Diana and James Hewitt


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Oh I agree...what D&C said in their respective interviews (and books) was very hurtful to those boys. That said I think it beyond low that the issue of Harry's paternity was raised. Any person who does this has no class.


LaRae
 
Hewitt went on a TV show, in one of the periods when he needed money, supposedly undertook hypnosis, and 'under the influence' broadly hinted that he and Diana had got together much earlier than they had and that therefore there was a chance that....
 
well I wont bother to reply at length, since I think that Curryong etc have done so effectively. Im sure the boys WERE Hurt by Diana's revelations and by Charles' but that said, they are their parents.. and they love them. Hewitt cast doubt on Harry's paternity. THat is indeed the lowest of the low
 
well I wont bother to reply at length, since I think that Curryong etc have done so effectively. Im sure the boys WERE Hurt by Diana's revelations and by Charles' but that said, they are their parents.. and they love them. Hewitt cast doubt on Harry's paternity. THat is indeed the lowest of the low

So you are only upset about TV show in which he was hypnotized, which happened a few years ago? Your earlier posts seemed to refer to his book and other interviews, which didn't cast any doubts on Harry's paternity.
 
No that is NOT all i am bothered about. It was wrong fro him to use his affair with Diana to make money - period. Most people in the UK certianly thought so form the time he started with his gradual selling of his Diana story..
 
:previous: Yes, I agree. There's something very sleazy about making money from a former romantic relationship.

I've not heard an explanation of why his military career ended? Was he not intelligent enough to get promoted? Or was an affair with the Princess of Wales (then considered likely to be the future Queen Consort) considered beyond the Pale for a serving officer?
 
Would regarding Charles as 'erring in situations where others are severely penalised' (such as sleeping with a fellow officer's wife) be 'partisan', as well? After all, according to Household cavalry regulations an officer found in adultery with another officer's wife (the case with Charles and Andrew PB's spouse) would be liable to penalties like being thrown out of the regiment.

Does it matter if said officer is sleeping with everything in a skirt and not crying his eyes out at being cuckolded?

No that is NOT all i am bothered about. It was wrong fro him to use his affair with Diana to make money - period. Most people in the UK certianly thought so form the time he started with his gradual selling of his Diana story..

Ok so my grand ole country the USofA embraced Fergie and tried to help her make some money. We did the same with Heather Mills....has James Hewitt made money in the US? I know we even tolerated Burrell for awhile.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, it was open knowledge that APB was a ladies man from way back and it was rumoured that the PBs had an open marriage. Andrew himself was not sleeping in-house though, ie with the wives of his fellow officers, (as far as is known) and anyway, Hon Colonels of regiments such as the Prince of Wales was, are supposed to be above that sort of behaviour.

I think Hewitt spent some time in the US on a private visit some years after his books came out, trying to offload his last cache of Diana letters to the highest bidder. It was rumoured he was asking for over a million dollars for them, but as far as I know there were no takers. I don't know whether Hewitt's books were hugely popular in the US.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, it was open knowledge that APB was a ladies man from way back and it was rumoured that the PBs had an open marriage. Andrew himself was not sleeping in-house though, ie with the wives of his fellow officers, (as far as is known) and anyway, Hon Colonels of regiments such as the Prince of Wales was, are supposed to be above that sort of behaviour.
Oh i know it is in the army regulations but I dont believe it is often enforced unless there is something else going on.. I can't quite see why an honorary col of a regiment should be considered to be "above that sort of behaviour". Diana was one..
As for Hewitt As I recall he failed exams for promotion and was in trouble for various transgressions, so he retired from the army with a pension.. which wasn't enough for him.

:previous: Yes, I agree. There's something very sleazy about making money from a former romantic relationship.

r?
Seems to be very few who agree! I think it is horrible behavior especially (Old fashioned view I know) when it is done by a man about a woman. Hewitt started hinting to journalists about his affair with Diana for ages before he went the whole hog and wrote a book, and then went on and on flogging his story. He also said things about her that she had allegedly said to him, such as that Manakee was her lover.. He hinted that his affair with Diana started earlier and earlier to the point where he almost got to the point of saying he knew her before William was born. His outing their affair was as he must have known dangerous for Diana because she was trying to negotiate a divorce or some kind of arrangement about her position with the RF.. and the more public support she had, the better her position in the negotations would be....So for him to talk about their affair, to hint at her having had other affairs, might well have cooled the public on her and worsened her position in trying to sort out the end of her marriage...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brown and blue eyes - genetic certainty

We take it as an undisputed fact that brown eyes are more dominant than blue and therefore it is impossible for a parent with brown eyes to have blue eyed children - however, I am a witness to it in reality. My Mother had dark brown eyes and my Father had deep blue eyes. My two brothers? Both have blue eyes. My brown eyed Mother gave birth to two boys with blue eyes.

Having said that, there are redheads in the Spencer family. I believe Harry's red hair comes from those genes. Again, thinking of my own family as an example, there is no red hair in my Dad's side of the family but a lot in my Mother's. My oldest brother - flaming red hair.

I think Harry looks much more like Prince Charles than James Hewitt - especially in the eyes! James Hewitt's are wide apart where as Prince Harry's are close together, just like his Father's, Prince Charles.

If a person puts a photo of James Hewitt and Prince Harry next to each other and really looks at them, there are so many differences. The ears, the chin, the eyes, the eyebrow colour, the shape of their foreheads, their smiles... the only similarity is in the nose - but then, Prince Charles has the same shaped nose.
 

Attachments

  • Harry-Hewitt Comparison.jpg
    Harry-Hewitt Comparison.jpg
    81.1 KB · Views: 1,936
Last edited:
Harry looks like Charles and Prince Phillip. When he was younger he reminded me of a young King Edward.


LaRae
 
Neither of Charles's sons resemble him much, nor each other really. Harry had rather elfin looks in his early to mid teens, which allowed people with too much time on their hands to say 'Aaah..' and make jokes about Harry Hewitt, such as you see in the DM comments section to this day whenever a Harry story appears. I do think that Harry has become more Windsor as he's got older. I believe Harry has a similar, rather fleshy nose, to Diana's and his Spencer grandfather except for the very thin bridge at the top, which is pure Charles.
 
I think that last remark is a bit odd Nimue... Diana wanted a public role, and she did still continue to work at her charity work after her divorce. Yes of course she lived as a royal, she was rich and royal, why should she not? Why should she not ask to be treated as such?

All I know is what I have read. :flowers: Of course she wanted a public role. It pleased her. But she had exited her royal role. It's possible with another kind of personality, there would have been more discreet behavior. But if there was present discretion in the character, it is unlikely divorce would have been necessary to begin with.

I don't entirely approve of her doing the Morton book or the Panormaa interview, but they were done to get out of her marriage or at least to sort out her position as the wife of a royal who no longer wanted her as his wife.

Here I have to adamantly disagree. :sad: Diana did the Morton book and the Panorama interview as damage control, to off-set serious bad press due to her extracurricular activities making headlines. Her damage control was masterful in many ways, but it wound up being her ultimate undoing.

She wanted a divorce or to have her position regularised as the mother of a future King...who was not living with her husband. It was not done for money.

Worse than money: she did it to denigrate the man and institution she had been so keen to marry into. And I don't think for a moment she thought Charles would ever be able to divorce her, which made her far more reckless than was wise.

And I can't see why you feel Diana should buy an estate (she didn't like the country) and retire into private life, when she could still do good with her charity work.

Because she wanted a weekend place in the country. That's what I read she said, and her actions speak to that wish. Having a weekend country place does not mean she could not have done charity work. However, she could have chosen a more discreet lifestyle. It would have been a happy choice, I think, but not in her character. She loved the attention too much.

What I read from it is that you disapprove of supper on trays, which is fair enough

No, I don't 'disapprove'. I was questioning the truth of the tale. I was questioning the chef's assertions.

but we then get from the above, it's the 'reverse of endearing', 'odd' 'unusual attitudes' 'not (really) being with one's children' 'lost opportunity for conversation' etc. In what way is that not being a criticism not of the chef but of Diana's parenting skills?

The only time (as I mentioned) that I heard of the supper trays was in the context of keeping her sons away from Charles. In 'The Housekeeper's Diary', this ploy is specifically mentioned, denying Charles the sit-down meal with his family.

The chef's story makes it sound like a regular practice. I questioned his story, asking why we should take his word for it. That's all.

Denville, I am finding it difficult to reconcile the bolded sections of your posts. Diana not only wanted to ensure her public standing (I am not so sure she wanted a divorce), but she undoubtedly wanted to destroy Charles' public standing.

Exactly so. :sad: I agree.

I also think that Diana's actions hurt both Harry and William far more than anything Hewitt has said or done. I've seen no evidence that Hewitt has caused Harry to doubt his parentage. On the other hand, there is a lot of evidence that Diana's sons were deeply hurt by her public disclosures, particularly the Panorama interview. The Morton book may not have cast doubts on Harry's parentage, but it may have caused him to question whether Charles loved or wanted him when he was born. That had to hurt.

Yep. Nicely summed up.

If it was okay for Diana to "out" Charles and Camilla, it was okay for Hewitt to "out" her.

Yes. Absolutely.

We take it as an undisputed fact that brown eyes are more dominant than blue and therefore it is impossible for a parent with brown eyes to have blue eyed children - however, I am a witness to it in reality. My Mother had dark brown eyes and my Father had deep blue eyes. My two brothers? Both have blue eyes. My brown eyed Mother gave birth to two boys with blue eyes.

Not so, because (as described in 'olden times' regarding the genes ;)) anyone with the dominant brown gene can have the recessive blue gene (because we have two genes for any characteristic). Hence two brown-eyed parents can have a blue eyed child, because both can have a blue recessive gene (making having a blue-eyed child 25% likely). What is unlikely - in this old version of the genes' operation - is that two blue-eyed parents could not have a brown-eyed child.

However, recent advances in gene research have revealed the issue of eye color being influenced by more factors than just one pair of genes. Just trying to be helpful. :flowers:
 
Last edited:
Prince Harry is the spitting image of his grandfather Prince Philip. It is beyond belief that anyone questions Harry's paternity. As if Diana became pregnant from an extramarital affair, kept her mouth shut, Charles having no notice and Diana consciously giving birth to a cuckoo-boy in the royal nest, Hewitt's son, as a royal prince. How more unlikely does one want it?
 
Prince Harry is the spitting image of his grandfather Prince Philip. It is beyond belief that anyone questions Harry's paternity. As if Diana became pregnant from an extramarital affair, kept her mouth shut, Charles having no notice and Diana consciously giving birth to a cuckoo-boy in the royal nest, Hewitt's son, as a royal prince. How more unlikely does one want it?

Unfortunately, it was Diana who went down that slippery slope when she told the tale of Charles greeting his newborn second son, and upon seeing the red hair, made some appalling comment about the red color, according to Diana. :sad: It was Diana who introduced the meme. Very mean thing to do, particularly to Harry, who would inevitably one day hear of it.
 
C's remark about the Red hair was nothing to do with Hewitt, He said "Oh he's got rusty hair..." as a comment on the fact that the baby resembled the Spencers"..
I dotn beleive that he meant anything by it; he was just saying "Oh the baby's a boy, and hes got red hair..." but later on in retconning her marriage when she was very unhappy and the marriage had failed, it may have seemed to Diana like charles was annoyed that Harry was a boy, when he would have liked a girl, and that he looked more of a Spencer than a Windsor

Prince Harry is the spitting image of his grandfather Prince Philip. It is beyond belief that anyone questions Harry's paternity. As if Diana became pregnant from an extramarital affair, kept her mouth shut, Charles having no notice and Diana consciously giving birth to a cuckoo-boy in the royal nest, Hewitt's son, as a royal prince. How more unlikely does one want it?

It is highly unlikely, but people who want to attack Diana unfairly do say such things.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All I can say is that, in my mind, there is absolutely no doubt who Harry's parents are. Many, many times looking at pictures, I've had to do a double take and make sure its Harry I'm looking at and not Charles. Harry's looks and mannerisms are very similar to his father's.
 
I dont think he looks much like Charles, and children do pick up mannerisms from whoever rears them not necessarily their biological parents. But it is of course totally untrue that H could be Hewitts son. It is a stick to beat Diana with.
She didn't know Hewitt at the time, and she was not very clever perhaps but not a fool.. Even if she had been the sort of woman who thought nothing of having a fling, she would have waited a few years till she had had her 2 or 3 children, to have an affair. That was traditional upper class protocol.

and I think that for soem years into the marriage, Charles was her emotional focus. She was in love wiht him. She wanted his attention. One of her dress designers said that even during her pregnancies she woudl say "Will my husband like this? WIll he find me sexy in this outfit"...
 
Harry definitely looks like Charles and Philip through the eyes/nose bridge area. Given the nature of the British press, I'm sure that someone has picked up Harry's DNA of a glass or cigarette for testing already


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
This thread is not about Prince Harry or who he does and doesn't look like, nor is it a place to post offensive comments. Let us get back to the topic of the relationship between Diana and James Hewitt. Further off-topic posts will be deleted without notice.
 
Well was it a good thing? DId It give Diana some happiness and help her a bit to get over her bulimia? Or was the really horrible selfsihness that Hewitt displayed so bad that it overshadowed the better times
 
Well was it a good thing? DId It give Diana some happiness and help her a bit to get over her bulimia? Or was the really horrible selfsihness that Hewitt displayed so bad that it overshadowed the better times

I don't think any of us really jump into a decision to do something because we decided its a bad thing and do it anyways. Diana did what she though was a good thing at the time. Same with Hewitt. For every cause there is an effect and it isn't until the effects happen that we can deem them good or bad.

Kind of like feeling so free spirited running and playing in a thunderstorm but really wishing you hadn't when you develop pneumonia kind of thing.
 
I do think he was a pretty unpleasant person, and behaved badly. If she had chosen someone discreet like Oliver HOare, maybe the affair would not have lasted more than a few years but I'm sure he woud have kept quiet about it.. and she would not have had to fear his talking...

True of course that Diana didn't "think it was a bad thing and do it anyway". I think she did care for Hewitt, at first. He was kind ot her and by then I think she and Chalres were always arguing and he was putting her down. So a man being kind, listening to her, who presumably had some sex appeal for her, was a boon.
But I think that she was in a very difficult situation.. in that I would say that most "nice" men would have been wary of her, because of her position. THey would hve felt that "ok she's a lovely woman and I'm attracted but look who she is? What if there's a row? A scandal? What if Charles turns out to be a not complaisiant husband? "
I can't help feeling that Hewitt was "brave enough" to take Diana on as a lover because he was essentially very selfish and didn't think of these things or that maybe havig a lover would only make Di's problems worse.. He just thought "oh the Princess of wales is in love iwht me - great! and "went for it."
I think he's so egotisitical that he just was delighted that a woman of high rank was giving him the attention he felt he deserved...and of course she was also rich and generous to him..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He is similar to Fergie in that way, but I don't dislike her, either. They are both people who think it's OK to make money from opportunities they have as a result of their intimate relationships. They are taking advantage of opportunities they had because of their connections, as most of us do one way or the other.

No most people dont sell the stories of who they've been to bed with, or hawk knowledge that they only gained through an illicit affair....
 
Goodness me! How to spin a few words and a chance meeting or two into chapters in one's autobiography and then push it like mad in the media! I'm sure Diana's reccommendations about inner cleansing resonated with Phil through the decades since so he felt he should share it with the world. Are we going to hear how he went down to Highgrove in the 1980's and had a joke or two with Camilla about chain smoking as well?
 
And he has it wrong a colonoscopy is a medical procedure in hospital.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
:previous: Right. I remember reports about Diana having colonic irrigation among her various treatments. People rarely enjoy a colonoscopy. ;)
 
There were pictures of Harry as a young child that reminded me of Prince Edward at that age. Sometimes I still see a similarity in the smile.


Harry looks like Charles and Prince Phillip. When he was younger he reminded me of a young King Edward.


LaRae
 
There were pictures of Harry as a young child that reminded me of Prince Edward at that age. Sometimes I still see a similarity in the smile.
Nowadays I see a lot of Prince Philip in Harry, and Harry has Charles's close-set eyes.
 
Back
Top Bottom