Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 16: January-May 2011


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why not if the government does on its official website in relation to legislation that only applies to the royal family and had to be signed by the Queen (who also had to approve all addenda etc) so the Queen also had to approve her name being on this list.

As the Queen would have approved her name appearing on an official government list of those in the Royal Family why shouldn't Sarah regard herself as being a member of that family?

Of course she is a part of it through her daughters but I mean that she'd never dare call herself part of the "official" family, in royal terms. She's not part of official functions for a reason, there is a line that separates her just like for Diana and Mark Phillips.
 
Last edited:
silver, it's no use. People see what they want to see in terms of this, in spite of the very careful explanations both here and contained in the legislation.

It's in Sarah's best interest to continue to portray herself as a Royal insider of one form or another, and her teeming throngs of ardent fans will brook no argument that does not conclude with her still being Royal, and Andrew's wife. It's as though the past nineteen years, since she was caught out with her financial advisor, simply never happened.

Every time the Duke of York bends over to scratch his left ankle, it does not signify that he intends to repeat his error of marriage to Sarah - but there are those who, deeply enmeshed, consider it to be so.

And you stated it very well - there is a line that separates her, just as it does for Mark Phillips. But no matter how insightful your statement, it falls on fallow ground.
 
Where are people here saying that Sarah is still Andrew's wife, or that Andrew is about to remarry Sarah?

As for the list, I don't think it means that Sarah is still royal--having lost the HRH, I don't think being on a list of "Royals" is enough to reinstate her.

That being said, Sarah is on that list and Mark Phillips isn't--they are both divorced from members of the royal family, but there must be a reason Sarah is on that list and he isn't. I assume it's because, as much as people sometimes don't like it, Beatrice and Eugenie are still fairly high on the list of succession--and Sarah is their mother.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rmay.....

More than once, more than one posting party here has stated that because of Sarah's continued residence under Andrew's roof and the presumption of continued use of her, er, charms, that Sarah and Andrew have a de facto common-law marriage. Now I'm not sure if these individuals who post this have advanced degrees in law which cover UK circumstances, or how it is that they know that this couple are intimate, but there you are. And as to them remarrying.....well, it's repeatedly remarked on here by the ardent followers, who seem to snatch at every movement of Andrew's to draw the conclusion that a remarriage is simply inevitable. And I mean, literally every movement - or non-movement: each and every thing he does is seized upon as proof positive of his endless devotion to Sarah and their imminent remarriage.

And has been stated earlier - and oddly, seems to be continually ignored in the rush to use this Web site of "evidence" of, well, a lot more than it is: there are trademark issues regarding the Queen's granddaughters that this inclusion on the list covers.

As I said earlier...sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
 
The Queen's granddaughters yes - and they are listed. So are Peter, Autumn and Zara Philips - but not Mark Philips but Sarah is - why Sarah and not Mark - the father of Peter and Zara - the father of two of the Queen's grandchildren? Why the ex-wife of the Queen's son but not the ex-husband of the Queen's daughter?

Why are people ignoring the very fact that this is an official list attached to a piece of legislation and that the Queen herself had to sign that legislation?
The Queen and the government had to create the list and the Queen and the government put Sarah on that list?

Obviously you disagree with the Queen and the government's list of who is a member of the royal family and that is your right. Personally I will go with the government and the Queen to decide who is a member of the family and they say Sarah is. I had assumed that Sarah was no longer a member of the family until I saw this list and realised that the government and the Queen obviously must see her as a member of the family to cover her in this legislation - legislation that only applies to member of the royal family.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My thoughts on Sarah vs Mark on list, could Sarah be on because she still carries style of Duchess allbeit divorced, while Mark carries non such title/style? Just a guess....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was not aware that Sarah continued to be a member of the royal family after her marriage. But just one question: wouldn't this actually mean that she should receive a yearly apanage from the government? Sorry but I am a little confused here as I thought that the Duchess doesn't receive any payments of that sort.
 
In Britain only two people get any payments from the government - the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh. The rest are supported by the Queen or the Duke of Cornwall. The Civil List only pays money to the monarch and the spouse of the monarch.

The Queen reimburses any government money given to members of the Royal Family (as up until 1992 the government did make payments to members of the family but rather then repeal those pieces of legislation the Queen and government felt it easier for her to simply reimburse the government).

Charles supports himself and his family from the income of the Duchy of Cornwall estate.

Sarah never received any money from the government, even when married to Andrew, although he did then but that money is now amongst the money that the Queen reimburses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you Iluvbertie:flowers: I was not aware of this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bertie, did Mark Phillips remarry and if he did, could that be the reason he is not on the List? I honestly don't know if he's married at present or not. Now I'm curious.:)
 
Bertie, did Mark Phillips remarry and if he did, could that be the reason he is not on the List? I honestly don't know if he's married at present or not. Now I'm curious.:)


Yes he has remarried but that doesn't change the fact that he is the father of the Queen's grandchildren (and now the grandfather of her great-granddaughter). He, like Sarah, is the biological parent of the monarch's grandchildren - same relationship.
 
