The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #161  
Old 06-18-2007, 05:16 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
Do you mean to say that back in 1984, years before the rumours about extramarital affairs started up and two years before Hewitt and Diana claimed to have met, there were already rumours that this guy nobody had ever heard of was the father of Prince Charles's younger son?
You may not have heard the rumours, for those of us around at the time, there was talk that the child was not Charles'.
Quote:
People forget that Diana had royal protection officers watching her every move, including who she was sleeping with and the royal family is often spied on by MI6. There is no way The Queen would not know if Hewitt was, in fact, Harry's father
How? HM would ask Diana if it were the case, Diana would say no (she didn't always tell the truth) and that would be the end of the matter. The government wouldn't be involved.
If HM knows Harry is not her blood grandson, it would never be told and as for the argument that MI6 etc watch the royals at all times, who's to say that there isn't a dossier somewhere detailing every man Diana slept with, that the general public would never be made aware of!

It certainly makes you wonder what was seen and heard in KP when Princess Michael said the Brits care more about the breeding of their animals!
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 06-18-2007, 06:24 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess View Post
i i was just saying that just because harry looks like a spencer doesn't mean that would eliminate hewitt as the potential biological father. is that what you mean that just because he looks like his aunt he could be her son? i suppose that's a good point too. however do we want to open that can worms?
No, of course I don't say Harry is Sarah's son. I don't say either that both Harry and Sarah's son are Hewitt's kids.

What I was trying to say is that both sisters, Diana and Sarah have born sons who look alike. If we talk about the plausibilities of potential reasons for it, we can assume with a very high percentage of plausibility that it's because the mothers were sisters. The plausibility that both kids have the same mother (Sarah) and one was swapped to Diana is very small, IMHO. The plausibility that both sisters had an affair with hewitt, got pregnant and foisted the respective son on their husbands is even smaller, IMHO.

So where does that leave us?

I personally believe that the fact that both sisters have similar looking sons is based on their being sisters family trait. But that means that Harry looks like a Spencer. Nothing else.

There is no real proof that Diana had an affair with Hewitt before she became pregnant with Harry. There is no proof she had any extramarital relationships before her sons were born. There is a high plausibility that she wouldn't have dared to foist a bastard on The Prince of Wales. Having an affair is one thing, being caught in the act of getting pregnant by another man as wife of the heir to the throne is a different matter altogether.

But I guess the fact that there were no more children after Harry is based on a) a stop in the marital relations to Charles and b) using contraceptives.

Of course there were these rumours about a pregnancy and an abortion in 1994 but exactly the points mentioned as explanation to this abortion show IMHO that Diana wouldn't have had an affair while still really married to Charles.
__________________

__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 06-18-2007, 06:50 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
You may not have heard the rumours, for those of us around at the time, there was talk that the child was not Charles'.
Now that's interesting. Do you mean public talk as in something that could be read in the media or was it more insider's talk of people who either had insights themselves or knew people with such information?

Diana calimed according to Wharfe that Charles went back to Camilla after prince William was born. I have to say that I don't believe her when it comes to the timing of Charles' putting an end to his marriage. But if there were these rumours around, as you say, then insiders must have had knowledge about problems in the marriage, affairs etc. from early on. Which is sad, I think.

As for Charles: he commented according to Diana in the Morton-book when he first saw newborn prince Harry: "A boy - and one with red hair" (retranslated from the German edition). I doubt he would have said that if he had had an idea about the rumours. Or would he?
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 06-18-2007, 07:31 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine
There is a high plausibility that she wouldn't have dared to foist a bastard on The Prince of Wales. Having an affair is one thing, being caught in the act of getting pregnant by another man as wife of the heir to the throne is a different matter altogether.

But I guess the fact that there were no more children after Harry is based on a) a stop in the marital relations to Charles and b) using contraceptives.

Of course there were these rumours about a pregnancy and an abortion in 1994 but exactly the points mentioned as explanation to this abortion show IMHO that Diana wouldn't have had an affair while still really married to Charles.
What do you think anyone would have done about it Jo, sent her off to the tower? Or do you think she would do as millions of women do and pass the child off as her husbands child.
Your last point that she wouldn't have had an affair while still really married to Charles, what was she doing in her admitted affair in 1986, pretending?

BBC ON THIS DAY | 24 | 1981: Prince Charles and Lady Di to marry

After Prince Harry's birth on 15 September 1984 it was clear the fairytale marriage was falling apart.

Just one of many articles that mention the marriage was seen to be falling apart in 1984 and these things don't happen overnight.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 06-18-2007, 07:58 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
What do you think anyone would have done about it Jo, sent her off to the tower? Or do you think she would do as millions of women do and pass the child off as her husbands child.
Your last point that she wouldn't have had an affair while still really married to Charles, what was she doing in her admitted affair in 1986, pretending?

BBC ON THIS DAY | 24 | 1981: Prince Charles and Lady Di to marry

After Prince Harry's birth on 15 September 1984 it was clear the fairytale marriage was falling apart.

Just one of many articles that mention the marriage was seen to be falling apart in 1984 and these things don't happen overnight.
In Germany we have a legal term about seperations leading up to divorce where the couple has to go on sharing a flat. It's "sharing of table and bed" - I meant that as being "really married", as in "still living together as man and wife, including having marital relationships". In 1986, AFAIK, they didn't share the same table and bed anymore - so any child simply could not have been Charles'.

The BBC article was written well after 1984, so for whom was it clear? Diana told Morton that for her it was clear. But for Charles?
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 06-18-2007, 09:17 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine
The BBC article was written well after 1984, so for whom was it clear? Diana told Morton that for her it was clear. But for Charles?
IMO, anybody who had any contact with either party could see the marriage was far from a happy and contented one, but unless any of the people concerned were willing to 'go public' apart from articles that have been written since, there will never be proof what those people thought.

I think they both knew soon after Williams birth that things were not working out.
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 06-18-2007, 09:38 AM
Duchess's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
Duchess, I believe we have a misunderstanding here. What I was trying to point out is that there is a very important lex in law: "In dubio pro reo" - which means in case there is a doubt, it's to the advantage of the accused.

You turned (or so I read it) this principle into the opposite: you said that because there is no proof for the innocense of Diana in this case, you doubt Harry's parentage. And IMHo that is not fair, not to Diana, not to Harry. There must be a presumption of innocense or proof: as long as there is no proof, Harry has a right to be considered Charles' son. Which he legally is anyway as his parentage was never contested with legal action.
first let me say that i hope i'm not coming across totally against your point of view as that's not my intention. i agree that harry has every right to be considered charles' son as charles has been the only father that he's ever known. i just feel that as long as there are people out there questioning this issue i will, personally, have to remain open minded...not that the world gives a hoot about what my opinion is . i don't believe (and correct me if i'm wrong) that hewitt, to his credit, has ever said publicly that he wants to have tests done. i'm content to leave things unverified but even if they were i would be happy to say "charles is his father, he has always been a wonderful father and nothing should change".

thanks for your thoughts on the topic though...this has been very interesting.
__________________
Duchess
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 06-18-2007, 10:01 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
IMO, anybody who had any contact with either party could see the marriage was far from a happy and contented one, but unless any of the people concerned were willing to 'go public' apart from articles that have been written since, there will never be proof what those people thought.

I think they both knew soon after Williams birth that things were not working out.
I guess, you're right. Whitacker wrote in 1993 that it was in 1987 that Charles believed Diana had an affair with Philip Dunne and that that was the reason he stopped living with her completely apart from holding up the facade. He claims that Hewitt, then member of the Guards and a good polo player, was selected by courtiers to be the one to teach William how to ride and that he could maybe be the one to teach Diana, too. But he said as well that Hewitt and Diana had common friends, including David Waterhouse, who for Whitaker, was a candidate as a lover of Diana. Not sure what to make of this. But he refers to his sources by name, so it could be at least a bit of the truth.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 06-18-2007, 02:56 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
IMO, anybody who had any contact with either party could see the marriage was far from a happy and contented one, but unless any of the people concerned were willing to 'go public' apart from articles that have been written since, there will never be proof what those people thought.

I think they both knew soon after Williams birth that things were not working out.
That's as may be, but the question isn't so much a case of the marriage not working out as the allegation that by early 1984 Diana was already being unfaithful. To say nothing of the fact that she was supposed to be being unfaithful with a person with whom, by all accounts, she only had a very casual acquaintanceship at the time, if that.

If all the books and articles are to be believed, the marriage was in trouble because Diana was very insecure, jealous (of Camilla), and possessive, not because she was indifferent to Charles and already eyeing possible alternatives. The scenario you're suggesting means that she was already intimate with James Hewitt less than three years after her wedding to Charles.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 06-18-2007, 03:02 PM
Nichola's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: , United Kingdom
Posts: 401
I can't believe this thread is actually open - the claim is absurd!
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 06-18-2007, 03:04 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,894
Well, some people seem to think it isn't. As long as it's a topic of discussion in the press, there's no harm in having a thread about it; it does at least stop having Harry's current-events thread derailed with the rumours.
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 06-18-2007, 03:16 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Distrito federal, Mexico
Posts: 239
This is absurd. Princess Diana is dead, and She can´t to defend her. Prince Harry looks like his uncle Charles Spencer.
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 06-18-2007, 03:19 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
You say by all accounts she only had a very casual acquantance with Hewitt, I presume you mean by published accounts. Has anyone managed to get a statement from any of his fellow officers, for instance?
If she was desperately unhappy with Charles while she was carrying William (it was she who said she threw herself down the stairs and self harmed while pregnant), why do you think it so hard to believe that she looked elsewhere, straight after the birth, many women do, especially as Charles was apparently unable to cope with her, more than usual, at this time?

The fact remains that all these conversations, gossip and speculation will continue, because although both Charles and Diana had affairs, only one was able to cause major problems for the monarch, because of course only one of them could cause these problems by getting pregnant.

To the person who said she would have been careful and taken the pill. how do you suppose she would have got that and who from?
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 06-18-2007, 03:32 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 1,032
why?????

why bring up such a subject. don't you think he has suffered enough with the death of his mom, having no private life, going to war and now this. imo its a waste of time, since time only goes in one direction im going to move on
__________________
ain' no sunshine when i gone
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 06-18-2007, 03:45 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
You say by all accounts she only had a very casual acquantance with Hewitt, I presume you mean by published accounts. Has anyone managed to get a statement from any of his fellow officers, for instance?
He himself is only claiming a casual acquaintanceship with Diana before 1986, even with the aid of hypnosis. I don't recall hearing statements from his fellow officers that he was close to Diana in the early 1980s, although it's possible that they've all been very discreet for the last 25 years.

Quote:
If she was desperately unhappy with Charles while she was carrying William (it was she who said she threw herself down the stairs and self harmed while pregnant), why do you think it so hard to believe that she looked elsewhere, straight after the birth, many women do, especially as Charles was apparently unable to cope with her, more than usual, at this time?
Sure, it's possible, but considering all the stuff that's come out about her since she died, it seems to be significant that nothing has come out about a close relationship with anyone, Hewitt or otherwise, in the early 1980s.
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 06-18-2007, 03:47 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 197
I hope (in the event a dna test is ever requested or done) that Hewitt is not the father. He was an abominable person, a woman's worst nightmare after being in a relationship, casual or otherwise. He used the occasion and just cheapened man/woman relationships, in general.
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 06-18-2007, 03:49 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 197
And I should that even is a test showed positive, secretly, that Prince Charles would ignore it and consider himself the father. As is/has often been done when a woman strayed in a marriage and the husband was possibly negligent-that he considered the child his responsibility.
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 06-18-2007, 04:03 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
He himself is only claiming a casual acquaintanceship with Diana before 1986, even with the aid of hypnosis. I don't recall hearing statements from his fellow officers that he was close to Diana in the early 1980s, although it's possible that they've all been very discreet for the last 25 years.
Under hypnosis, as I thought you knew, Hewit claimed that he met Diana in 1981 and that they started their affair after William was born. He went into great detail of how they met at friends and that she was the one who made the first move. When he was woken from the 'apparent' hypnosis, he refused to answer any questions on what he had just said and stated again that the agreed date of their meeting was 1986.
Very few fellow officers would ever speak out, it is their code of conduct, Hewitt may have brought shame on the regiment, but it doesn't mean they have to. There is also a little thing they sign, called the official secrets act, that they all seem to honour.
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 06-18-2007, 04:26 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,894
Quote:
Under hypnosis, as I thought you knew, Hewit claimed that he met Diana in 1981 and that they started their affair after William was born. He went into great detail of how they met at friends and that she was the one who made the first move.
Perhaps if the friends in question come forward to confirm all this, it might help. Generally this sounds like a stunt; hypnosis may (or may not - there seems to be some professional controversy about this) allow people to recover repressed memories, but there's no reason why this particular memory would be repressed. One of the things that makes repressed-memory recovery so controversial is that it's been shown that false memories as well as true ones can be recovered.

I wonder why he would even agree to be hypnotised for public consumption - if it's really true that he doesn't want to hurt Prince Harry, this is a very strange way to go about it. I wonder what he's trying to achieve, other than giving Harry yet more trauma.

Quote:
Very few fellow officers would ever speak out, it is their code of conduct, Hewitt may have brought shame on the regiment, but it doesn't mean they have to. There is also a little thing they sign, called the official secrets act, that they all seem to honour.
So the point of your previous question asking whether anyone had managed to get a statement from one of them was what, exactly, if they have a code of conduct by which they don't make such statements?
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 06-18-2007, 05:08 PM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 664
Someone here has mentioned what I think, i.e. that Harry has 'the look' of his maternal grandfather and Spencer cousins in his facial mix. And yes, I saw the late Earl Spencer in the flesh, just as I have seen all of the royal family.

Another reason why I believe Harry to be Charles' son is that my mother has, on tapes, many videos of the Queen with her family, both on public occasions and more private moments. Time and again, the Queen is walking holding Harry's hand; bending to smile and laugh with him; ruffling his hair, i.e. displaying all of the usual sort of affection that a grandparent shows a small child. I do not believe that she would ever have behaved in this way if she had the slightest doubt that Harry wasn't her natural grandson. Given her well known antipathy towards Diana, I can not imagine that she would show Diana's son any obvious affection if were not Charles' son, as well.

Someone also intimates that Hewitt's fellow officers might know 'something', and that I don't believe either. If Hewitt told them that he was Harry's father, we'd know about it by now. We can no longer assume that officers are gentlemen - look at Hewitt's unconscionable behaviour.

These sorts of rumours are often attached to royalty, including Her Majesty. In the past, I've read that Lord Carnavon is Andrew's father (Andrew looks like Carnavon and is built like him and Carnavon's sons) and that Lord Plunket is Edward's father (they certainly share remarkable physical similarities). Where does all of this stop?

Whereas I liked Diana, I didn't think her particularly intelligent. Even so, I strongly doubt that when having an affair with another man that she wouldn't have known about and used contraception. To insinuate, further, that she might deliberately have imposed a bastard child on the royal family out of revenge alone, is to claim that she was an evil, vindictive, sociopath, and I don't believe that, either.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, extramarital affair, james hewitt, paternity, prince charles, prince harry, prince of wales, princess diana


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
James Carnegie, 3rd Duke of Fife (1929-2015) and Family betina British Royals 30 07-06-2015 09:12 AM
James and Julia Ogilvy and Family News 1: December 2003- flirtmooni British Royals 19 05-09-2014 05:23 AM
Why do you like Diana? juliamontague Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 222 12-21-2011 02:40 AM
Sophie Gives Birth to a Son: James, Viscount Severn - December 17, 2007 BeatrixFan The Earl and Countess of Wessex and Family 237 01-27-2008 05:11 AM
James James Mclean Member Introductions 1 10-30-2007 05:19 PM




Popular Tags
albania ari behn best gown september 2016 best outfit best outfit september 2016 biography birthday crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion cymry denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of cambridge fashion duchess of cambridge style duke of cambridge english books far-right fashion poll fashio poll french jewels king abdullah ii king carl gustaf and queen silvia king willem-alexander maxima in australia and new zealand monarchy nazi new zealand norway november 2016 october 2016 paris picture of the week prince charles prince felix princess charlene fashion princess claire of luxembourg princess marie princess mary princess mary fashion princess sofia queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia cocktail dresses queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia eveningwear queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen mathilde visits jordan queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania fashion rohan family september 2016 silva state visit succession sweden the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:02 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises