Prince George and Princess Charlotte, General News Part 3: May 2016-April 2018


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Prince George attended his second ever Trooping the Colour yesterday, and according to his mum, the Duchess of Cambridge, the third-in-line to the throne was "so excited."

Speaking to a well-wisher as she greeted the crowds on The Mall at the Patron's Lunch on Saturday, Kate revealed that Prince George greatly enjoyed Trooping the Colour the day before. According to the royal fan, Kate said: "I've honestly never seen him so excited. His face lit up."
Read more: Kate talks about Prince George's excitement at Trooping the Colour
 
:previous:At this age/stage I'd expect that Charlotte would be "feisty."
I thought she looked a bit tearful at Trooping the Colour, perhaps frightened by the noise.. She' is sweet looking, I hope she takes after the queen, whom she resembles...
 
This made me laugh

The Duchess of Cambridge told Ella Hunter-Gibbs, that George had talked to her about the wet weather earlier in the day. Ella told HELLO!: "I'm so excited right now, we were talking about how it has finally stopped raining.

"She was saying that George opened the door today and said, 'it's not very nice out today mummy, is it?' She said 'No, it isn't George.'"
 
They may be short of stature, but when it comes to Princess Charlotte and Prince George, their fashion influence looms large.

Just hours after Charlotte made her Buckingham Palace balcony debut on Saturday wearing a pair of pale pink Mary Jane leather shoes, the manufacturer has been inundated with requests.

"We have been non-stop since the weekend – I'm actually having to turn orders away," Paul Bolton, managing director of Early Days tells PEOPLE.

"There has been a real boost but now we have to worry about how to produce them all!"

The British company is now running at eight to 12 weeks estimated delivery time for all their pre-walker styles.
Read more: All About Princess Charlotte's Pink Shoes from Trooping the Colour : People.com
 
Did anyone see the bit at the latest event, where George was almost falling over the balcony and William knelt down to stop him.. and the queen said to him "Stand up William!?"
What was he supposed to do Let G keep on hanging over the edge?
 
Did anyone see the bit at the latest event, where George was almost falling over the balcony and William knelt down to stop him.. and the queen said to him "Stand up William!?"
What was he supposed to do Let G keep on hanging over the edge?


That's a pretty intense dramatization of events. George was not in danger or at risk of falling over the balcony ever. It looked like William crouched down to talk to him, not because there was a safety issue.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app
 
That's a pretty intense dramatization of events. George was not in danger or at risk of falling over the balcony ever. It looked like William crouched down to talk to him, not because there was a safety issue.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app
Exactly. And the Queen told him to stand up because the flypast was arriving. He had been down there talking to George for a while.
 
well loioked to me like G was getting pretty excited and might have fallen.
 
well loioked to me like G was getting pretty excited and might have fallen.

If you watch the before and after the "scene" the BBC doesn't include The Queen motioning William to stand up as the flypast is about the start. You will see the The Queen is comfortable talking to George before and after the event and she simply told William to stand up when the helicopters were flying over for simply courtesy. George was never ever going to fall over that balcony, seeing as he never actually gets anywhere near the edge. The Queen would also distracted her grandson from taking care of his son should a situation like that actually have risen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb9hrWbb2NI

Start from around 2 hours 43 and you'll see what really happens instead of a snapshot. :whistling:
 
I like the way four of the royal women (that includes Charlotte) dressed in a lovely blush pink color. Or that was what the color looked like. Very nice when they all coordinate like that imo. :flowers:
 
They don't look like that they want any parts of that goose.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
Smart kids...geese can be a challenge.


LaRae
 
They don't look like that they want any parts of that goose.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

or perhaps any part of the person who photographed them...:bang: Leave the children to be children, for heaven's sake!
 
:sleeping: they are public figures in a public place, i don't get the fuzz about those photos.

any other royal kids get photographed outside, no big deal. what is so special about the cambridges?
 
:sleeping: they are public figures in a public place, i don't get the fuzz about those photos.

any other royal kids get photographed outside, no big deal. what is so special about the cambridges?


In fact no other royal kids are photographed outside these days, other than in the 1990s, unless the palace allows a photocall!
You won´t normally see the royal children from Denmark, Netherlands, Norway or Sweden just passing the streets or playing somewhere. All the photos we see of them, are more or less staged (the Lech holidays of the dutch Royals, Ingrid and Magnus of Norway at their grandparent´s silver jubilee, the King and Queen of the Belgians bringing the children to school after their summer holidays, first little "engagements" of Christian and Isabella of Denmark, 1st day at school etc etc.).
Photographers are allowed to attend these events to leave them completely alone during their private lives in return.

What makes the Cambridge´s so special? Well, they´re of course not more important or precious than other royal children. But other than their continental counterparts, they´re not just popular in their country, but, small as they are, some sort of "world celebrities", no matter if their family or we like it or not. In that regard it is only fair for their parents, to be very much aware and protective - I in William or Catherine´s place would do the same thing!
 
In fact no other royal kids are photographed outside these days, other than in the 1990s, unless the palace allows a photocall!
You won´t normally see the royal children from Denmark, Netherlands, Norway or Sweden just passing the streets or playing somewhere. All the photos we see of them, are more or less staged (the Lech holidays of the dutch Royals, Ingrid and Magnus of Norway at their grandparent´s silver jubilee, the King and Queen of the Belgians bringing the children to school after their summer holidays, first little "engagements" of Christian and Isabella of Denmark, 1st day at school etc etc.).
Photographers are allowed to attend these events to leave them completely alone during their private lives in return.

What makes the Cambridge´s so special? Well, they´re of course not more important or precious than other royal children. But other than their continental counterparts, they´re not just popular in their country, but, small as they are, some sort of "world celebrities", no matter if their family or we like it or not. In that regard it is only fair for their parents, to be very much aware and protective - I in William or Catherine´s place would do the same thing!

Especially the Danish kids are a great example, I've lost count how many photos I've seen taking the twins to school by bike, Mary or Fred wearing ordinary clothes, nothing staged about that. Yet there is no uproar on this forum when these pictures are posted here.
 


Charlotte is getting so big already!
It looks like they really did not trust the geese lol :p

in these pictures I dont think they had any idea about being photographed.
and regarding other royal kids, just yesterday 3 of the Danes were photographed on their bikes on their way to horseback riding school (these photos usually come out as the family stay in Grasten for part of the summer)
http://3.t.cdn.belga.be/belgaimage:94255672:preview:watermark?v=577251ca&m=ejfpkagf
 
Especially the Danish kids are a great example, I've lost count how many photos I've seen taking the twins to school by bike, Mary or Fred wearing ordinary clothes, nothing staged about that. Yet there is no uproar on this forum when these pictures are posted here.
I have to say I think it's a big difference in this case. That the kids are with the nanny. Them being photographed in the precense of their parent it can be excused as photographing the adults. But in this case it's probably clear that they were targeting the kids. (I've not watched the pictures since this goes over my personal line)
 
I have to say I think it's a big difference in this case. That the kids are with the nanny. Them being photographed in the precense of their parent it can be excused as photographing the adults. But in this case it's probably clear that they were targeting the kids. (I've not watched the pictures since this goes over my personal line)

Thank you hernameispekka and I agree that without the direct consent of the Cambridges for their children to be photographed is an issue. Our Muhler shares that having one or both parents present to give consent is why we've seen these types photos of the Danish royal children in the past. Here is his post from today.



"Originally Posted by Frelinghighness
How are they against privacy rules if they are in public? Because there are children?
Basically you can't just walk up to anyone, whether in public or in private, and take their picture without consent. Especially children.
Unless there is a very good reason or the one you are photographing is a part of something where (s)he must be expected to be photographed, like a carnival.
Strictly speaking that also applies to celebs and royals. - But of course royals know that what they do is somewhat newsworthy. So as long as the photographer is standing in open view and perhaps saying hi, it's part of the game.
But if the photographer had been hiding behind a bush or using a 20.000 mm lens PET would very like grab him by the collarbone.
And if Mary had say "no photos" to the photographer - that's it."

But as said before, every year photographers hang around at that intersection to snap a few photos and the DRF know it and I imagine the photographers sometimes see the children playing in the park. But of course they don't take photos of that."

Muhler clearly states that without the consent of Frederik or Mary the photographers know they are not to photograph the children. Mary was present when she and the children were out riding bikes and she gave her consent.

I have yet to see these types of paparazzi photos featuring the Spanish, Danish, Swedish, Belgian, Dutch, and Norwegian children with just their caregivers/bodyguards when their parents are not present.
 
Last edited:
:sleeping: they are public figures in a public place, i don't get the fuzz about those photos.

any other royal kids get photographed outside, no big deal. what is so special about the cambridges?

To be fair, DoM, some of us believe that no children should be photographed in any commercial context without the permission of their parents or guardians.
 
To be fair, DoM, some of us believe that no children should be photographed in any commercial context without the permission of their parents or guardians.

Sadly hel I've read comments on this site (Not by Duke of Marmalade) that stated that any royal child is basically "fair game" for photographers because the taxpayers pay for their security.
 
If we are using that logic - where are the daily photos of Cameron's kids or Obama's daughters? Big brother cameras in all royal and government residences ?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
We've seen pictures of the Danish children last year in Spain without Fred & Mary present, all I was pointing out that there was no outrage about those pictures or calls to remove the links, as it happens with the Cambridges from time to time.

I don't think at all that children are fair game but do think that as long as there is no harmful activity such as chasing or harrassing (I strongly disagree with that) I don't have a problem with pictures of royal children in public places. In the Cambridge's case the nanny is replacing the parents and even though many posters here disagree, the future King of England and his sister are public persons, no matter what age.
 
We've seen pictures of the Danish children last year in Spain without Fred & Mary present, all I was pointing out that there was no outrage about those pictures or calls to remove the links, as it happens with the Cambridges from time to time.

I don't think at all that children are fair game but do think that as long as there is no harmful activity such as chasing or harrassing (I strongly disagree with that) I don't have a problem with pictures of royal children in public places. In the Cambridge's case the nanny is replacing the parents and even though many posters here disagree, the future King of England and his sister are public persons, no matter what age.

Maria is not their parent/guardian so she can't give permission for her charges to be photographed. Also after viewing photos, it is apparent that she is also unaware that she is being photographed while in the park.

If the children's parents give their consent to photographs being taken in a public place that is their right to do so. In the recent pictures of the Danish children, Mary was present and agreed to having the kids photographed. The objection here is that the children's parents are not present and therefore cannot give their consent.
 
Maria is not their parent/guardian so she can't give permission for her charges to be photographed. Also after viewing photos, it is apparent that she is also unaware that she is being photographed while in the park.

If the children's parents give their consent to photographs being taken in a public place that is their right to do so. In the recent pictures of the Danish children, Mary was present and agreed to having the kids photographed. The objection here is that the children's parents are not present and therefore cannot give their consent.

George and Charlotte are sweet, but; that's true, and something to keep in mind IMO. William and Catherine also issued a statement asking the paparazzi to not take photographs of George and Charlotte in intrusive ways (when it was discovered that they were using tactics like luring other children into playing with George and Charlotte just so they could get a photo of them), however I can't tell whether these photos were taken in a "normal" way or an "intrusive" way.
 
George and Charlotte are sweet, but; that's true, and something to keep in mind IMO. William and Catherine also issued a statement asking the paparazzi to not take photographs of George and Charlotte in intrusive ways (when it was discovered that they were using tactics like luring other children into playing with George and Charlotte just so they could get a photo of them), however I can't tell whether these photos were taken in a "normal" way or an "intrusive" way.

IMO the photos appear to be taken at a great distance which is a tactic that the paparazzi have used in the past with members of the British royal family. These do not look like the photos that have been taken by Catherine or designated photographer who was requested to take George and Charlotte's pictures. I doubt that the Cambridges gave their consent to have their children photographed at the park while feeding the water fowl.
 
Also DoM, not every users on the BRF forum visit the Danish forum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom