Diana's Friends, Lovers and Bodyguards


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Skippyboo said:
There hasn't really been great turnover in the Cambridges staff at KP. Miguel, Rebecca, Nick have been there a long time. Jamie was there a long time too. If William was such a horrible person to work for why would they stay. William's RAF SAR coworkers always speak well of him.
Click to expand...

The day is young. ;) We are talking two years? Maybe three? Let's talk about longevity in the positions at ten years. But even if there was turn-over, especially initially, it would not signify imo. Turn-over happens for a whole raft of reasons. I'll bet staying on (and being loyal) has significant perks not worth throwing over easily. I also have reason to suspect that the Middletons (which includes Kate, of course) make the Cambridge Household a happy place to be.

Skippyboo said:
Even the cook at RAF Valley spoke well of him but not Harry.
Click to expand...

What did he say about Harry? :huh:

Skippyboo said:
To me, William has never come across as the spoilt prince who never lets you forget he is a prince.
Click to expand...

He for sure has a good public persona, more or less. He's worked on it over the years. It was not always smooth sailing, as I recall. He's only just developed a sense for the camera and how to present himself at all times. He has his mother's happy predisposition to engage and ingratiate on short acquaintance. :flowers:
 
Skippyboo said:
Rebecca and Miguel have been there for more than a couple of years. It's more like going on five. They were there for the wedding. Nick too. Miguel was the press guy before he became William's private secretary.
Click to expand...

From what I've read they had no servant help while they were in Wales. This seemed like it was a big deal, that they had no servants. Were we being lied to by the Daily Mail? :ohmy: The most I count is three years.

Skippyboo said:
Link to RAF Valley cook bit.
Former RAF Valley chef reveals Prince William's favourite duty meal during his time on Anglesey - Daily Post
Click to expand...

Thank you for the link, Skippyboo. :flowers:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The no servants in Wales was household servants- housekeeper, maids, cooks etc. They had office staff at St James who then moved to KP. Jamie started working for the Princes in 2005. You can find photos of Miguel and Nick in their morning suits going to the Abbey on the morning of the wedding. Rebecca can be spotted in the footage of Kate going into the Goring the day before the wedding. All three have been with them for quite a while.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
Yeah, there is a big difference between private staff and office staff. William's been doing engagements since he graduated University. He went on his first solo royal tour in 2005. Of course he needed a press secretary as well as other advisors. If he was trying to hide his office staff he wouldn't have asked Jamie to be George's godfather.

William's known Rebecca since 2007 when she helped him organize The Concert for Diana.
 
Last edited:
The point is, and these claims always stir everybody up - we tend to believe who we want. But the fact of the matter is, we don't know them. Any of them. They all have public personas, and at time they don't match the private one. Maybe Princess X is a serial killer and has people buried in the backyard. Maybe Prince Y is an identity theft. Maybe Lady H, who everybody hates based on what they read, heals the sick.

Maybe Ken is out there just to make a buck. Maybe Ken is telling the absolute truth. Who knows? Flip a coin.

There is usually a hands-off approach to the sovereign and the direct line. Also demi-god like. We usually don't hear the truth - the good, the bad and the ugly until they've been dead a sufficient amount of of time.
 
Well, I want to comment on Wharfe's opinion of himself compared to the current staff. I'll hope that's considered on-topic.

I do think Wharfe is a bitter betty. He sees Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton got chosen as godfather to a future king, and Jamie's son being part of the royal wedding party.

He sees Catherine's office staff (Rebecca, Sophie Agnew) and her main protection officer (Emma Probert) all get described in the media as good friends of The Duchess.

And then he sees how the royals have kicked him to the curb 20 years ago with no acknowledgement.

The fact that 13-year-old William didn't care for Ken, yet 33-year-old William really likes his current staff, well the difference must be William's fault! Ken can't see how that could have been a character flaw on his own part.
 
Last edited:
Marty91charmed said:
Ouch, apparently Ken Wharfe (princess Diana's bodyguard) had it a go with almost every member of the royal family... I wonder if the palace will say something about that...

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/co...na-former-bodyguard-Ken-Wharfe-rejects-Royals
Click to expand...


I agree with the part about "unless the family is seen achieving something the republican movement will become stronger" I don't think they can not just "be". While things like saving wild life etc are great causes they aren't the things that worry john smith in his daily life JMO
 
royal rob said:
I agree with the part about "unless the family is seen achieving something the republican movement will become stronger" I don't think they can not just "be". While things like saving wild life etc are great causes they aren't the things that worry john smith in his daily life JMO
Click to expand...

I'm a "Jane Smith", and the environment/wild life is my #1 concern. That's why I'm more interested in Charles' and William's charity work than the rest of the Windsors.
 
Rudolph said:
Ken Wharfe hasn't work around the royals for years and years and even then it wasn't like he was a high level confident. He was a protection officer.
Click to expand...

I take it you haven't read "Closely Guarded Secret". I'm about two thirds of the way through it at the moment. Wharfe was the police inspector in charge of Diana's security, but he was more than that. He lived in the thick of it and saw it all, and Diana confided in him. He knows all the scuttlebut about Diana and Hewitt, because he was there with them and took Hewitt's phone calls, and he had front row seats for the War of the Wales'. He was witness to everyday things like Diana drumming it into William and Harry that the press and/or photographers (can't remember which without checking) were all bad men, and he saw her acquiescing when William filled balloons with water and catapaulted them at the photographers who were sitting off Necker Island in boats in an effort to get them to go away. They did.

Wharfe witnessed the family at work and play, and saw them at their best and worst. He went everywhere with Diana, and he has connections.

And William would loathe him for writing that book.
 
I'm also a Junie Mae Smith and from my perspective, I am of the opinion that the results from the endeavors of most of the royal family has not only drawn attention to crucial issues but also has physically helped many, many other Smiths out there. Charles was ridiculed and mocked years back when he expressed concerns for the planet. Yesterday, 196 countries approved a historic climate agreement. Charles' Prince's Trust actively has helped out thousands over the years who needed it. William has achieved a bit of success in his work to combat illegal poaching but we've also seen him just recently giving an interview to a young lady who four years ago was homeless but with a bit of encouragement and involvement with Centrepointe, achieved her goal and cashed in a promise William had made to her. There are a lot of Smiths that have benefited through Kate's patronages focusing on children's issues and wellbeing, addiction, bullying, and many others I'm probably not remembering right now. I would feel safe to think that most of the UK military is pretty darned proud of Harry and his work with wounded service personnel too. This isn't the royal family playing tiddlywinks folks.

They are making a difference. They are the reason perhaps that organizations and programs get the word out there and donations rise to aid them in helping many more Smiths in the future.

To me, this makes me realize that Wharfe is wearing blinders and earplugs.. "Unless the family is seen to achieve something"? What rock has he been hiding under? Perhaps for someone like him, he'll only see gigantro monumental achievements like singlehandedly curing cancer or perhaps wiping out radical extremism all by themselves? Or perhaps, as many have pointed out, he's dipped a little too much into the sour wine.
 
Ken Wharfe can say he witnessed whatever he wants about Diana. She isn't around to refute any of it.

Ken Wharfe wants us to believe Diana confided in him, Darren McGrady says Diana confided in him, Diana's former hairdresser wants us to believe Diana confided in him...

Wharfe has been out of the picture for years. He is a nobody who just wants to inflate his importance trying to portray himself as a confidant of Diana.
 
Roslyn said:
I take it you haven't read "Closely Guarded Secret". I'm about two thirds of the way through it at the moment. Wharfe was the police inspector in charge of Diana's security, but he was more than that. He lived in the thick of it and saw it all, and Diana confided in him. He knows all the scuttlebut about Diana and Hewitt, because he was there with them and took Hewitt's phone calls, and he had front row seats for the War of the Wales'. He was witness to everyday things like Diana drumming it into William and Harry that the press and/or photographers (can't remember which without checking) were all bad men, and he saw her acquiescing when William filled balloons with water and catapaulted them at the photographers who were sitting off Necker Island in boats in an effort to get them to go away. They did.

Wharfe witnessed the family at work and play, and saw them at their best and worst. He went everywhere with Diana, and he has connections.

And William would loathe him for writing that book.
Click to expand...

I believe he does have connections. It's normal to keep in contact with previous places of employ. I have done so. :flowers: Recently when there was a low level scandal at a place I had worked several years ago, I for sure heard the scuttlebutt at holiday parties that year. It seems only reasonable that Ken Wharfe would have some insights based on connections.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rudolph said:
Ken Wharfe can say he witnessed whatever he wants about Diana. She isn't around to refute any of it.

Ken Wharfe wants us to believe Diana confided in him, Darren McGrady says Diana confided in him, Diana's former hairdresser wants us to believe Diana confided in him...

Wharfe has been out of the picture for years. He is a nobody who just wants to inflate his importance trying to portray himself as a confidant of Diana.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that the people Diana was most likely to confide in remain silent, whilst the staff fall over themselves to tell all. I know she liked a good old gossip now again, who doesn't? - but at this rate she will have spent every moment "confiding" in people and little else!
 
Jacknch said:
It's interesting that the people Diana was most likely to confide in remain silent, whilst the staff fall over themselves to tell all. I know she liked a good old gossip now again, who doesn't? - but at this rate she will have spent every moment "confiding" in people and little else!
Click to expand...

I take issue with Wharfe being described as "staff". He was a serving police officer and not a member of her staff. He was her protection officer, and with her all the time. He was in charge of her security. She had to tell what she was doing, and who she was doing it with, so he could make sure appropriate security arrangements were in place.
 
Roslyn said:
I take issue with Wharfe being described as "staff". He was a serving police officer and not a member of her staff. He was her protection officer, and with her all the time. He was in charge of her security. She had to tell what she was doing, and who she was doing it with, so he could make sure appropriate security arrangements were in place.
Click to expand...

Well, it was a tongue-in-cheek response to the quoted post.

Nonetheless, you are quite right that Mr Wharf was a serving police officer and will have spent countless hours with the Princess and may well have heard things or been told things. What those things were is anyone's guess and should have remained between the two of them.
 
Whether or not Wharfe should have written the book or given interviews, he did. He was a trained observer who had first hand knowledge of what Diana did, and he's someone I am far more likely to pay attention to than, for example, Diana's psychic or her hairdresser or butler anyone else of that ilk who might claim she had "confided" in them.
 
Last edited:
AdmirerUS said:
:lol: Where does he suppose Prince Andrew and the DOK should go? Aruba, Jamaica, Montego, Key Largo? He's a bit pompous, himself, isn't he? :lol:
Click to expand...

I have never understood the concept of making Andrew and his daughters "go" Like, they were a breed apart :lol:

Lady Nimue said:
Too true! :sad: Maybe. He may also be speaking truer than is comfortable.

However, it's not the royals he is pitching under the bus. He writes: “He was always a sly little boy, and now he’s become arrogant and spoilt. I hear from people who work for William that he can be very difficult." :ermm: Or might he be claiming more informants than are real? I mean, who would have the time to casually seek out Ken Wharfe to do some bean-spilling? Though it could be 'palace gossip' he's really referring to, not to anything directly said to him.

Fact is, I suspect Ken Wharfe may be a bellwether, like him or not for his 'cashing in' on his royal connections (always the premier sin). Fact is, the Queen is reported to be a decent woman with her staff (as was the Queen Mother, all-in-all). Fact is, no matter what is said about Charles, he is reported to be a decent employer. In one book I read, even when Charles might lose his temper with an underling, he makes a point of apologizing and making it up to the person. That says something. Diana, sadly, did not have this respect towards those who served her. It is reasonable to suppose that William would have learned how to treat servants from his mother's lead. There may be gossip in the palace about how William is, that inevitably leaks out over pub drinks. [I doubt Wharfe has had personal conversations with those who work for the Cambridges. I think he's repeating palace gossip that has reached him by circuitous routes. JMO.]

One can respect the Queen because (among other things) she respects those who serve her in her position. One can respect Prince Charles, the heir, because he looks out for those he will one day rule (through his Prince's Trust) and shows respect (like does the Queen) for those who serve him in his position. How do you respect someone one finds out shows scant respect for those who personally serve them in their position?

If William is an unpleasant sort to work for, it will leak out, as it appears to be doing in this instance. Can anyone respect a monarch who's a genuine snob and boorish in his private life? Ken Wharfe is raising the question perhaps. It's a fair one, I think. Or is he stirring the pot? Either way, he's raised an interesting prospect.
Click to expand...

You are raising very good points LadyNimue:flowers:. We actually don't know anything for sure and we can only speculate. I don'why we all have to take if from granted that everytime someone make negative comments abouyt a member of the royal family, that's promptly labelled as "untrue or that the person spilling the beans is "a bitter freak"etc. We don't know, but we can't make assumptions so easily only when it's about negative news. We all should doubt positive comments as well.

royal rob said:
I agree with the part about "unless the family is seen achieving something the republican movement will become stronger" I don't think they can not just "be". While things like saving wild life etc are great causes they aren't the things that worry john smith in his daily life JMO
Click to expand...


This is certainly something that has been gone around for years and I agree with that statement as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Diana, with very little vetting, hired Peter Settelen to coach her with speechmaking and within hours, while being filmed no less, shared that she witnessed her father hit her mother, discussed her sex life with Charles and shared other very personal tidbits. I don't automatically assume that she would not confide in certain people, also some of these people had a relationship with her for years.
 
Marty91charmed said:
I have never understood the concept of making Andrew and his daughters "go" Like, they were a breed apart :lol:



You are raising very good points LadyNimue:flowers:. We actually don't know anything for sure and we can only speculate. I don'why we all have to take if from granted that everytime someone make negative comments abouyt a member of the royal family, that's promptly labelled as "untrue or that the person spilling the beans is "a bitter freak"etc. We don't know, but we can't make assumptions so easily only when it's about negative news. We all should doubt positive comments as well.
Click to expand...

Precisely, everybody has something to gain when commenting about the royals, whether the comments are positive or negative. I'm guessing the truth is somewhere in the middle, leaning towards one side or the other. ;)

Queen Claude said:
Diana, with very little vetting, hired Peter Settelen to coach her with speechmaking and within hours, while being filmed no less, shared that she witnessed her father hit her mother, discussed her sex life with Charles and shared other very personal tidbits. I don't automatically assume that she would not confide in certain people, also some of these people had a relationship with her for years.
Click to expand...

Diana did not have a good filter, nor was she the best judge of character. (Sorry, Diana fans, she had her good points and her bad, like us all).



P.S., yes, off topic, re: Andrew and his daughters - this is Harry in 30 years' time had he not seen the writing on the wall and became involved in his international charity work.
 
GracieGiraffe said:
Precisely, everybody has something to gain when commenting about the royals, whether the comments are positive or negative. I'm guessing the truth is somewhere in the middle, leaning towards one side or the other. ;)
Click to expand...
It's a royal watcher's weakness to see all the good and not the bad on a royal.;)
 
Then they are in for a world of let down and dissolution when Royals,being flawed humans with faults, don't live up to paragon image and screw up occasionally.
 
What Ken is saying sounds different than what people who have known and met William more recently are saying now.
Ken hasn't seen or talk to William in two decades and I doubt he has any connection to the people William surrounded himself with now.
 
EXACTLY what is to be expected from such a man.. 'Servants gossip'
 
Would anyone here be talking about Ken Wharfe if he said William is a great bloke and make a fine King some day? I think not. If he wants to continue to be a royals talking head, he has to bring "the dirt" so he gets attention so the next time E make a Royal documentary he can tell his William hates togophers story for the millionth time.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
miss whirley said:
Well, I want to comment on Wharfe's opinion of himself compared to the current staff. I'll hope that's considered on-topic.

I do think Wharfe is a bitter betty. He sees Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton got chosen as godfather to a future king, and Jamie's son being part of the royal wedding party.

He sees Catherine's office staff (Rebecca, Sophie Agnew) and her main protection officer (Emma Probert) all get described in the media as good friends of The Duchess.

And then he sees how the royals have kicked him to the curb 20 years ago with no acknowledgement.

The fact that 13-year-old William didn't care for Ken, yet 33-year-old William really likes his current staff, well the difference must be William's fault! Ken can't see how that could have been a character flaw on his own part.
Click to expand...

Excellent point! The man is throwing a hissy fit for not getting attention. Perhaps making a 13-year-old boy look bad and insinuate that the said boy hasn't grown up makes him feel better. Whatever. He may want to get over himself and move on. William doesn't strike me as someone who would be rude to staff, or anyone else. We all have bad and good days. Heck, I can be described as 'difficult' at work, because I hate being told what to do, but that doesn't make me a person who won't listen to suggestions or respect her supervisor. If William is indeed a snob and a boor, then he's a damn good actor and should be given an award for performances well done. I highly doubt it, but anything is possible.

Osipi said:
I'm also a Junie Mae Smith and from my perspective, I am of the opinion that the results from the endeavors of most of the royal family has not only drawn attention to crucial issues but also has physically helped many, many other Smiths out there. Charles was ridiculed and mocked years back when he expressed concerns for the planet. Yesterday, 196 countries approved a historic climate agreement. Charles' Prince's Trust actively has helped out thousands over the years who needed it. William has achieved a bit of success in his work to combat illegal poaching but we've also seen him just recently giving an interview to a young lady who four years ago was homeless but with a bit of encouragement and involvement with Centrepointe, achieved her goal and cashed in a promise William had made to her. There are a lot of Smiths that have benefited through Kate's patronages focusing on children's issues and wellbeing, addiction, bullying, and many others I'm probably not remembering right now. I would feel safe to think that most of the UK military is pretty darned proud of Harry and his work with wounded service personnel too. This isn't the royal family playing tiddlywinks folks.



They are making a difference. They are the reason perhaps that organizations and programs get the word out there and donations rise to aid them in helping many more Smiths in the future.



To me, this makes me realize that Wharfe is wearing blinders and earplugs.. "Unless the family is seen to achieve something"? What rock has he been hiding under? Perhaps for someone like him, he'll only see gigantro monumental achievements like singlehandedly curing cancer or perhaps wiping out radical extremism all by themselves? Or perhaps, as many have pointed out, he's dipped a little too much into the sour wine.
Click to expand...

This an excellent post. William and Catherine, along with other members of the Royal Family are making a difference in the lives of the 'Average Joes'. They're bringing awareness to serious issues and that awareness brings about change and assistance. That's important. William's work on preventing bullying, Catherine's work on helping addicts and promoting improve,net of children's mental health are all a big deal. If the anti-monarchists don't see that, then they're not looking very hard.



Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app
 
I think that she talked about her private life with anyone who would listen. There was that story about her meeting with a group of abused women and saying, "Well, ladies, we all know what men are like." So she gave those ladies, whom she hardly knew, the idea that the men in Diana's life (e.g., her husband, her father-in-law, her brothers-in-law, etc.) were as bad as their own husbands.


Queen Claude said:
Diana, with very little vetting, hired Peter Settelen to coach her with speechmaking and within hours, while being filmed no less, shared that she witnessed her father hit her mother, discussed her sex life with Charles and shared other very personal tidbits. I don't automatically assume that she would not confide in certain people, also some of these people had a relationship with her for years.
Click to expand...
 
Please note that several posts have been deleted as they are off-topic. As a reminder, posts containing information purporting to have come from members of the Royal Family or their associates cannot be verified and thus can only be viewed as speculative. Accordingly, just posts will be deleted without notice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Claire
Diana and Sophie, Countess of Wessex
8 9 10
Replies
275
Views
111K
MARG
MARG
Furienna
Diana and Celebrities
3 4 5
Replies
136
Views
39K
Denville
D
Duchess Sophie
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Diana Websites, Links and Videos
4 5 6
Replies
160
Views
93K
corazon
corazon

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom