Juan Carlos Paternity Claims

[Winnie]

Originally Posted by Tarlita

I can't believe that in this day and age some people would make a claim when it can be so easily disclaimed by DNA testing.

I agree with you on that statement. The trick would be to get a true DNA test from king without having it tampered with to show incorrect results. In his position, testing would certainly not be easy.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Tarlita

I can't believe that in this day and age some people would make a claim when it can be so easily disclaimed by DNA testing.

The problem is that no one wants to participate in DNA tests, again, and again, and again.

"I am a daughter of Juan Carlos de Borbón!"

JC forced to participate in DNA testing.

"Angela Merkel is my secret mother!"

AM forced to participate in DNA testing.

Paris Hilton is really no Hilton at all but an illegitimate parasite if the Hilton fortune!

PH forced to participate in DNA testing.

Apart from the juridical, publicitary, financial and familial implications, alone to prevent a wave of trolls making the one claim after the other, it is wise that royals and other public persons are very cautious with engaging in DNA tests. For sure when these tests can be manipulated or selectively explained: "There is a 70% match between Mr X from Germany and Mrs Y from Portugal, which might possibly lead to a conclusion that they are siblings". Well, there can be a 70% match between me and the cleaning lady as well, who knows... After all we are all the same: a body, a two ears, one heart, two lungs, one liver, etc. etc...

When the Court is convinced that Ms Sartiau's story might have reasons to believe that Don Juan Carlos de Borbón is her natural father, then new possibilities open for the lady in question. It still remains difficult, see the story of Ms Boël in Belgium.

[Duc_et_Pair]

There have been three claims on Don Juan Carlos de Borbón being a father out of wedlock:

By the Française Marie José de la Ruelle: the claim was that she would have been the fruit of a liaison between Don Juan Carlos de Borbón and Princess Maria Gabriella of Savoia. Investigations learned that her story was so inconsistent and ridiculous that it was denied by the French Justice.

By the Spaniard Albert Solà: the claim was that Don Juan Carlos de Borbón would have had a liaison with his mother María Bach Ramon while the Prince was stationed at a military base in Zaragoza. A DNA test with the Belgian Ingrid Sartiau claimed they were for 90% sure siblings, new tests learned that the earlier test was a set-up or a fraud and there was no relationship with Sartiau at all, the case was dismissed by Spanish Justice.

By the Belgian Ingrid Sartiau: the claim is made by her mother Liliane Sartiau. Then years ago she told her daughter that her father was Don Juan Carlos de Borbón. For years her mother "did not realize that he was the King". Now the lady tries to pursue her claim. The Spanish Supreme Court has accepted her request for an investigation and waits on a reaction from the former King. This is possible since Don Juan Carlos no longer enjoys inviolability as head-of-state.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Two days ago the Spanish Supreme Court has ruled that Ms Sartiau needs to deliver more backing for her claim that Don Juan Carlos de Borbón y Borbón is her father. It seems that the backing is a story told by Ms Sartiau's mother, which has been written by a notary. The Court wants to have more backing: pictures, letters, cards, gifts, etc. which are traceable to Don Juan Carlos and which give ground for furtherer investigation.

According to the declaration of Ms Sartiau's mother she would have had an affair with Don Juan Carlos in 1965. According to Ms Sartiau's mother she had no idea who the "very handsome young man" was. Only a few years ago Ms Sartiau's mother would have told her daughter she had an affair with "a Spanish Prince". The Belgian needs to deliver more materiaal to convince the Court that there is enough proof to declare Don Juan Carlos as the father (a DNA-test is not required by the way).

The stories are somewhat conflicting. I have read a version in which Ms Sartiau's mother was holidaying in Zaragoza and learned a handsome Spanish officer from the Royal Military Academy there. Another version is that Ms Sartiau's mother was working as a governess for the princely family De Mérode. The mother of Ms Sartiau would have met Prince Juan Carlos in France, in 1956. Ten years later, in Luxembourg, the two would have met again and nine months later Ms Sartiau was born. All the time Ms Sartiau's mother would not have known who Don Juan Carlos was (???? A governess from one of Belgiums most prestigious families, not knowing who he is, after all the media frenzy surrounding his marriage with Princess Sophia of Greece and Denmark ???)

To be continued.

[maria-olivia]

Ah !! The Love Stories of Belgian Ladies and future Kings.....

[COUNTESS]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Two days ago the Spanish Supreme Court has ruled that Ms Sartiau needs to deliver more backing for her claim that Don Juan Carlos de Borbón y Borbón is her father. It seems that the backing is a story told by Ms Sartiau's mother, which has been written by a notary. The Court wants to have more backing: pictures, letters, cards, gifts, etc. which are traceable to Don Juan Carlos and which give ground for furtherer investigation.

According to the declaration of Ms Sartiau's mother she would have had an affair with Don Juan Carlos in 1965. According to Ms Sartiau's mother she had no idea who the "very handsome young man" was. Only a few years ago Ms Sartiau's mother would have told her daughter she had an affair with "a Spanish Prince". The Belgian needs to deliver more materiaal to convince the Court that there is enough proof to declare Don Juan Carlos as the father (a DNA-test is not required by the way).

The stories are somewhat conflicting. I have read a version in which Ms Sartiau's mother was holidaying in Zaragoza and learned a handsome Spanish officer from the Royal Military Academy there. Another version is that Ms Sartiau's mother was working as a governess for the princely family De Mérode. The mother of Ms Sartiau would have met Prince Juan Carlos in France, in 1956. Ten years later, in Luxembourg, the two would have met again and nine months later Ms Sartiau was born. All the time Ms Sartiau's mother would not have known who Don Juan Carlos was (???? A governess from one of Belgiums most prestigious families, not knowing who he is, after all the media frenzy surrounding his marriage with Princess Sophia of Greece and Denmark ???)

To be continued.

In today's day and age, DNA testing and not these long convoluted stories should be done.

[royal rob]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

In today's day and age, DNA testing and not these long convoluted stories should be done.

I agree the amount of money it cost going back forth with lawyers etc. just have the test simple


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Duc_et_Pair]

The point is that every European citizen has the basic right on protection of the physical and moral integrity of the person (Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights).

When someone steps forward, out of the blue, and claims that he/she is someone's natural child, then the Court of Justice has the obligation to investigate the claim seriously. Only when there are enough grounds to support a ruling to interfere the physical and/or moral integrity of an alleged parent, the Court will request a DNA-test. Such a test can not be enforced. Refusing a test may lead to an acknowledgement that the claimant indeed is a natural child, when the supporting circumstancial evidence gives enough ground for the Court to believe that there is a question of paternity indeed.

The French lady Marie-José de la Ruelle failed in giving a coherent backing story for her claim that Don Juan Carlos de Borbón and Princess Maria Gabriella di Savoia are her natural parents. Her case was already rejected by the Public Prosecutor.

The Spanish gentleman Alberto Solà backed his claim with a DNA test making clear that he was "for 90% sure" siblings with the Belgian lady Ingrid Sartiau, another claimant. So he was hooking his claim to another claim. It turned out that the DNA-test was a fraud and there was no relationship with Sartiau at all, the case was dismissed by Spanish Justice.

Remains the Belgian lady Ingrid Sartiau. Her claim is mainly backed by a declaration stated by her mother. The Court of Justice has requested more supporting material for her claim. What lies at table is not sufficient and/or convincing enough.

[scooter]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

In today's day and age, DNA testing and not these long convoluted stories should be done.

The two claimants, who have two different mothers, have already taken a DNA test which confirmed that their father is the same man. Their mothers say JC. JC, let's have a cheek swab if you are confident that you did not have relations with the mothers in question. It's easy enough to shoot holes in it, IF you are not the father. The problem, of course, is he has always had, shall we say, a 'man about town' reputation in the media. If one were to know, for example, that one has only had relations with X number of people, it's easy to keep track of.

[COUNTESS]

Originally Posted by scooter

The two claimants, who have two different mothers, have already taken a DNA test which confirmed that their father is the same man. Their mothers say JC. JC, let's have a cheek swab if you are confident that you did not have relations with the mothers in question. It's easy enough to shoot holes in it, IF you are not the father. The problem, of course, is he has always had, shall we say, a 'man about town' reputation in the media. If one were to know, for example, that one has only had relations with X number of people, it's easy to keep track of.

Well. I am sure if he were in no way, the father, he would have given a sample. Get's rid of the obvious frauds.

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by scooter

The two claimants, who have two different mothers, have already taken a DNA test which confirmed that their father is the same man. Their mothers say JC. JC, let's have a cheek swab if you are confident that you did not have relations with the mothers in question. It's easy enough to shoot holes in it, IF you are not the father. The problem, of course, is he has always had, shall we say, a 'man about town' reputation in the media. If one were to know, for example, that one has only had relations with X number of people, it's easy to keep track of.

I think the result was a fraud, they don't share thes same father.

[Duc_et_Pair]

The Fiscalia del Supremo (the Prosecutor-General at the Supreme Court) has adviced the Lords Justices of the Tribunal to reject Ms Sartiau's request for a DNA test. They advice the Tribunal to accept the application filed by the defense of Don Juan Carlos de Borbón and correct the admission of paternity suit filed by the Belgian citizen Ms Ingrid Sartiau.

According to the Prosecutor-General, the former monarch should not be requested to cooperate in a paternity case because such an order can not be given while the slightest evidence about the veracity of Ms Sartiau's claims is missing. This means that the Office of the Prosecutor-General supports the case that the lawyers of the former monarch have filed against the resolution by the examinating Court of Justice that Ms Sartiau's claim should be admissed. According the advice issued by the Prosecutor-General that resolution was "insufficiently motivated" and holds no ground which can stand any legal case in Court.

According to the ProsecutorGeneral, just providing a written document, an affidavit -filed by a Belgian notary- in which the mother of Ms Sartiau stated she remembered she once had a relationship with Don Juan Carlos, more than 40 years ago, is insufficiently backing of a possible proof required by law to file a claim of paternity, especially given the absence of any other element or data like letters, photos, messages, witnesses, etc. Jurisprudence usually considers this as a verisimilitude leading to rejection of a lawsuit. (Verisimilitude means that no citizen can be enforced to cooperate in a lawsuit purely on base of uttered assertions and hypotheses without any possible deduction of said claims limiting the space between truth and falsification).

In addition the Prosecutor-General has concluded that there were contradictions between the contents of the affidavit and public statements by Ms Ingrid Sartiau and her mother. It also concluded a lack of consistency in the versions told in public. In the affidavit, Ms Sartiau's mother stated that during a holiday at the Costa del Sol in 1965 she "met" a man with whom she had sex for three days. The hotel concierge told her it was "Prince Juan Carlos".

Ms Ingrid Sartiau, however, stated in an interview to a Belgian magazine that "the love story" of Don Juan Carlos and her mother "lasted from 1956-1966" after meeting at the home of a Belgian family which employed her mother. "She had no idea who the man was. It was only years later she found out it was Don Juan Carlos". The applicant has also told another version in a television interview for the Belgian television: Ms Sartiau's mother would have met Don Juan Carlos "during a holiday in France, she was with the family where she worked as a governess".


El fiscal rechaza que el Rey haga el test de ADN | Espa?a | EL MUNDO

[Marty91charmed]

This Sartiau sounds completely contradictory but IMO if I was in JC position, I would do the test of DNA: if I am that sure I'm not her parent why would I refuse to prove it? I would have nothing to hide... And doing so I would ashame Sartiau and put a rest to it. Of course, I am talking from a personal point of view. (And nothing juridical).

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Marty91charmed

This Sartiau sounds completely contradictory but IMO if I was in JC position, I would do the test of DNA: if I am that sure I'm not her parent why would I refuse to prove it? I would have nothing to hide... And doing so I would ashame Sartiau and put a rest to it. Of course, I am talking from a personal point of view. (And nothing juridical).

This means that any idiot stepping forward and saying "I am his/her love-baby" can enforce anyone to participate into any formal investigation purely on basis of assertions, hypotheses or claims. I can understand the unwillingness of citizens to be dragged into juridical procedures and protest against allegations which come out of the blue and then are "honoured" by Justice, especially when there is absence of any other element like letters, photos, messages, witnesses, etc..

[Marty91charmed]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

This means that any idiot stepping forward and saying "I am his/her love-baby" can enforce anyone to participate into any formal investigation purely on basis of assertions, hypotheses or claims. I can understand the unwillingness of citizens to be dragged into juridical procedures and protest against allegations which come out of the blue and then are "honoured" by Justice, especially when there is absence of any other element like letters, photos, messages, witnesses, etc..

I just said what I'd do if I wore his shoes... And sincee he certainly is not a common person but a ex king it could also be seen as a favour to him... nothing to hide, nothing to fear IMO

[lula]

The Spanish Supreme Court has dismissed a paternity suit against former king Juan Carlos by a Belgian woman claiming to be his daughter, a judicial source said.

Court quashes King Juan Carlos paternity suit - The Local

[Duc_et_Pair]

As expected, the Tribunal has followed the advice by the Excma. Sra. Dª. Consuelo Madrigal Martínez-Pereda, Fiscal General del Estado (Chief Prosecutor of the State) to reject the claims of Ms Ingrid Sartiau.


The Tribunal has not given a motivation yet but will most likely refer to the advice of the Chief Prosecutor. In her advice she wrote that just providing a written document in which the mother of Ms Sartiau stated she remembered she once had a relationship with Don Juan Carlos, more than 40 years ago, is insufficiently backing of a possible proof required by law to file a claim of paternity, especially given the absence of any other element or data like letters, photos, messages, witnesses, etc.


In her advice the Chief Prosecutor pointed to the jurisprudence: such a lack of backing for claims is considered a verisimilitude which leads to rejection of a lawsuit. (Verisimilitude means that no citizen can be enforced to cooperate in a lawsuit purely on base of uttered assertions and hypotheses without any possible deduction of said claims limiting the space between truth and falsification).

[maria-olivia]

Everybody knows her now in Belgium !

[WreathOfLaurels]

Oh what a tangled web has been weaved...

Without sounding insensitive or un-feminist, I do feel a little sorry for JC about all off this. It's interesting that more or less everyone had been fast to write him off as a feckless cad. What would the reaction be if somone came forward claiming to be a child of Sofia who was put up for adoption before she married JC? Permit me to play Devil's Advocate for him?

Although he's got a bad sexual reputation for a reason, albeit one that I personally think is probably over exaggerated in popular culture, it is quite unlikely that he is the father of all three of these people. The fact that the courts in two different countries have thrown out the testimony of two of these people is telling as the French courts have no reason to protect JC's reputation; and as the Noos investigation shows the courts in Spain, if Mariano Rajoy had not included imminuty in the legalisation that allowed for his abdication, would not have hesitated to begin legal proceedings ether, so I don't think there's any kind of conspiracy going on.

I really don't think he is the father of either Marie-Jose de la Ruelle or Ingrid Sartieu. Their stories do not add up, and both seem to be clutching at straws as their 'evidence' is mostly circumstancial. This isn't to call either frauds or liars, they aren't after money and I get the feeling both were (and are) probably sincere in their beliefs but the fantasy of being royalty in disguise is very powerful and in the absence of concrete records; in de la Ruelle's case a side effect of older adoption laws that kept the identity of the birth mothers anonymous and often just omitted the fathers from the whole process. Sartieu's case on the other hand just seems odd and I get the feeling that her mother's testimony is maybe covering up somthing else. Her claims could well be true, but I find the fact her mother was able to keep her as a single mother in a time period where single mothers were regularly pressured to relinquish their children for adoption particularly interesting - was somone else financially supporting them? I can see why such a belief would be attractive, as its profoundly frustrating trying to piece together a personal history of conflicting evidence, deception and blank spaces. Its the not knowing that is the worst part and makes the fantasy all the more attractive.

Albert Sola on the other hand, he certainly does look like JC, more so than Felipe or the infantas to be honest. Its possible another member of the Bourbon clan could be the father (a possibility for the two women above as well) or Sola and JC's physical resemblence is just a coincidence. His story, however, is the one that make the most sense out of the three claimants. I'd say it's pretty likely that JC is his biological father. Given that JC would have been pretty young (I can't remember the dates but I've heard 1956/1958 being thrown around) when Sola was born I'd say that JC would either have been unaware of ms Bach being pregnant, or did know and would have been excluded from having any say over what happened regarding Sola being adopted out. The expectation was that it would all remain anonymous and all parties would get a "fresh start" and be allowed to get on with their lives.

However the question that's under all of this is - just because you're someone's biological parent, does that automatically entitle them to a relationship with you? I don't think so. Its a lot to ask of somone who might not have known you existed to suddenly turn around and accept you as their children and any possible inherentance or social obligations that would go with it. Its also unfair to other members of the families of those involved. We have no idea about what JC really thinks about all of this, he could be distressed, humiliated, starkly indifferent, relieved, or any other mix of emotions at having somthing that should be a private matter paraded through the courts and the press - Yes these people have a right to know if he may well be their father or not but JC also has a right that his privacy be respected and that he not be caused undue distress. But by refusing to take the test he's made this worse for himself than it needed to be and its only fuelling talk and making him look selfish and callow, and for all we know that may not be the case - its often not indifference and selfishness that keeps these men from coming forward, its the guilt and the shame.

Sorry about the length but its been on my mind for a bit. Thanks for your patience.

[WreathOfLaurels]

Addendum - that's my take on the claims mentioned in this thread - there has also been rumors of him being the birth father of two others - the names of the purported mothers escape me and probably others.

This all things considered is a great lesson why you should use birth control when you are conducting your affairs - it's just good manners and good sense.

Also I see that Delphine Boel has lost her court case - again.