Diana and James Hewitt

[normalil]

This must be such a trauma for Prince Harry. The only person he really resembles is Diana's sister, (the one with red hair, I always forget her name.) Harry is the absolute image of her. I do believe he is Charles's son. I can't see Diana being so silly as to take such a risk...

 

[Skydragon]

But even if he were, even if he became the first "non-biological" son of a king to inherit the throne, it would be a whole lot safer for the monarchy than some revelation that he was actually the son of someone like Hewitt who many people consider unsavory.

If it was proven that he is not Charles' biological son, he couldn't inherit.

 

[rmay286]

If it was proven that he is not Charles' biological son, he couldn't inherit.

Yes, I know. What I meant was, suppose Harry actually isn't Charles' biological son but it's never proven because no one does a DNA test, and he happens to become king. Would the the monarchy be worse off, if not one person but Diana or Hewitt ever knew the difference? Of course not.

On the other hand, if Harry was proven to be illegitimate, it would have huge personal repercussions for him and be a great blow to the monarchy. That's what I meant when I said, in this case, the legal truth can't do any good and has a very slim but real possibility of doing enormous harm.

 

[randomlyKeira]

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned yet or not in this thread, but Harry was obligated to take a blood test when he joined the army in 2005, and a DNA test was done. I'm unsure of the results, but I doubt that we'll ever know for sure if Harry is not Charles' son, as the family would never want that sort of scandal, even if it were aimed primarilly towards Diana.

(But I know for a fact that Harry believes he is Charles' son, and that he would never call James Hewitt his father even if he were biologically.)

 

[LadyCat]

I hadn't thought of that. DNA testing is routine in the armed forces now to assist in identying casualties. Good point.

Cat

 

[Skydragon]

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned yet or not in this thread, but Harry was obligated to take a blood test when he joined the army in 2005, and a DNA test was done.

A blood test is done at the time of a full medical for illnesses but not for DNA, our government does not keep a DNA database on our service personnel, just criminals. In the same way that US soldiers are allowed to keep samples in a sperm bank, widows here are not allowed to use the sperm from a dead spouse, so there is no option offered.

For a paternity DNA test, they would have to have samples given by Charles.

 

[Royal Fan]

So do you belive he was Fathered by the Prince of Wales

 

[randomlyKeira]

So do you belive he was Fathered by the Prince of Wales

yeah, definitely

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I am sure that many posters would claim impeccable sources.
As I have said the forces take a blood sample at the time of the full medical that every potential trainee undertakes. DNA testing is not done, in this country at this time, due to the costs involved.

And I bet Charles, Harry and their medical staff are much more careful with their patient's information than the UCLA medical center was with Britney Spears' data...

 

[LadyCat]

I can't claim impeccable sources, just my belief that Harry is Charles' son and not Hewitt's. As for the blood test/DNA testing done by the military, I have a cousin who is in the special forces and know his DNA was placed on file with the branch of service he is in. I assumed the same was true for all service men. As it is a foolproof means of identifying casualties it just makes sense. And considering that the US military has been known to spend $400 for a simple hammer the cost of DNA testing shouldn't be much of a problem. But then you know what they say about "ass-u-me"-ing things. My apologies.

Cat

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I can't claim impeccable sources, just my belief that Harry is Charles' son and not Hewitt's. As for the blood test/DNA testing done by the military, I have a cousin who is in the special forces and know his DNA was placed on file with the branch of service he is in. I assumed the same was true for all service men. As it is a foolproof means of identifying casualties it just makes sense. And considering that the US military has been known to spend $400 for a simple hammer the cost of DNA testing shouldn't be much of a problem. But then you know what they say about "ass-u-me"-ing things. My apologies.

Cat

Cat, as Skydragon pointed out, Harry serves in the British army and they obviously don't have a DNA-base. And even if they had one, I doubt they would add "Royal" DNA to it but put that information under special secrecy.

 

[Skydragon]

As for the blood test/DNA testing done by the military, I have a cousin who is in the special forces and know his DNA was placed on file with the branch of service he is in. I assumed the same was true for all service men. As it is a foolproof means of identifying casualties it just makes sense. And considering that the US military has been known to spend $400 for a simple hammer the cost of DNA testing shouldn't be much of a problem. But then you know what they say about "ass-u-me"-ing things. My apologies.

Cat

Please don't apologise, the US seems to provide for all eventualities for it's men and women. There was talk of allowing, as one polite poster put it, the facility for storing 'donations' here but as I said, women are not allowed to be inseminated with sperm from their dead husband, even with a pre written letter of consent and so the idea was dismissed, (terribly unbritish ). Whilst many servicemen and women have the foresight to draw up a will, this is not something the services mention to them as being a necessary evil.

The British cannot even equip our men and women properly, they are given a list of items they will be provided with, must have/may need, that is not to say they get them all, in time. We had to hunt around, at the last minute for desert boots because the army suddenly found the boots they had provided and which had been broken in, disintegrated in the heat, the wrong camouflage colours were provided on some clothing for our daughter, the list goes on and on.

It would be a good idea for the UK to follow the US military's lead and set up a DNA database, but then there would probably be dozens of human rights cases demanding the sample is destroyed after they leave the military, I think there is a case going through the courts right now, over the governments right to hold the DNA of someone arrested but not charged!
[Jo of Palatine;742867]And even if they had one, I doubt they would add "Royal" DNA to it but put that information under special secrecy[/quote]I had a vision of Harry and Williams DNA data, with a detachment of soldiers guarding the room it is kept in!

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I had a vision of Harry and Williams DNA data, with a detachment of soldiers guarding the room it is kept in!

Oh, come on, dear!

 

[Skydragon]

Oh, come on, dear!

You are right, a vault would be better and a battalion perhaps!

 

[Eloise]

hey if harry wasn't the biological son of prince charles, he can become a king anyway or ...

 

[Mermaid1962]

I believe so. Charles has accepted him as his legal son. I believe that Charles is his father in any case.

hey if harry wasn't the biological son of prince charles, he can become a king anyway or ...

 

[Royal Fan]

I Belive that as well Henry is a Windsor in all aspects

 

[Eloise]

yeah youre right thanks

 

[PrinceOfCanada]

hey if harry wasn't the biological son of prince charles, he can become a king anyway or ...

Yes, he could. He was born in wedlock, which is required under the, whatsit, Act of Union 1707 (? is that the right one?). And under British common law, I believe, if a father acknowledges a child as his, that child is indeed considered his under the law, no matter what the putative biological relationship.

So.. bottom line: unless Charles were to publicly say "He is not my son and here are the paternity test results," Harry will be third, and eventually second, in line to the throne.

Honestly, I used to think Hewitt was probably the (biological) father as well. But after seeing the pics of Harry's cousin, I'm really doubting that. In any case, it doesn't matter. I would be flabbergasted if the RF--or, indeed, the famous men in grey suits--hasn't had a test done, quite possibly without Harry's knowledge (a hair from a hairbrush, if it has the follicle, is more than enough for DNA testing as long as they have either Hewitt's or Charles' DNA to compare to), just so that they know for sure one way or the other. If Charles is the father, they have the proof in their back pocket. If he's not, they can prepare for the possibility of him ascending the throne and someone kicking up a fuss.

Of course, saying all that has just made me realize that they're not at all concerned about his paternity. Any random maid or servant could snag Harry's hairbrush or hairs left in the tub or whatever, and potentially make a mint by calling a tabloid and saying "I have Harry's DNA. Get Hewitt's, and give me X-thousand quid."

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Yes, he could. He was born in wedlock, which is required under the, whatsit, Act of Union 1707 (? is that the right one?). And under British common law, I believe, if a father acknowledges a child as his, that child is indeed considered his under the law, no matter what the putative biological relationship.

So.. bottom line: unless Charles were to publicly say "He is not my son and here are the paternity test results," Harry will be third, and eventually second, in line to the throne.

What About Andrew? If something happened to William before he had kids, then Andrew has a right to question Harry's paternity because he is an "interested party" as the next in line after Harry.

And there already were cases where the child lost his rights to a peerage and the ttile went to the brother of the former peer instead.

 

[PrinceOfCanada]

What About Andrew? If something happened to William before he had kids, then Andrew has a right to question Harry's paternity because he is an "interested party" as the next in line after Harry.

My understanding is that he can't question Harry's paternity, because as I already said above, Harry was born in wedlock and has been acknowledged to be Charles' son, he is therefore Charles's son under the law. Period. His biological parentage is legally unimportant.

More to the point.. do you think any member of the core RF would rock the boat like that? Merely raising the question would spark an enormous and probably damaging debate, cause an enormous amount of bad publicity, and further divide Britons (and, indeed, all Commonwealth citizens) in much the same way as we saw how the mudslinging around the Charles/Diana/Camilla triangle did.

 

[Al_bina]

...
In any case, it doesn't matter. I would be flabbergasted if the RF--or, indeed, the famous men in grey suits--hasn't had a test done, quite possibly without Harry's knowledge (a hair from a hairbrush, if it has the follicle, is more than enough for DNA testing as long as they have either Hewitt's or Charles' DNA to compare to), just so that they know for sure one way or the other. If Charles is the father, they have the proof in their back pocket. If he's not, they can prepare for the possibility of him ascending the throne and someone kicking up a fuss...
[snipped]

You have made a valid point. It would be unwise not to provide for the above contingency. So it would be fair to presume that the certain parties have already taken steps in dealing with this tricky unpleasant matter.

 

[TheTruth]

Quite unique picture of Charles, Hewitt and Diana together :
thesuntw5.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

 

[HRH Kimetha]

I personally wish that this man (and Paul Burrell) would suffer some sort of amnesia on some deserted island and don't remember who he is or where he is from. He's a real irritant with all his escapades. They got their 15 minutes and are desperately trying to delay time out.

 

[TheTruth]

Well, I don't think Hewitt and Burrell should be put in the same basket IMO. I still have more sympathy (if you can call this sympathy) for Hewitt than for Burrell. To me, Hewitt told his truth about what happened and that's all. Burrell kept changing his stories and his dirty work was revealed in the Inquest. I don't know why people still have such anger toward Hewitt. Yes, he has given too many details about his affair with her ; yes, he has betrayed her. But he remains one of the very few men who stayed with her until SHE decided to dump him.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Interesting how Prince Charles and Hewitt seem to be sharing a joke, and Diana's looking away from both of them.

Quite unique picture of Charles, Hewitt and Diana together :
thesuntw5.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

 

[TheTruth]

Interesting how Prince Charles and Hewitt seem to be sharing a joke, and Diana's looking away from both of them.

Yes, the situation is really awkward when you know what's been going on.

What's rather amazing with their affair is that it was kept secret for so long. I find it hard to believe that no one except a few members and friends of Diana's knew about it. I tend to think some people of the press were perfectly aware of the love affair but that's where Diana's relations with newspapers editors intervened. It's been already proved that she didn't hesitate to use the press for her own purposes. That wouldn't surprise me if she had on this matter as well.

 

[Tsarina Anastasia]

Two words. Puh Lease! Harry looks way too much like Charles and nothing like James Hewitt.

 

[Chappy]

Looks mean nothing. How many times have you met someone and thought they were related to your friend and found out that they have no relation whatsoever? (I have done it a million times)

Harry could be a Hewitt or a Windsor, but he will always be the son of Charles no matter what a paternity test says.

 

[Eloise]

yeah thats a global truth, prince charrel has been the harrys father all his life