Delphine Boël, daughter of King Albert II

[Benjamin]

Our Daughter is Called Delphine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bO9iQ2z8ac

 

[vkrish]

Ok lets set aside all this moral/ethical/love/relation stuff..
Please tell me what exactly is the Belgian law for this particular case..
A married man has a child with another woman. But the second woman goes on to marry another man, and they live as a happy family for a few decades, ALL is WELL. And suddenly the daughter is disinherited. Then she claims for 'recognition'? What will be done by the courts if the man is a mere commoner?The DNA test will be done and his paternity is proved. Then what next? Is that all? Can she claim anything else based on that..

In my country (India), the child can always go for a paternity test (DNA) which no one can refuse. But THATS IT. He cannot claim even a single penny if he is born out of wedlock..
So whats the Belgian law in this matter?

I am interested only about property inheritence. I dont give a damn for 'recognition'..What exactly is this 'recognition'?
Seriously, I dont understand why any self-respecting person would run behind his 'father' who willingly abandoned him forever, just begging for a kiss and hug.. Or who would want to barge into a 'family' when they never feel you as their own? Why that desperation?
Or if for her 'recognition' meant the King coming on national TV and declaring ya she is my daughter..Well already pretty much everyone knows that. And you have lived 50 years with that..Whats your problem now suddenly..

 

[AristoCat]

I completely agree!

What happened that made her all of a sudden think she was deserving of recognition? What on earth made her want this and then make her think she could just bully her way in?

 

[Benjamin]

A married man has a child with another woman. But the second woman goes on to marry another man, and they live as a happy family for a few decades, ALL is WELL. And suddenly the daughter is disinherited.

Sybille de Sélys Longchamps (b.1941) was married to Jacques Boël (b.1929) from 1962 to 1978. Her daughter was born in 1968. The Baroness remarried the Honourable (Michael) Anthony Rathborne Cayzer (b.1920) in 1982 and was widowed in 1990.

Jacques Boël remarried in 2001 to Diane de Woot de Trixhe de Jannée (b.1943). Diane was married firstly in 1965 to Francis De Bois (b.1926), with whom she had three sons (Thierry, Arnould, and Bernard) and a daughter, Sophie (b.1970). Sophie De Bois, stepdaughter of Jacques Boël, has been married since 2003 to Prince Maximilian zu Ysenburg und Büdingen, with whom she has two children. Jacques Boël also has a brother and a sister, both of whom have issue. Perhaps he wishes to leave his assets to his stepchildren or nieces and nephews.

It is not known when exactly the disinheritance took place, nor is it known whether the family life of Sybille and Jacques was "happy."

 

[Benjamin]

More information regarding the legal aspect:

http://www.successions-europe.eu/en...reedom-to-dispose-of-ones-succession-by-will/

As Delphine is the "only child" of Jacques Boël, she is technically entitled to half of his estate. However, at some point, for reasons unknown to us, Jacques disinherited Delphine.

This case probably has nothing to do with money. Both of the husbands of Sybille were wealthy, and she certainly appears to be living comfortably. Furthermore, there is no factual basis to suggest that Delphine is "bankrupt."

As an adult, through various private channels, Delphine tried to reestablish a relationship with the man whom she had been told was her father and who had been a presence during her childhood. She was rebuffed in a brusque fashion. She is reacting accordingly, is not now pursuing a relationship, but is simply attempting to make her truth (i.e. that King Albert is her biological father) widely known and legally established.

I wish her the best of luck.

 

[vkrish]

Thanks, Benjamin I have gone through that.
It is all mostly technical legality. Lots of telling about what an heir should do after death, how much an heir should receive and how much an heir should pay..
But what exactly is an 'HEIR'? Its nowhere mentioned. It just speaks of fractions children, spouse and parents receive..
Can a DNA-proven-illegitimate child claim to be an heir, if not specified in will? In the article only spouse, kids and parents are mentioned..

 

[Lee-Z]

Can a DNA-proven-illegitimate child claim to be an heir, if not specified in will? In the article only spouse, kids and parents are mentioned..

DNA is not relevant to make someone an heir as such. Mr Boel is her legal father and you can only have one legal father. Comparable to people who are adopted...after adoption they are not legally connected to their biological parents and are not heirs to them, they are heirs to their adoptive parents.

Ms. Boel is also including her currently legal father in this courtcase (not just K.Albert); she will first have to prove that Mr Boel is NOT her biological father and then prove that K.Albert is. I'm not sure whether she intends to want to change her 'legal father' if she can prove all of the above...
(afai understand..)

btw, as much as she insists not being the daughter of Mr.Boel...i'm not really that surprised that he will try to let her have as little of his inheritance as possible... but that is my opinion
(you cannot completely disinherit a legal child here)

 

[vkrish]

As an adult, through various private channels, Delphine tried to reestablish a relationship with the man whom she had been told was her father and who had been a presence during her childhood.

WHY WHY WHY
Why is she so desperate to 'reestablish a relationship' with a LOSER who is not a man enough to say he s ur dad...

She was rebuffed in a brusque fashion.

And she seems eager to be rebuffed again and again in a much more brusque manner..And she gets a pleasure from being rebuffed.

She is reacting accordingly, is not now pursuing a relationship, but is simply attempting to make her truth (i.e. that King Albert is her biological father) widely known and legally established.

I bet long back everyone in the picture..right from her stepfather's stepkids to Albert's extended family knew who is her father..
And what does she mean 'widely known'? Should it be written in Encyclopedia Britannica and Wikipedia (the latter will do,anyway)
And what is this 'legally established'?


Either she is a silly, sentimental fool with absolutely zero dignity and self-respect, ready to manipulated by every useless a*****e on earth, and still craving for their love/recognition/relationship..

Or she is a just another hopeless schemer, trying to live off a few days selling gossip..

 

[Benjamin]

WHY WHY WHY
Why is she so desperate to 'reestablish a relationship' with a LOSER who is not a man enough to say he s ur dad...

Neither Boël nor any of her representatives have stated anything of the sort.

And she seems eager to be rebuffed again and again in a much more brusque manner.

Presumably Delphine Boël believes that her suit will ultimately be successful, even if it has to go to a higher court.

Either she is a silly, sentimental fool with absolutely zero dignity and self-respect, ready to manipulated by every useless a*****e on earth, and still craving for their love/recognition/relationship..

Or she is a just another hopeless schemer, trying to live off a few days selling gossip..

Either way, it seems as though you possess a strong (and completely rational, one is sure) dislike for Delphine Boël.

 

[cdm]

Trying to put everyting I've read and seen on TV so far (I haven't seen the interview with Sybille yet, only bits and pieces in the news)


1959 Albert marries Paola. Philippe is born in 1960, Astrid in 1962, Laurent in 1963
1962 Sybille marries Jacques Boël
1966 Albert & Sybille start their relationship
1968 Delphine is born. Sybille is married to Jacques Boël so he is automatically the legal father.
Albert, Sybille and Delphine practically live together as a family in Brussels and at the Belgian coast.
1976 Albert wants to divorce Paola, Baudouin agrees, Sybille refuse to agree with the conditions the Palace demands.
1978 Sybille divorces from Jacques Boël
1982 Albert & Sybille's relationship ends, Sybille remarries and moves to London
1980's Albert and Paola get back together (some say they found each other again at Philippe's graduation party, other say it's around Astrids engagement)
1999 A biography of Paola reveals the existence of Delphine. And she is chased by the press. In his new year's speech at the end of 1999 Albert says 'that he and Paola were confronted with a difficult time in their marriage 30 years ago, that it is private and that he wishes not to comment on it
up until the end of 2000 Delphine receives gifts from Albert for her birthday and christmas, she calls the palace when the gifts stop coming (Sybille told this in an interview with TV show Royalty)
2003 Delphine moves to Belgium and regularly gets press attention with her art, especially the pieces in the colours of the Belgian flag or with clear references to Albert
2004 Delphine didn't want to talk about Albert for the past 5 years, but now she tells that she and Albert have no contact anymore with each other
2013 January Delphine says Jacques Boël did everything to keep her from inheriting from him by putting his fortune in foundations. After he dies (and when he's still his legal child) she could object to his will and claim her part.
2013 June Delphine goes to court and wants to prove her descendance with DNA from Philippe, Astrid and Jacques Boël
2013 July Albert abdicates
2013 September 3rd Delphine changes her case and only wants DNA from Albert (He can refuse a DNA test according the belgian law, confirmed by his lawyer)
That evening the first part of an interview with Sybille is aired. She agreed to be interviewed when it was put into a contract that the interview could not be aired before Albert's death or abdication. Apparently she wasn't expecting the abdication to happen during the interview session. Review from the first part of the interview (google translate) Google Translate

So IMO both Albert and Sybille are equally 'guilty' of Delphine's situation.
After the affair ended and Paola and Albert get back together, Albert still sends gifts to Delphine but doesn't see her anymore. That's what sometimes happens with kids from divorced parents too.
He stops sending gifts around the time Delphine gets press attention. Because he's angry of her indescretion? I also think Delphine came to Belgium hoping to launch her carreer as an artist because she's famous now and that didn't turn out the way she wanted.

I think Albert should have handled the situation in 1999 by making a Mitterand-like 'et alors' statement and Delphine should have stayed in London. She could have been his known illegitimate but discreet daughter.
But now everybody is just bitter and angry at each other
Delphine and her mom at Albert for ignoring her
Albert at Delphine for being indiscreet
Jacques Boël for being dragged into this whole situation.

We'll see what happens next.

 

[dbarn67]

WHY WHY WHY
Why is she so desperate to 'reestablish a relationship' with a LOSER who is not a man enough to say he s ur dad...



And she seems eager to be rebuffed again and again in a much more brusque manner..And she gets a pleasure from being rebuffed.



I bet long back everyone in the picture..right from her stepfather's stepkids to Albert's extended family knew who is her father..
And what does she mean 'widely known'? Should it be written in Encyclopedia Britannica and Wikipedia (the latter will do,anyway)
And what is this 'legally established'?


Either she is a silly, sentimental fool with absolutely zero dignity and self-respect, ready to manipulated by every useless a*****e on earth, and still craving for their love/recognition/relationship..

Or she is a just another hopeless schemer, trying to live off a few days selling gossip..

3rd option is she delusional in thinking that approaching the matter in this extremely public way will bring her closer to King Albert's family.

 

[Benjamin]

Thank you for the very informative post, cdm!

The timeline is most helpful, and I agree with your summary at the end.

It will be quite interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[vkrish]

Either way, it seems as though you possess a strong (and completely rational, one is sure) dislike for Delphine Boël.

Ohh thanks for atleast qualifying my 'dislike' as completely rational..
Actually my dislike is not for Delphine Boel..but its for all this messy nonsense, which is totally unnecessary in the first place..atleast what I feel.

 

[Benjamin]

Actually my dislike is not for Delphine Boel..but its for all this messy nonsense, which is totally unnecessary in the first place..atleast what I feel.

Many people feel similarly to the way that you do about this whole situation.

Whether it was necessary is debatable as far as we the public are concerned. Obviously, Delphine Boël feels that it is necessary. King Albert (or Queen Paola or whoever is advising them) also must feel that it is necessary as they have refused/are refusing to put the matter to rest by handling this case in a totally unreasonable fashion.

It does not make sense to visit upon the child (not just Delphine Boël, but also King Philippe, Princess Astrid, and Prince Laurent) the sins of the parents (be they Sybille de Sélys Longchamps or King Albert or Queen Paola or even Jacques Boël). One could say that the vitriol and attacks directed against Delphine Boël are being misdirected. She is entitled to seek to correct any misinformation about her biological beginnings/legal identity if she so desires (look at the Romanian Royal Family and the Lambrinos, for example).

 

[Mitral Valve]

No matter what one thinks of this case, it is inhumane to refuse to recognize one's child. Sooner or later a person wants to know who his or her parents are and wants recognition. Not to inherit money, but to feel as complete as possible in a situation like this.

It is obvious the royal family itself knows Delphine is Albert's daughter. The former monarch is in the last part of his life, now is the time to confront old demons and to owe another human being, of his own flesh and blood, peace of mind.

 

[Ish]

No matter what one thinks of this case, it is inhumane to refuse to recognize one's child. Sooner or later a person wants to know who his or her parents are and wants recognition. Not to inherit money, but to feel as complete as possible in a situation like this.

It is obvious the royal family itself knows Delphine is Albert's daughter. The former monarch is in the last part of his life, now is the time to confront old demons and to owe another human being, of his own flesh and blood, peace of mind.

Except everything indicates that Delphine was privately acknowledged by Albert right up until she started to publicly speak about this. To me, that's not necessarily him being a horrible person as it is him trying to keep his private life private.

Albert can be wronged for many things, including how he chose to treat both his legitimate and illegitimately born children at various points in their lives depending on his relationship with their respective mothers. He left his legitimate children when his marriage was falling apart, and then when he reconciled with his wife he left his illegitimate daughter. However he continued to provide for them, in a manner, even when he wasn't there, and continued to do so with Delphine up until she went public with things.

This isn't her seeking out her father. She had a father in as best as she was likely to get in 2000, and had she privately sought out a relationship with him or his children, things may have been different. Instead she has chosen to go public and increasingly act in a manner that can be seen as a vindictive attempt to ruin the image of her father. In many ways her behaviour is just as questionable as his.

 

[Benjamin]

Delphine did not go public with the information in 2000. That is when contact was broken off sans explanation by the palace. In retrospect, they likely regret that move.

 

[Mitral Valve]

Just get it over and done with. 99% of the Belgian people believe she is his daughter. Let him acknowledge that and put it to rest. Even though she might not have chosen the most clever way, let him be the humble and wise one.

 

[Ish]

Delphine did not go public with the information in 2000. That is when contact was broken off sans explanation by the palace. In retrospect, they likely regret that move.

Sorry, you're right. I was misremembering the timeline posted.

Re-reading it, it seems that the contact was broken off following the affair becoming public knowledge, even if Delphine wasn't responsible for that. The book was published in 1999, contact ended in 2000. It almost seems like there was an "oh no, we have to cover up this" moment and that's why contact ended.

I still stand by the argument that Delphine's actions are a deliberate attack of Albert because contact ended and she wants the publicity. So long as Albert and his family don't comment Delphine is able to continue to garner publicity from this.

 

[rominet09]

This evening, first part of a huge program about the Delphine story, very long and detailed interview of her mother.
I refused to watch, I am disgusted, what happens in a couple must remain in the couple I think.
To reveal intimate details of a relationship won't help the case I think. And I think it will change the opinion of right thinking people and not in her favour.

 

[Grandma828]

Delphine did not ask to be born. She was the innocent child. I can see her wanting the truth established. Too bad Albert wasn't man enough to admit fathering her.

 

[Roslyn]

...... what happens in a couple must remain in the couple I think.

I agree, but when what happens in a couple ends up producing a child, the game changes. The person their affair created has rights quite independent from those of her parents.

 

[Rice]

Albert and Paola got married, had some kids, had some affairs, one of them likely had another kid with someone they werent married to, they stopped having affairs and got back together. Paola did nothing to Sybille. She decided to fight for her marriage and won. Sybille looks like the woman scorned here, particularly airing dirty laundry now. Paola may have encouraged Albert to deny Delphine, but we don't know that for sure. And if she did, Albert didn't have to listen to her. He chose, and is choosing to deny her existence. Tough to do given she is a carbon copy of Queen Astrid, but so be it.
Hammering this out in a public forum is never going to accomplish a good result. I think at this point this is too far gone. It's very sad

 

[AristoCat]

Delphine did not ask to be born. She was the innocent child. I can see her wanting the truth established. Too bad Albert wasn't man enough to admit fathering her.

She was an innocent, but isn't any longer. Albert privately acknowledged her and she was generally known to be the illegitimate daughter, so why this messy drama?

She isn't an innocent kid, she isn't an innocent adolescent; she's a fully grown woman and is acting out her issues on the RF. Paola had every right to want her marriage to succeed and I don't think Delphine's life was deprived of material security and as far as I know, her legal father and stepfather loved and provided amply for her to live a good life.

I don't hear any stories about her going without food and clothes and she does have an art degree and art degrees are often for the posh.

 

[Grandma828]

But what created those issues. I think there are too many things that we do not know.

 

[Roslyn]

Paola had every right to want her marriage to succeed

But at what price? We don't have all the details of the estrangement, and I do think there is a limit to what one spouse should require of the other. I believe it would be unconscionable to require your husband to essentially disown a child he had fathered and acknowledged and actually lived with during the period of estrangement. And weak of him to accept those terms.

and I don't think Delphine's life was deprived of material security and as far as I know, her legal father and stepfather loved and provided amply for her to live a good life.

I don't hear any stories about her going without food and clothes and she does have an art degree and art degrees are often for the posh.

Material security is not everything. And no amount of paperwork or legal niceties can make Mr Boel her real father if he is not.

 

[AristoCat]

But what created those issues. I think there are too many things that we do not know.

There has to be something more we don't know about.

 

[Benjamin]

It is a bit rich to act as if Queen Paola "fought" to save her marriage. The Queen and King Albert contributed to their serious marital crisis by their childish and selfish actions, both of them had affairs with other people. The only difference between the two spouses is that Albert (allegedly) sired a child with his long-term lover (because apparently the King and his amour did not use protection owing to the fact that Sybille de Sélys Longchamps believed herself to be infertile...well, turns out her first husband was the one suffering from that condition).

Furthermore, the comparisons between Queen Paola and the late Diana, Princess of Wales, are not really viable. At the time of their marriage, the Prince of Wales was still in love with another woman and Lady Diana Spencer was a young, inexperienced, naive girl - their feelings do not seem to have been mutual - they were not on the same page. Conversely, Albert and Paola contracted a union based on mutual attraction and passion, and then they both went their separate ways for quite some time once they ran into difficulties.

No, no - Queen Paola did not fight to save her marriage. She simply did not have any serious reason to abandon it, unlike her husband. The divorce conditions that were to be imposed upon King Albert had he split from Paola were intolerable, so the marriage theoretically remained intact until such a time as the actual reconciliation between the couple took place.

 

[maria-olivia]

This is my last thread about Baroness Sybille.
To tell a love story they are two and we heard only hers.
With a lot of dignity She said that:
1. her own mother did not like her and loved another man when she was pregnant. Sybille did not speak during 12 years only yes and no !
2 She marries Jacques Boel and they were not happy
3 She met when she was in Greece because her father Ambassador for belgium was will , Prince Albert whose boat had problems. Although the boat was repaired the Prince stayed 3 weeks.
4 She fell in love , King Baudouin invited his Father in Spain asking him to insist that the relation should stop. Sybille did it but they fell in love again
6. her unexpected pregnancy because she thought she could not have children and then Delphine bad hidden conditions birth but she was "l'enfant de l'amour." and the 3 others ???
___________________________________________________________________________
7. To a journalist ,she should have never criticized Prince Albert's behavior with his own Children nor that Paola had a very bad character. They are Royal Highnesses and still alive and that is private.
8. Her interview had to be public when King Albert abdicated or died and she said about our new King Philip he has " une sorte d'autisme " which is very harsh .
___________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion of a Lawyer
1. King Philippe may not recognize a half sister
2. King Albert may not recognize Delphine as his daughter , before the law she is officially Jacques Boel daughter.

MY conclusion and this is my last sentence in this thread , this interview will give money to the bankrupt Delphine.

 

[Marengo]

I didn't find her that harsh. Her point was that it was/is difficult for Philippe to communicate, esp. in the past. I think that has been visible to all of us. She added her own experience (not talking until the age of 12). But she also said that she would not be surprised if king Philippe will do well and will grow when he steps out of his father's shadow. And I think all of us have seen that the last month already.

She was most harsh about Paola, although even there she showed some understanding as she thought that also Paola was very unhappy during that period in her life.