The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #61  
Old 01-03-2009, 09:12 AM
Menarue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
That was a very strange episode, not the train, but Lord Fermoy practically advertising the fact that his niece was a virgin, surely this is a very strange way to act and Jo is right in thinking it was an act of desperation, the crown was so close when Sarah apparently said the wrong thing and now that the crown was within reach again they would stop at nothing, even a public declaration from an uncle on the subject of his niece´s virginity.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 01-03-2009, 11:13 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
The train incident: Tina Brown makes quite a convincing scenario that it was not Camilla but Diana on the train that night, because she found a witness who could verify that the car which brought the "blonde guest" belonged to Diana's mother. Brown claims that Diana stayed at Camilla's (she has a witness for that as well - and shows that in fact Diana could have driven up to Camilla's that night instead of going to bed, as she claimed she had done)) that night and was encouraged by Camilla to drive over to spend an unsupervised evening/night with Charles.
"The woman on the train' story quoting Stephen Barry "Royal Service' who actually was on the train that night he stated that there was no woman on the train. Charles was never alone as he had his private detective with him. Charles did try to get the editor who published the story to retract it, but he refused. So it's now gone down in folklore as there was a woman on the train.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 01-04-2009, 04:02 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Oh, I don't know. Maybe we should try to find all sources available about the "Train incident" and see what's coming out of it. Tina Brown obviously did that for her book, colecting all kind of sources and then started to dig into the incident.

As for Stephen Barry: when he wrote his book, the image of the Wales marriage was still intact. So what was he to do? if he wrote that it had been Diana, he would show openly her lying, manipulating side, as she and her family had publicily claimed it wasn't her. But the editor of course would have told him that he had to put that episode into his book as it was a "Royal mystery". So at that time there are many reasons why barry wouldn't name either Diana or Camilla as the "lady on the train" but declare that the incident simply didn't happen. Bradford and Brandreth are convinced it happened and they did quite thorough research while Tina Brown even used detectives to find the guard who could identify the car.
__________________
'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
  #64  
Old 01-04-2009, 09:33 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 802
Bradford and Brandeth state it was Camilla on the train. Brandeth I think quotes Bradford as his source, she in turn names the person ( I don't have the book with me) who stated many years later that it was Camilla, but that person wasn't on the train. With the benefit of hindsight history tends to be moved somewhat by whatever slant an author wants to be put on. All 3 authors' sources are somewhat tenuous, even Tina Brown's guard made no positive identification that he saw either Diana or Camilla board the train.

So even with knowing when Stephen Brown wrote his book, he being a primary source ( he was on the train) and no other primary sources being as strong as he, I would go with his version of events. Plus Barry also pointed out that Charles was very discreet when it came to his sexual affairs, ( not carried out as BP as there is no privacy there, all his rooms went along a corridor) he used friends' country homes where there was a lot more privacy. That then would rule out a tryst on a train which wasn't private, Charles was with his staff ( valet, detective) in country homes, the valet didn't come with him and his detective left him at the door, Charles could be alone. Had Charles really wanted to sleep with either Diana or Camilla then he would have chosen somewhere more private and practical than the royal train. As witnessed by when C & C were carrying out their affair it was at the country homes of sympathetic friends.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 01-04-2009, 02:25 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Yes, but we don't talk about a "tryst" necessarily. The fact that the lady was on the train does not mean she was Charles' lover. If it had been Diana, then she and Charles could well have used this as an opportunity to spend time alone to get to know each other better. I think it has ben written by quite some reliable biographers that the marriage bed tunred sour for Charles and Diana pretty soon after the wedding, so in all probability they didn't have intercourse pre-wedding. Sounds crazy, but this still happened in the 1980ties.

We should not forget that Charles was in a very difficult situation pretty soon after meeting Diana. He liked her, he felt he could maybe offer for her but the public/media was after them very quickly (and with Diana's help, as we know today). A person like Charles (as shown in the Dimbleby-biography) and of course his friends surely had an interest in him meeting the girl without anyone else around, just to sit and talk and get to know each other. Diana OTOH had her own agenda: to force his hand before she could make a fault like her sister had done.

So both had an interest to meet that night in private - enjoying a privacy that no house party could give them because even then they had their duties towards the host and hostess.

As for the detective and Barry not saying anything: Charles' detectives IMHO never breathed a word about the prince's doings and Barry, as I said before, had an interest to keep his mouth shut as well.