I am wondering if this is just an anticipatory/defense move on the part of the BRF. I don't recall that Mark Phillips has ever especially tried to profit by his former association with the family, clearly Sarah has and does continue to gain attention by her former relationship. Maybe they are including her so that her name may not be used in any way for profit and they don't feel they have to with MP.

Just a thought.
 
I second Princess Of Durham`s idea of the anticipatory/defense move on the part of the BRF. With Sarah's "creative" way of funding her lifestyle and her being already involved a bit in the new TV channel OWN (Oprah Winfrey Network) well who knows what they/she can come up with to remind us that she is/was royal..
 
Yes he has remarried but that doesn't change the fact that he is the father of the Queen's grandchildren (and now the grandfather of her great-granddaughter). He, like Sarah, is the biological parent of the monarch's grandchildren - same relationship.

Thank you, I was just throwing out an idea. :flowers:
 
I second Princess Of Durham`s idea of the anticipatory/defense move on the part of the BRF. With Sarah's "creative" way of funding her lifestyle and her being already involved a bit in the new TV channel OWN (Oprah Winfrey Network) well who knows what they/she can come up with to remind us that she is/was royal..

I'm going to "third" this idea - it's highly sensible. We've all had ideas of how to place limits on Sarah's less savory commercial activities, and it could well be that the BRF consulted with knowledgable parties as to how this might be achieved, and extending such protections from exploitation of images of the two York girls.

So what *is* Sarah doing in these frosty winter months?
 
So what *is* Sarah doing in these frosty winter months?

She has been filming the Oprah documentary, as far as I know. But other than that, she's been lying low and steering clear of the media...which is just what people here said she should do, I think :flowers:
 
I'm going to "third" this idea - it's highly sensible. We've all had ideas of how to place limits on Sarah's less savory commercial activities, and it could well be that the BRF consulted with knowledgable parties as to how this might be achieved, and extending such protections from exploitation of images of the two York girls.

So what *is* Sarah doing in these frosty winter months?

There may well be some truth in what you say NAP.

The only recent thing I read about Sarah is that she spent Christmas quietly in the UK, and was in Canada for a week filming her series for OWN. She gave one interview in Canada but refused to comment on the forthcoming Royal wedding other than to say it was wonderful news and that she was excited for them.
It has been reported in the papers that Andrew, Sarah and the girls had planned to go to Verbier skiing next month to celebrate his birthday (the report said this trip is routine for them and not unusual ), but there are doubts over it now because of the wedding and the risk of injuries close to the wedding. They may decide on something else to mark his birhday this year or reschedule the trip.

All in all she has being keeping a very low profile, if that's the type of understanding she has with Andrew at least she's sticking to it.
 
Oprah Winfrey delays Fergie's TV show because it's 'too boring'


Read more: Oprah Winfrey delays Fergie's TV show because it's 'too boring' | Mail Online


I do hope that the princesses don't get involved in this sort of thing as it isn't what princesses should be doing.

I have no problem with Sarah doing this as she needs to earn a living and all she has to sell is herself but she should stand up to Oprah etc and say 'no way will you have access to my daughters' and if she doesn't then the Queen needs to step in and stop the princesses from getting involved.
 
Oprah Winfrey delays Fergie's TV show because it's 'too boring'


Read more: Oprah Winfrey delays Fergie's TV show because it's 'too boring' | Mail Online

From the article: "Sarah had also said the cameras would have access to members of her family, including her daughters, but we are finding it hard to get them to be part of it.'

Hmmm.. access to members of her family including her daughters eh? Who else would there be? Andrew? Wasn't it something like this that landed Sarah in the big mess in the first place?

 
Personally i think that is why Sarah doesn't remarry, because she doesn't want to lose her so called title!! She doesn't want to revert back to being a mere commoner
 
Personally i think that is why Sarah doesn't remarry, because she doesn't want to lose her so called title!! She doesn't want to revert back to being a mere commoner

She doesn't have a title but a style - like any other divorced wife of a peer, including Diana, Princess of Wales.

She was a commoner throughout her life as she was never a peer in her own right - just like Diana who was also never a peer in her own right.

Except for the Queen the rest of the royal women are actually commoners as none of them are peers (able to take their seats in the pre-1999 House of Lords). They are all able to stand for election to the House of Commons, even when they were married both Sarah and Diana could have stood for election as they were 'mere commoners'.
 
I too said HAHA at first but then I thought "oh boy!" I'm now concerned that Oprah could use all her power and convince Sarah to "go deeper for her own good". I apprehend lots of "soul searching" just for ratings and the "soul searching" that Oprah and her network are looking for - IMO - I don't know why but I fear - would include some sharing of family dirty laundry (here ROYAL family). I'm afraid Sarah doesn't have the necessary self-esteem to stand up to Oprah (and I understand Sarah on that point). Poor girl she kinda painted herself in a corner: she either betray the RF for which she may still have warm and genuine feelings or she lets down a rich media icon who may save her from her current financial distress or, if upset, may put her deeper in the mud. Poor Sarah (never thought I would write that "poor Sarah")
 
I too said HAHA at first but then I thought "oh boy!" I'm now concerned that Oprah could use all her power and convince Sarah to "go deeper for her own good". I apprehend lots of "soul searching" just for ratings and the "soul searching" that Oprah and her network are looking for - IMO - I don't know why but I fear - would include some sharing of family dirty laundry (here ROYAL family). I'm afraid Sarah doesn't have the necessary self-esteem to stand up to Oprah (and I understand Sarah on that point). Poor girl she kinda painted herself in a corner: she either betray the RF for which she may still have warm and genuine feelings or she lets down a rich media icon who may save her from her current financial distress or, if upset, may put her deeper in the mud. Poor Sarah (never thought I would write that "poor Sarah")

When I read that the program was so far deemed "boring" (if you read down in the article though, the network denies this) and saw how they're having troubles getting Sarah's family to co-operate on this, I got the gut feeling is that getting some of the RF or dirt on the RF is what they're really after to begin with. Something that would really sensationalize this program and "reveal" things never before revealed to the public.

In all the years during her marriage and after her divorce until now, Sarah has not uttered one derogatory remark about any of the BRF and most likely she knows how much money could be made from doing so. Although Sarah does have her faults, I really think Sarah would refuse to sell out Andrew, his family or her daughters for a TV show.
 
Sarah's invitation is not surprising. The tabloid press makes much of her isolation from the Royal Family but it's not actually the case.

Of course William would invite her. She was a close friend of Diana's for years before the falling out; Sarah is the mother of his cousins to whom he's close; Sarah would not be living in a royal residence if the Queen didn't approve; she remains very close to Andrew; she was badly affected by the GFC, not by squandering money; in the recent past, she's worked very hard to clear enormous debts and succeeded; some journalists have raised the possibility that Andrew was fully informed of her attempt to squeeze money for 'access' to him. Sarah's mother, Susan, was and remained, a close friend of Charles' until her death. Shortly before her death, PoW wrote a glowing Forward to her newly published book. It is highly unlikely that he would turn on her daughter.

Sarah remains very well liked by many members of the Royal Family. The tabloids can't quite accept this: Sarah continues to provide good 'copy' for their scurrilous newspapers and their gullible readership. Their hypocrisy is breath-taking as, at the time of the York's separation, they were all calling for the heads of the Family for treating Sarah so shabbily. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Sarah's rehabilitation is a direct result of the Family's trying to make amends.

I often reflect on the fact that despite the ill-informed and derogatory newspaper articles about Sarah, she has retained all of her close friendships, remains popular in royal and aristocratic circles and is adored by her daughters. All of those who know her best can't all be wrong.
 
From the article: "Sarah had also said the cameras would have access to members of her family, including her daughters, but we are finding it hard to get them to be part of it.'

Hmmm.. access to members of her family including her daughters eh? Who else would there be? Andrew? Wasn't it something like this that landed Sarah in the big mess in the first place?

Yes, I noticed that too.

I applaud her efforts to come to terms with the results of her own actions and behaviours, if this article is to be believed: but did she "sell" herself to Oprah by promising access to her ex and her daughters? It does in fact sound like more of the same...
 
When I read that the program was so far deemed "boring" (if you read down in the article though, the network denies this) and saw how they're having troubles getting Sarah's family to co-operate on this, I got the gut feeling is that getting some of the RF or dirt on the RF is what they're really after to begin with. Something that would really sensationalize this program and "reveal" things never before revealed to the public.

In all the years during her marriage and after her divorce until now, Sarah has not uttered one derogatory remark about any of the BRF and most likely she knows how much money could be made from doing so. Although Sarah does have her faults, I really think Sarah would refuse to sell out Andrew, his family or her daughters for a TV show.

Unfortunatley your gut instinct may be right Osipi, something similar crossed my mind. Hopefully we are all being a bit too suspicious and reading too much into it. I also think the Royal wedding in April might have something to do with the delay. If this is at Sarah's request she is being wise (especially if rumours of an invite prove to be correct).
Press attention or negative headlines re the show around the time of the wedding would be a nightmare. Sarah does owe Oprah a lot (financially and for giving her something to focus on) but her relationship with Andrew and their daughters should be far more important to her. I really think the way Andrew and the girls have supported her will have meant the world to her, and I think hurting or upsetting them again is the last thing she would want to do. The less Andrew and the girls have to do with the show the better, but I would love to know if Andrew's trip to NY last month had anything to do with it.
 
From the article: "Sarah had also said the cameras would have access to members of her family...

Could be her Ferguson family, not the Royal Family, that they mean.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom