General News & Information for Prince Albert and Charlene Wittstock

[NotHRH]

The truthx

[Zonk]

Maybe its a cultural differences that is leading to the confusion of this story.

I am American, and I am not familiar with L'Express. So if you guys tell me its a serious newspaper and not the yellow press....I have two options 1) check the internet to see how the newspaper is viewed and/or 2) take your word for it.

I think the main issue for some (mainly Americans) is that no facts are being given. Just hints of a story:

1) The reports state that Charlene tried to flee Monaco prior to the wedding but the holes that we see in this story are 1) no specific date and/or time has been given...and as previously pointed out she has had a pretty full schedule. When is she supposed to have done this?

2) Its alleged that Albert has not been true to Charlene during their engagement. Again, no specifics are being given. Who is this person? When did they meet? In America (and the UK) there would be grainy pictures. Tacky but true.

3) A child has been born or will be born of this "relationship". Again no specific information.

Now I don't know if this is true or not because again I don't know any facts. But I do know that in an American newspaper, before this was printed....we would know that Charlene attempted to flee Monaco on 11/22 on a South African Airlines Flight 212 and was detained (and there would be some additional proof to support this allegation). We would know the name of this woman (and yes in the ensuing press her picture would be ALL over the newspapers), when she was due etc. People that this woman knows would be selling this woman out in a New York second for a quick 20K. That girl she went to summer camp with and shared a cabin...their picture is in the NY Post. The color of the dress she wore to her senior prom you would know that too.

Just look at the Arnold story in LA. Basic info was provided (okay he did give a statement) and than the press was all over it. And we knew more than we wanted to know.

Now Again, this may all be true and it may not be true but I think the point that some are trying to make is that WE (the general public) would have a little bit more information than L'Express (or the Washington Post, New York Times) said its true.

For the record, I do agree with those who think its pretty nasty for this to come out days before the wedding. Its like it was timed on purpose....if they (or whomever) had this information...why wait a couple of days before the wedding. Its tacky IMO. When I say this is like a soap opera it is. Its like when Cord was marrying Kate on One Life to Live (literally at the altar) and Tina walked in to say stop the wedding...this is your baby. Who does that in real life?

And you have Nicole walking around town....I mean this is just....... words can't express it.

I hope Albert and Charlene have a beautiful wedding despite the drama.

[CrownPrincessJava]

When does Charlene actually become HSH Princess Charlene of Monaco? Is it after the civil or religious ceremony?

[Lady Felicity M]

royak guest list??

[Katrianna]

Hope this helps.


http://www.palais.mc/monaco/root/ban...OCOL_ORDER.pdf

[Zonk]

You might want to check out the wedding forum, which can be found here Wedding of Prince Albert II and Miss Charlene Wittstock 1-2 July 2011 - The Royal Forums

[LadyMacAlpine]

I don't want to do this but, I posted the first time I heard of Charlene trying to run away was on Eringers QandA then it showed up in the press. The reason for this so called running away attempt was because she found out he had a 3 month old son. He has posted on his blog a World Exclusive about the mother and child. This is about more than an unpaid bill.

[Madame Royale]

If there is credence to the speculated story, then I'd ultimately not be much surprised. Though naturally one would like to think Albert would not have acted in such a way.

Despite his exceptional wealth and status both domestically and abroad, he his a middle aged, portly and balding man who no doubt wants to feel desirable. Go figure.

Often, men (and women) who spend many years engaging in consentual one night stands often find it hard to become monogamous when they are involved in long term relationships, as the validation of one person isn't enough. It doesn't feed nor does it sustain their sexual appetite. And they often attempt to rationalise their behaviour by suggesting "it's purely physical". Well, *news flash*, its not. It's often representative of progressive self esteem issues which were never proactively addressed in years previous.

As far as I'm aware it's being denied vigorously (?), and I hope for Charlene, and Albert's sake that it isn't true because quite often than not a person who cheats once, will cheat twice.

So if the person doing the cheating is middle aged and who has for years, established themselves in a particular way of life, to break that cycle would be a very confronting reality check and would require the total and utter determination of that person.

And when you're a billionaire sovereign prince with a charming disposition, I imagine that willing participants wouldn't be so hard to come across...

[Sancia]

Originally Posted by Zonk

Now I don't know if this is true or not because again I don't know any facts. But I do know that in an American newspaper, before this was printed....we would know that Charlene attempted to flee Monaco on 11/22 on a South African Airlines Flight 212 and was detained (and there would be some additional proof to support this allegation). We would know the name of this woman (and yes in the ensuing press her picture would be ALL over the newspapers), when she was due etc. People that this woman knows would be selling this woman out in a New York second for a quick 20K. That girl she went to summer camp with and shared a cabin...their picture is in the NY Post. The color of the dress she wore to her senior prom you would know that too.

I fully understand your concern but the press acting like it in France is mostly trash press (and I checked my word). Serious papers have no custom to post pics of anybody involved in news items, even when there is a violent murder or something like this. This has a matter several times discussed in our papers and on our TV channels during the DSK affair, so, you are right, matter of culture: it is not the journalistic culture in France for serious press to display much details in this kind of case. An example: a 13 years old teenager was kicked dead at school by a former fellow class mate nearly two weeks ago. Le Figaro, Le Monde and L'Express released all the details given by the police but no pics, no exclusive interviews at first. This was done by other magazines with worst reputation (Le Parisien, for example). Another example: we had our lot (too much) of political scandals these last years. We don't know a source named for this: if the paper is serious and can prove he is saying the true, the minister won't wait to have all the sources names to be forces to resigned. The proofs have only to be proved true.
There was even discussions to know if the name of DSK's alleged victim should be released by french press. That shows the difference with american journalist.

But I would like everybody to remind the three serious only spoke about the attempted flight, not about the rest, which would have been only speculations for which they had no proof. The main question was: did Charlene tried to flee a week before her wedding? Were they serious breachs of laws by french police?

But don't worry, you will enjoy the wedding very much, all the journalists, including the serious, are working on the reversal of situation in the DSK affair so it will let you some days "scandal-free". And I am rather serious about it.

So, once more, a matter of journalism culture.

Let me add that I do agree about the yellow press, the very bad timing of Nicole Coste coming in Monaco. I wonder if Le Monde and L'Express would have talked about the alleged third out-of-wedlock child if there had not been the call from Nice airport saying "Charlene tried to flight a week before the wedding". I don't think so. They would have made a paper about the wedding after to report about it.

[Sancia]

I would add that publishing a full account of details is punishable in trial if some details appears to be wrong. A sentenced paper has to publish the sentence on first page. If they publish the name of the policeman who leaked the facts, they could be sentenced if they can't prove the policeman really called them. But they could be sentenced too if the Palace manages to prove that the source said wrong. That is why there are saying they have three different sources and I am sure these sources will be investigated in case of trial. Saying "I have sources but I won't reveal them" is at high level in France too. One generally does this when he knows his report will be fully accurate. If it appears to be wrong, Renaud Revel and Christophe Barbier can search a new job, unrelated to journalism.

Edit: I have forgotten a very important point. The respect of privacy is even more important in France than freedom of press. Theoretically, if the policeman who says Charlene has been stopped at Nice airport or the witnesses of the scene have their name printed against their will, they can go in trial and the papers will be sentenced for breach of privacy. One can be sentenced for this in France when the facts are true but belonging to people's private life.

[Renata4711]

Sancia If you thought this wedding to be a really special occasion, well...it isn't anymore:
The headlines will be dictated by a new development in the DSK Saga (case about to collapse), and by the hordes of young (and old) Canadians going ape over Wills and Kate.

[Sancia]

Originally Posted by Renata4711

Sancia If you thought this wedding to be a really special occasion, well...it isn't anymore:
The headlines will be dictated by a new development in the DSK Saga (case about to collapse), and by the hordes of young (and old) Canadians going ape over Wills and Kate.

I precisely wrote this two posts above

[Catharina]

Originally Posted by LadyMacAlpine

I don't want to do this but, I posted the first time I heard of Charlene trying to run away was on Eringers QandA then it showed up in the press. The reason for this so called running away attempt was because she found out he had a 3 month old son. He has posted on his blog a World Exclusive about the mother and child. This is about more than an unpaid bill.

I question the motives of the guy behind that website. If you read is bio on that page... Well, it might be true, I don't know but why would a journalist turned "spymaster" behind a country's "first intelligence service" go public with all his information and do it by setting up a blog..? Just think about it. A couple of explanations and reasons behind this come to mind. I suspect he wants nothing good for that country.

I am still hoping these are just lies but if they are true, no reason to bring it up now. Let the couple have their wedding. Ruining someone's happiness like that is just cruel, especially considering everything the family has been through.

[Duke of Marmalade]

I wouldnt be surprised if all of this was true. Apart from this "situation" Charlene has to - or will already have - learn that she has signed up for a princess package that includes putting up with everything in return.

Besides, its Monaco, they have to live up to their image

[Renata4711]

Charlene is an intelligent woman - at least I think so.
She will have had info about Eringer and other matters, and yet she probably is still in the dark about many things pertaining to the Principality.

W. Somerset Maugham - much quoted:
Monaco - a sunny place for shady people.

[Zonk]

Sancia...thank you for your explanation of how the French press reports. I think that is the "disconnect" so to speak as to why people (outside of France) are questioning the veracity of this story.

And I can definitely see how if Charlene attempted to flee in France, and was stopped by a request of Monaco that could be a BIG deal. Unfortunately for the rest of the world, that is just a minor piece of the story.

But in regards to the other stuff...timing of the news....people walking around in Monaco when they are very rarely seen in Monaco....well...there is something fishy in Monaco going on this week. I think for a lot of people, its really about the timing.

[ashelen]

Monaco royal wedding: palace denies Charlene Wittstock tried to flee as preparations continue
may be she got cold feet
she saw what it is comming and she is panicing!
i was told that Diane at the time wanted to cancel the wedding but it was to late at that point

[LadyMacAlpine]

Originally Posted by Catharina

I question the motives of the guy behind that website. If you read is bio on that page... Well, it might be true, I don't know but why would a journalist turned "spymaster" behind a country's "first intelligence service" go public with all his information and do it by setting up a blog..? Just think about it. A couple of explanations and reasons behind this come to mind. I suspect he wants nothing good for that country.

I am still hoping these are just lies but if they are true, no reason to bring it up now. Let the couple have their wedding. Ruining someone's happiness like that is just cruel, especially considering everything the family has been through.

He comes across as a jerk and this was timed to cause all this trouble just as a reporter I've had contact with (not friend) said would occur. I also heard the firing of Eringer was messier and more to it then he has ever let on. He is a man with an agenda who IMO could care less about Monaco or wouldn't have done this to the people so close to the wedding they had waited for all these years.

Originally Posted by ashelen

Monaco royal wedding: palace denies Charlene Wittstock tried to flee as preparations continue
may be she got cold feet
she saw what it is comming and she is panicing!
i was told that Diane at the time wanted to cancel the wedding but it was to late at that point

Charlenes father was suppose to have been the person who gave her the ticket and he has denied it as well. She has known Albert wasn't faithful having been photographed looking at photos of him in the Nice Airport with other woman and then the new girlfriend stories with photos. Where is the photos now to prove this latest claim? Why haven't we heard from witnesses at the Airport? The paparazzi follow Charlene where she goes and this close to the wedding they are in full force laying in wait.

EuroNews video Monaco unshaken by rumors as it gears up for the wedding. Recorded today

[Princess of Durham]

Just quickly reading his blog (not in depth) it's clear this guy has an agenda. And why, pray tell, would Monaco need a spymaster??? He sounds more like a tabloid writer than anything else.

[iceflower]

__________________

Time to close this thread - thanks for all your contributions!
The new thread can be found here!