The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #501  
Old 08-25-2018, 04:31 AM
JessRulz's Avatar
Administrator
Blog Editor
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,688
A few posts have been moved to the http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...tles-9610.html thread.
__________________

__________________
**TRF Rules and FAQ**
Reply With Quote
  #502  
Old 08-25-2018, 05:15 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Because Alice was a working Royal and lived in the UK. The Duchess of Windsor wasn't, and lived abroad...
Like anyone with a risk profile, regardless the public function, monseigneur et madame les Ducs de Windsor will have enjoyed discreet protection from the Sûreté and the Paris' police.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #503  
Old 09-27-2018, 09:30 PM
JessRulz's Avatar
Administrator
Blog Editor
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,688
Several posts discussing Samantha Markle and any potential security issues have been deleted.

The Markles are to be discussed in the Duchess of Sussex: Family and Background thread only. As it is currently closed, the Markles are off-topic to all other threads in this forum and any posts discussing them will be deleted as such.
__________________
**TRF Rules and FAQ**
Reply With Quote
  #504  
Old 10-18-2018, 03:48 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 112
Are former spouses of royals entitled to Scotland Yard Protection?
Reply With Quote
  #505  
Old 10-18-2018, 03:50 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
Are former spouses of royals entitled to Scotland Yard Protection?
I don't think so. Heck, not even every spouse of a royal get 24/7 RPO.
Reply With Quote
  #506  
Old 10-18-2018, 04:16 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 112
That’s a good point, not even Sophie gets 24/7 RPO. I’m just wondering that if let’s say Sarah for some reason is deemed as needing protection would it be provided to her or not?
Reply With Quote
  #507  
Old 10-18-2018, 04:30 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
That’s a good point, not even Sophie gets 24/7 RPO. I’m just wondering that if let’s say Sarah for some reason is deemed as needing protection would it be provided to her or not?
I don't think Sarah would be on the radar at this point. For Diana, they wanted to continue provide security for her after the divorce, but she declined. However, it was made clear that she had to have them with her when the boys are with her. Although her situation was different from Sarah as she was the mother of the future king.
Reply With Quote
  #508  
Old 10-18-2018, 04:48 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,533
Scotland Yard would protect anyone if there was a risk, just as Salman Rushdie received police protection for years after a fatwā was placed upon him.
Sarah Ferguson would get police protection if a specific, credible threat was made against her as would any ex spouse of a royal.
Reply With Quote
  #509  
Old 10-18-2018, 04:57 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,215
If an ex-spouse was deemed 'at risk' then the police would provide security as deemed appropriate. They did for Salman Rushdie for instance and he was never a member of the BRF.

They did offer 24/7 security for Diana after the divorce and she accepted it for a period and then did away with it, except when with the boys.

They assess the needs for 24/7 security on a case by case basis. As Harry moves further from the throne and the hysteria around Meghan settles down she will probably lose the 24/7 security and I doubt that their children will have it for very long, if at all - but again that will depend on the assessed risk.

Remember that Beatrice and Eugenie had that level of security growing up but as soon as they left university it was dropped so I suspect Harry's children - also the children of the second son - will either not have it at all or only on certain occasions, unless there is a level of threat we aren't told about.
Reply With Quote
  #510  
Old 10-18-2018, 05:02 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Remember that Beatrice and Eugenie had that level of security growing up but as soon as they left university it was dropped so I suspect Harry's children - also the children of the second son - will either not have it at all or only on certain occasions, unless there is a level of threat we aren't told about.
The York princesses didn't receive it based on the risk assessment though. That was back when children of the sons of the monarch would receive 24/7 regardless. They changed the rule to risk based in the 2000s, which was when the York princesses lost theirs (although I believe it wasn't taken away immediately, they were given some time and that lasted until end of uni).
Reply With Quote
  #511  
Old 10-18-2018, 05:04 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 112
So let’s say The Duchess of Cambridge divorces The Duke of Cambridge would she after the divorce receive police protection in your opinion?
Reply With Quote
  #512  
Old 10-18-2018, 05:11 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,533
In the immediate after the divorce, yes. She would be in the media alot so be getting a lot of attention. 10 years down the line who knows! Certainly she would live in a well protected house and if she called the police they would probably come quicker and with more back up than if you or I called them.
But as her children, George at least, would receive police protection she would be getting some level of protection while he was around.
Reply With Quote
  #513  
Old 10-18-2018, 05:15 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
IIRC Diana was offered protection after her divorce from Charles but refused the offer.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #514  
Old 10-18-2018, 05:19 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,745
We know that its the Metropolitan Police/Scotland Yard that provides the RPOs that protect the royal family but what is lesser known is that there is also a department for VIP security. Its possible should Sarah need protection (lets say for the time of Eugenie's wedding and celebrations), it would most likely be provided through that department.

This department also provides security for visiting dignitaries and high profile, at risk people. I read about this in Ken Wharfe's book because that is the department he went to after leaving as Diana's RPO.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #515  
Old 10-18-2018, 05:32 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 14,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
So let’s say The Duchess of Cambridge divorces The Duke of Cambridge would she after the divorce receive police protection in your opinion?
No doubt IMO.
She is, also after a divorce, one of the most high-profile women in the world and she is after all mother to a future king.
She would be a potential target for extremists, kidnappers, stalkers and other nutcases of all kinds.
Extremists because no matter what, she would still have millions of devoted followers and be the center of constant media interest. Any extremist hurting her would have succeeded in getting whatever message they have across.
Kidnappers because as such a high-profile woman and a mother to a future heir, there is no way any demands for a ransom will be ignored.
Nutcases have all kinds of motives, becoming famous by harming one of the most well-know women in the world would be one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
IIRC Diana was offered protection after her divorce from Charles but refused the offer.


LaRae
Yes, instead she had privately hired bodyguards. And the police in the various countries she visited (including UK) offered police protection on a as-need basis.
Apart from that the world was different when Diana died. Not necessarily less dangerous for a woman like her, but the authorities were perhaps more naive back then.
I simply cannot imagine Diana not having 24/7 protection were she around today.
No security agency in any country would wish to be caught with their pants down not having offered her protection, only for her to be attacked.
I will go so far as to claim that most countries wouldn't even ask her.
- It would be a take it or stay away option.
Reply With Quote
  #516  
Old 10-18-2018, 05:52 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 112
Would the same apply to Meghan if she divorced Harry?
Reply With Quote
  #517  
Old 10-18-2018, 05:59 PM
Blog Real's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 7,097
Diana always had security. Even when she had no protection from Scotland Yard she hired private security.
Anyone know if Eugenie and Beatrice still have security? And Zara Philips and her brother? I believe that Sarah Ferguson will still have some sort of security.
But this is something that is never known well because the real house never divulges these things.
I believe that Catherine and Meghan will always have security for the rest of their lives, the first for obvious reasons and the second even in case of divorce will always be linked to the royal family and so is always at risk of some kind of threat.
__________________
My blogs about monarchies
Reply With Quote
  #518  
Old 10-18-2018, 07:11 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 14,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
Would the same apply to Meghan if she divorced Harry?
Yes, but IMO for a considerably shorter period. Then some sort of privately engaged security will have to take over.
She is after all further down the royal pecking order than Kate. And Meghan's children are almost certainly destined to never getting near the throne.
I imagine that after a year or two Meghan will be of limited interest to kidnappers and extremists. Even the number of nutcases wishing to harm her would IMO be reduced.
The most dangerous period for Meghan in this hypothetical divorce scenario will be during the period leading up to and the first year after a divorce. And mainly from nutcases.
One of the things I could easily imagine would trigger at nutcase-attack would be if someone blame Meghan for the "fairy tale-image" of her and Harry shattering. Whether that would be justified or not is besides the point.
After the first year I believe the risk of anger-nutcase-attack would be greatly diminished. I.e. most nutcases would have cooled down or found someone else to focus their obsession on.
Reply With Quote
  #519  
Old 10-18-2018, 10:25 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,215
Currently the Metropolitan Police's RPO unit provides 24/7 security for The Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla, William, Kate, George, Charlotte, Louis, Harry, Meghan, Andrew, Edward and Anne.

They provide security for the following when they are underataking official duties: Sophie, Richard, Birgitte, Edward, Katherine and Alexandra.

They do not provide security for anyone else.

Andrew pays for security for Beatrice and Eugenie. When they lost their security, on graduating from university, he offered the existing teams around each girl more money to stay with the girls and leave the Met which some of them did. To complete the teams for his daughters he has always insisted on security officers with Met training.

Diana was offered, and initially accepted, full 24/7 protection after the divorce. Her paranoia reached such a point that early in 1997 she decided to do away with it, unless she had the boys with her, and relied on her own or others. Had she still had decent protection she would never have been in that car on that night.

Sarah was not offered any security after her divorce and Andrew didn't provide any. Of course when she was with the girls they had security and so there was protection for her as well.

None of Edward nor Anne's children have ever had security.

As I said, up thread, security is now determined not on the title but the risk assessment on an individual case by case basis.
Reply With Quote
  #520  
Old 10-18-2018, 11:05 PM
loonytick's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Tennessee, United States
Posts: 755
It just occurred to me—by living (part of the time, when she’s in Britain, anyway) with Andrew still, Sarah does benefit from his protection detail and only needs paid security when out and about. I wonder if that is part of why they’ve chosen their unconventional living situation. I also wonder if the security already in place at Kensington and St. James are a reason why the Queen chose to allot Beatrice and Eugenie living quarters in those palace complexes, to simplify what they (or, rather, Andrew) need to arrange for in terms of private security.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, gloucester, kent, kidnapping, minor hrh, royal security, security, terrorism


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
The Royal Family's Security Helen88 Royal House of Sweden 10 07-27-2021 12:02 AM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia biography birth britain britannia british british royal family buckingham palace camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries crown jewels customs daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex elizabeth ii family life gemstones george vi gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan hello! henry viii history hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii książ castle lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchy mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee politics portugal prince harry princess eugenie queen consort queen louise solomon j solomon spanish royal family speech st edward sussex taiwan thai royal family tradition united states wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:26 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×