I mean: nothing untoward happened. Barry could well have witnessed Charles and Diana talking the whole night through on drinking water! Why should he comment this happening as long as the Wales' marriage was still intact? And why should the detective have said anything? It was his job to be discreet and to protect Charles: Diana surely back then was no danger at all.
__________________
'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
  #66  
Old 01-05-2009, 08:25 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 802
Well back to the train! Found Sarah Bradford's book, she doesn't offer up much as evidence. Here's what she had ( pg 70) Journalist James Whitaker stated 'on the record' that as a follow up to the 'woman on the train' story he went up to where the train had been at the siding and paid some money to the signal man to look at the log, a person was logged as getting on the train at the station down the road-a woman. Also that politician Woodrow Wyatt wrote a Christmas card to Sunday Mirror editor Bob Edwards in 1986 and wrote "it was Camilla" Woodrow Wyatt conveniently died in 1997 ( I looked it up) so there's no way to verify what he meant.

Back to Stephen Barry, there were actually 2 protection officers on the train, he also stated that when the train pulled into a siding the local police surrounded it. ( His take was that Diana would have had to have been Houdini to get on without being seen).
There would have been more people around to have talked on the record that Diana or Camilla were on the train. The Protection officers could have remained quiet, but local police? The signal man has never been identified nor the log verified, also it was at the 'station down the road' that the woman was logged as getting on the train, therefore could have been anyone come to work in the carriages.
At this stage in his courting Charles was seeing Diana alone at Highgrove, Barry would drive her down and then leave them alone. There was no other staff at Highgrove as it was still in its about to be renovated state.

Will try and find exactly what Tina Brown offers up as evidence to compare. I'm still leaning to the idea that the story is folklore.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 01-05-2009, 02:36 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlotte1 View Post
Will try and find exactly what Tina Brown offers up as evidence to compare.
Here's what I found - Anchor edition in PB from 2008:

p. 156: Diana at Highgrove, pre-wedding: "His valet Stephen Barry recalls them having tea together and later a light supper on a card table in the sitting room before driving back to London. A member of Charles' s staff, sonia Palmer, hints that it was more than tea. "Stephen used to say Diana always left iwth a glow and her hair freshly brished. Why did she neet to brush her hair if they were discursing on philosophy?"

Insert by me: We don't know if Stephen really used to say that. But if so: is it in his book? Or did he omit it for the same reasons as he omited the truth about the Train?

Brown goes on: "The tired old virgin thing again: the investment in that aspect of the fairy story had become so intense that it developped a life of its own. On the night of November 4, 1980, Diana attended Princess Margaret's fiftieth-birthday party at the Ritz Hotel in Piccadilly. What she did or did not do on two nights afterwards sent the Palace machine into near-hysterical overdrive....

From p. 157 to 164 Brown details the background of the Train incident and concludes: "Diana had now entered the zone of spin and would have to live there till the end of her life."

Another quote from the book, page 160:
For a number of reasons I have become convinced that it was indeed Diana on the Royal Train. If it was Camilla, why didn't Diana include the incident in her remorseless narrative of marital torture and betrayal in any of her confessional gut-spilling for Andrew Morton or Martin Bashir? Her later discovery that Charles was planning to give Camilla a bracelet became an operatic incident in her long list of hurts. For a girl on the verge of engagement it would have been a devastating discovery to find that her boyfriend was secretly two-timing her on the train while she was tucked up in bed at Coleherne Court..." Brown details her report with information from the Mirror, who had made a thorough investigation into the case and whose editor back then is still convinced that the research was serious and sucessful....
__________________
'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
  #68  
Old 07-17-2010, 01:36 AM
agogo's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: côte d'océan Pacifique, United States
Posts: 717
Too many books quote, "a friend", "a palace source", "an observer" and so on..........This allows the author to publish gossip without accountability.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 07-17-2010, 06:59 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
Well that is the point about royals books, they can never publish who their source is.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 07-17-2010, 10:47 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,148
Sarah Bradford had very few anonymous sources in her book about Diana.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Well that is the point about royals books, they can never publish who their source is.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 07-30-2010, 10:29 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
Sarah Bradford had very few anonymous sources in her book about Diana.
Tina Brown's Princess Diana book used a lot of Sarah Bradford's book as her source.
__________________

__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Questions about Royals and General Miscellania kcc Royal Life and Lifestyle 66 04-04-2014 07:50 PM
Username questions Daneborn Forum Announcements and Admin 44 04-15-2013 10:52 AM
Fun Questions... michelle Princely Family of Monaco 67 08-21-2010 07:14 AM
Citation of Sources in British Forum Threads Elspeth British Royals 1 10-24-2008 01:23 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth bourbon-parma charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta sofia jordan kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman picture of the month pieter van vollenhoven pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:08 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]