King Carl Gustaf Controversy: 2010-2011


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

JessRulz

Former Administrator
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
8,782
City
Melbourne
Country
Australia
In late 2010, an unofficial biography of King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden was published which revealed that the King had had an affair with a Swedish actress during the late 1990s/early 2000s. The book, Carl XVI Gustaf - The Relectant Monarch, also stated that Queen Silvia was aware of her husband's infidelity.

King Carl Gustaf addressed the issue at a press conference at a hunt a short time later, neither confirming nor denying the allegations, but stating "I’ve talked with my family and the Queen. We will turn the page and go on now, because as I understand, this is about things that happened a long time ago."

**Discussions related to the allegations brought up in the biography take place here: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...monarch-by-thomas-sj-berg-2010-a-29110.html**

In May 2011, Swedish news outlets reported that photographs of the King at strip clubs were in existance.

This thread is to discuss these reportings.
 
Last edited:
I am afraid that the newest allegations only have to do indirectly with the book; they are independent from it the result of different journalists' serious research.
This story is far more serious, actually dangerous for the King, as this is not about moral standards and personality flaws anymore, but about his active or silent approval of illegal acts.
 
This is really bad for the king and the monarchy... and today one of the eveningpapers writes about how the king was "sold out" by his friends: The friends wanted to buy the gangster guy´s party pictures of them and the king, but when the friends realised it was just the king on the pictures (and no friends), the friends didnt want to buy the pictures anymore...
Its in many ways a sad story AND (as Boris said abowe) a very very serious story
 
But if that is true, one can assume, that the King didn't ask his friends to buy the pics, but that they acted on their own...
 
Last edited:
Long live our Swedish Royal Court

Right now, there are unfortunately people who, for obscure reasons, want to denigrate our Royal Family.
 
Right now, there are unfortunately people who, for obscure reasons, want to denigrate our Royal Family.

The Royal Family shouldn't give them any 'material' to do so, though- if the story is to be believed. Although I don't understand why this is all coming out so many years after these events.

Article today:
http://m.thelocal.se/33900/20110521/
 
Last edited:
Leave the King in peace

There is somewhat strained over the attempts to make te King, Carl XVI Gustav, the villain, both in the book and it has happened in recent days. So leave the king in peace. Those who want to topple him from the throne will find better arguments than a sleazy gossip book and an idiot friend.

One can not judge someone before you have evidence, nor for that happen to be misguided friends. Red or Blue - King or President: does not matter! In a democratic state should not be done by Swedish TV4 and other media did. Media should be more nuanced debate. Bertil Tänert, palace spokeswoman, said that he did not know what it was we would comment. The only thing that there is a video clip in which one of TV4 as reporters speak with one of the most notorious criminal gangsters in Sweden and no one can verify authenticity. HRH The King can hardly be condemned in the media to one of his acquaintances said or done weird things? By then, not many people have remained friends with each other - not me either ...
 
There appears to be a major confusion about sources, probably because the whole discussion here actually takes place under the wrong topic header.
These news have ceased to be based on the biography of King Carl Gustaf which was published last year.
They're based on the research of a serious book published now by journalist Nuri Kino, 'Den Svenske Gudfadern' (The Swedish Godfather), about the life and businesses of Milan Sevos.
Sevos intimates that he has pictures of King Carl XVI Gustaf in embarrassing situations including several women and the use of hard drugs from the time Sevos managed a private club in Stockholm back in the 1980s.
The King's friend Anders Lettstrom, allegedly pictured with the King on the photos, is said to have contacted Sevos, offering money in order to try to buy the pictures.
Bertil Ternert, spokesman of the court's press department, is currently dealing in an abysmal way with the situation, giving live radio interviews here, talking to tabloids over the phone there, complaining about everyone calling him, and accusing Swedish channel TV4 of boradcasting special programs about the issue...
...instead of dealing with the issue itself and thinking before he speaks.

Link to article with some of the spokesman's latest utterings:
http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/1.2443670/hatsk-diskussion-i-tv-lugna-ner-er
 
Last edited:
The best thing he can do IMO is keeping a low profile.
I really see the monarchy in danger now. :ermm:
 
What would happen if the King were found to have done something illegal or supported something illegal? Would the government ask him to abdicate? Could he be charged with an offence?
 
What would happen if the King were found to have done something illegal or supported something illegal? Would the government ask him to abdicate? Could he be charged with an offence?

His Majesty the King has immunity and can not be prosecuted even if he does something illegal.

The king, he is not accused of anything, so long, other than a "friend" to the king talked with one of the most criminal gangsters. What they talked about, pictures or other evidence has not been able to master. So the problem for the court is that they do not have anything to add comments to. No one can ask the court to take responsibility for what a "friend" to the king does!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In Sweden, are prosecutions made in the name of the Crown? In other words, if the King was not immune from prosecution, would you have a situation of "His Majesty the King vs. His Majesty the King"? Is this why the king has immunity?


His Majesty the King has immunity and can not be prosecuted even if he does something illegal.

True. He can't be held responsible for what his friends do or the contacts they make. However, I also believe that he has let the Swedish people down if the rumours about him are true, to say nothing of the effect on his family. It could well be that the court of public opinion will try him and there could be pressure put on him to abdicate. What particularly bothers me, beyond the adultery question, is the suggested association with the criminal element.


No one can ask the court to take responsibility for what a "friend" to the king does!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mermaid1962 said:
True. He can't be held responsible for what his friends do or the contacts they make. However, I also believe that he has let the Swedish people down if the rumours about him are true, to say nothing of the effect on his family. It could well be that the court of public opinion will try him and there could be pressure put on him to abdicate. What particularly bothers me, beyond the adultery question, is the suggested association with the criminal element.

That's true but so far what we've seen are allegations and rumours. I think there's likely to be an element of truth. It would be dangerous for people to accuse the King of these things if they couldn't back them up at least to some extent. The King has said he is never going to abdicate, though.
 
I think there's likely to be an element of truth.

Speculation is just as bad regardless of who is casting them and whom they affect. If you want to behave serous, it is best to wait for the evidence ...

I think we should wait and see the authenticity of the alleged photographic evidence is before us who are interested in the royals also begin to contribute to speculation. If we, you and I, being charged with anything or accused of something we get in all cases, the evidence presented to us and we have an opportunity to respond to what we are accused. Here there is only one of Sweden's most notorious gangsters who says to a journalist who is not confident can verify the authenticity of the images. Nothing has been shown in public and the court has no material to make a comment. We do not know what, when or how. And yet, this has been enough for the Swedish TV 4 blowing up a story. Unbelievable!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Karisma: Well, the "photos" were enough to TV4 to act like Fox News did with the rapper that was invitied to the white house and that they found some minor things about. Only reason i know about that rapperthing is due to Daily show btw:)

This has been blown WAY over propotions.
 
This has been blown WAY over propotions.
I have to agree, with this. I had a chance to watch TV4 coverage this week, headline in every news and here I had though that Sweden is miles ahead of us, hmm not in this case, one interview aired several days over and over again... :ermm:

I'm not naive, I don't think that the King is an angel, but accusing him of something without actually showing the evidence is not how serious journalism should be done. If you have something, show it...without that it's just spreading rumors, not journalism.

If there will be any relevant evidence provided and it confirms what was writen, contacting mafia and existence of the photos, then I think it's time for the King to reconsider his abdication statements, or he might very likely be the last Bernadotte on Swedish throne, Sweden is not Italy after all...
 
If this is only the tip of the iceberg and there is much more we dont know about the only thing the king can do for the institution of monarchy in Sweden is abdicate in favour of Victoria. After all, Nixon resigned to preserve the institution of the precidency in the USA, but he actually did stuff that warranted this.
 
If this is only the tip of the iceberg and there is much more we dont know about the only thing the king can do for the institution of monarchy in Sweden is abdicate in favour of Victoria. After all, Nixon resigned to preserve the institution of the precidency in the USA, but he actually did stuff that warranted this.

Now you will do the same antics as the reporters on Swedish TV 4, or Fox, as you relate to. You make speculations as if it already would have adequate information. Let the scandal reporters handle this.

In a letter addressed to the media takes the King's friend, Anders Lettenström, blame themselves for the writings that he now realizes damaged the Royal Family.

Here's the link to the letter.

Below is a translation from Google.

"2011 05 22
I request to have the following published.
Best regards!
Anders Lettenström

Sorry, I was naive. Do not blame others.
I am deeply unhappy that I initiated contacts with rogue and criminal records
people on the occasion of the book "The reluctant monarch." I realize afterwards how
injudicious that everyone understands all, who is upset over what I had done even if no one can be
just as mad at me for this as I am myself.
I want this statement to ask my family, all my friends and not least the King to apologize for
that they have been harmed by my very own initiatives. In this story, there is no one else to
blame but me. What I did was I made by myself and no friends have been pre-informed
or involvement. What I seek is to understand how so many lies about me and others have
disseminated in a book. Others have since wanted to get me to buy pictures that I have not known about, not seen, and
not required to purchase and to make me pay for denials of lying statements that I never
wanted to buy. I got into something that was over me in a quest for truth and
with the ambition to make things right.
What drove me to this? I was personally very disturbed by untruths including a
svartklubb that I have not visited and a trip to Bratislava, which I did not do. I wanted to explore
how they come to, how a grossly overloaded criminal person, whom I never met could have
Such credibility and what he really wanted. I was hard pressed by the faulty
exposure and behavior is not rational. At roundabout way I got in contact with Daniel Webb.
He offered to obtain information about a nightclub owner "Mille", who lied about me. Before the
first meeting with Webb, I made no further inquiries about his person. As soon as I
found out his background and understood who he was and what contacts he had, I wanted
close contacts. This proved more difficult than I imagined. Early, but still too late,
I realized that I got into a situation I could not control and that I was a pawn in
others' games. Of course,
it is a wrong speculation that I was supposed to go to Zagreb to negotiate this.
This is thus only about my naivety and foolhardiness, and that I think all the good. The
should not harm anyone but myself. It will perhaps take time to restore it
I have lost confidence in many - but it is what will be my
The most important task. Until then, I take time out from my elected office but will do
all I can to mitigate any damage I and media storm around me may have caused.
Anders Lettenström"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited:
Unfortunatly, the King made himself look like a total idiot by giving an interview about the scandal.

PR interview gone bad. IMO. :whistling:
 
Swedish king flatly denies improprieties, scandal grows

God, how disgraceful! And Mr Ternert, Director of the Information and Press Department, was even sitting next to the King while he disgraced himself! :bang:

What are they doing? If you dont have anything more to say then uuhhmms or ehhmmms, reminding the interviewer that he is asking the questions or, to hit rock bottom, as a ruling monarch define what a "strip club" actually is, then leave it.
OK, the King is not very bright but his worst crime is to surround himself with people in key positions who arent bright, either.
Good Night, Swedish Monarchy.
 
Why on earth did they think that giving an interview would help? I sincerely hope that he was at least telling the truth. If any proof against his statements surfaces, he's done for. Also, ruling out abdication may mean the end of the monarchy. Victoria's popularity is really the only thing the SRF has going for it.
 
Why on earth did they think that giving an interview would help? I sincerely hope that he was at least telling the truth. If any proof against his statements surfaces, he's done for.

Yep. He came across as arrogant, sleazy and with a body language that sreamed "liar". If any proof, such as the infamous pictures, should ever come to light he is finished.

Who on earth advised him to do such an interview at this stage, and even worse, allowed such a pitiful presentation of a Head of State. Now the hole that he has been digging since the first "interview" at the Hunting Lodge is even deeper than before. If you give an interview on the subject, either do it right and are well prepared in order to clear the case or keep your mouth shut.
 
Okay, if Carl Gustaf says he's done nothing wrong I'll believe him.

But he'd better not have any more skeletons buried anywhere or he's just made one of the absolute biggest mistakes of his life.
He didn't look particularly convincing to me though and I fear this is going back to hit him like a boomerang.

I think this interview was a wrong approach. I mean who advise King Gustav? Laurel and Hardy?
And where is SÄPO in all this? Why aren't they screaming their heads off? Or at the very least going to the government with their concerns?
 
Last edited:
In fact, the intreview was not as bad as it seems. The King spoke in the way he always speaks: rather disjointed and tentative, and body language was as it always is: a little embarrassed. I think that the king quite did well - it is after all a difficult situation and a delicate matter. He was clear on some points but could have been clearer in others.... but the question many swedes rise today is: what happen if the king lied about pictures, if there exist pictures of hi in "situations" after all???
 
Yep. He came across as arrogant, sleazy and with a body language that sreamed "liar". If any proof, such as the infamous pictures, should ever come to light he is finished.


Who on earth advised him to do such an interview at this stage, and even worse, allowed such a pitiful presentation of a Head of State. Now the hole that he has been digging since the first "interview" at the Hunting Lodge is even deeper than before. If you give an interview on the subject, either do it right and are well prepared in order to clear the case or keep your mouth shut.
This was exactly my reaction after seeing and reading the interview. What was the point of this circus? It was clear that he did not want to answer the questions asked. What did he expect, that he'll be asked about the weather outside? I've already lost all respect I ever had for him. Now he can only hope that the alleged pictures would never ever see the light of this world, otherwise he's done.

I'm just wondering if this was his idea and the PR department could not convince him that it's a bad one or if this was Terner's idea. If it was the latest he should be fired, right now.
 
Back
Top Bottom