as he has to know that they'll never prove him wrong.
 
Princess of Durham said:
The Palace cannot place themselves in a position whereby they find it necessary to respond to every nut job out there. It was one thing to prove the connection with the DOE and the Russian royal family but quite another to set a precedent where they must respond to every cuckoo in the land. :)
Click to expand...


Exactly.

Philip's DNA was used to prove (or disprove had that been the case) that the remains were in fact those of known and acknowledged family members - those of his grandmother's sister and her family (he would have had the same female line DNA as Alexandra and her children due to his descent from Alexandra's sister).

To force The Queen, as Margaret's sister, or her children, to provide DNA to prove or disprove a 'believed' by the claimant and not acknowledged or accepted by the royals themselves leaves them open to every crackpot doing the same thing.
 
On the other hand, it definitively squashes said crack pot immediately and permanently.
 
Even I dont support entertaining every nut job claiming to be a long-lost child of a royal, or a real heir to the throne. But just wanna know wat s the legal system in UK..
I mean its the court that should decide right? If a person can request for a DNA test or not.. How the "Palace" decides?
 
I don't see any compelling evidence that would cause a court to order a DNA sample. Even if he was Margaret's son, he is illegitimate and not in the line of succession. The will was executed so if he was left something (highly unlikely), it would have be distributed.
 
scooter said:
On the other hand, it definitively squashes said crack pot immediately and permanently.
Click to expand...


It's like the heads of the Hydra; you cut one head and ten new will spring up. The world is full of people who thinks, they are Jesus Christ or a lost child or I don't know what.:whistling:
 
Skippyboo said:
I don't see any compelling evidence that would cause a court to order a DNA sample. Even if he was Margaret's son, he is illegitimate and not in the line of succession. The will was executed so if he was left something (highly unlikely), it would have be distributed.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily - as we saw with Diana's will - the wishes of the deceased can be ignored or overridden.
 
Iluvbertie said:
Not necessarily - as we saw with Diana's will - the wishes of the deceased can be ignored or overridden.
Click to expand...

Really? I never knew this. Which wishes in Diana's will were ignored? And how come they got away with that..without having their heads chopped off by the ultra-loyal Di-brigade...
 
The December 17, 2012 edition of People magazine had an exquisite photograph of Princess Margaret Rose near a climbing red rose.
I thought how appropriate to have roses with a princess whose middle name is Rose. :lancasterrose::lancasterrose::lancasterrose:
​

HereditaryPrincess, The photos of Princess Margaret are absolutely lovely!
As a child: She looks like it could be Easter Sunday.
As a baby with her mother: The Duchess of York has a pretty hairstyle. Princess Margaret's painting captures her childhood glee beautifully.
​

When Princess Margaret was born in 1930, no one would have thought of her as a spare heiress presumptive. Her uncle Edward was still The Prince of Wales. Surely he would marry and have children.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I stumbled across these photos of Princess Margaret from various stages in her life whilst browsing on Pinterest last night:

As a child ~ As a baby with her mother ~ I've never seen this photo of Princess Margaret before, at first I didn't think it was her – she looks different here ~ Princess Margaret horse riding/racing ~ Princess Margaret with Diana, Princess of Wales ~ Princess Margaret with long hair in 1969 ~ Princess Margaret and a toddler Lady Sarah Chatto ~ Princess Margaret with Prince George, Duke of Kent and his wife Princess Marina ~ A painting of Princess Margaret done in her childhood ~ Princess Margaret and the then Princess Elizabeth at Girl Guides

Since Princess Margaret doesn't have her own picture thread, I thought I'd post these here - at first I wasn't sure whether they belonged in the picture thread for the BRF in general or this thread.
 
An Ard Ri said:
Princess Margaret Compilation (1960-1968)
Click to expand...

I like the part where Princess Margaret and Antony got to view all the lovey flowers. These flowers are a gardener's delight!! :rose2:
​
 
Last edited:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
King Edward I (1239-1307) and Wives (Eleanor of Castile & Margaret of France)
Replies
17
Views
1K
LauraS3514
LauraS3514
Blog Real
King Henry VI (1421-1471) and Queen Margaret of Anjou
Replies
7
Views
995
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
W
Princess Margaret and the Royals
Replies
12
Views
2K
87SaminB
8
Blog Real
Prince Edward, Duke of Kent & Strathearn & Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld
Replies
7
Views
1K
Prinsara
Prinsara
doro
Royal Predictions for 2024
2 3
Replies
65
Views
24K
Hans-Rickard
Hans-Rickard

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom