The Princess Delphine & Family, General News & Events Thread; 2020 -

[sophie25]

Albert is taking all the flak for this situation but it takes two to tango. Delphine's mother claims she didn't think she could get pregnant and no one other than her knows if that's true or not but the bottom line is that she was having sex with a married man so she's as much to blame for this whole sorry mess as Albert is.

[Prinsara]

Originally Posted by sophie25

Albert is taking all the flak for this situation but it takes two to tango. Delphine's mother claims she didn't think she could get pregnant and no one other than her knows if that's true or not but the bottom line is that she was having sex with a married man so she's as much to blame for this whole sorry mess as Albert is.

Actually Sybille had been married to her husband for a number of years without becoming pregnant and had never been pregnant before, so she seems to have had some justification for believing it. And it's Albert's fault for believing her, and for having pursued a married woman whose husband was a royalist who made no fuss about claiming their child. And back and forth we go.

Edit: Sybille also seems to have been a loving and careful parent and a (formerly) discreet mistress, and has been very supportive of her daughter while (somehow) still having a measure of fondness about Albert. Which is better than appearing vindictive.

Albert dropped Delphine like a stone when she became too inconvenient. That's why he gets blamed, and that's why he's far more to blame. Sybille is not the one who denied and lied to their child.

[leidi]

https://plus.lesoir.be/329440/articl...resent-je-peux

Delphine gave an interview to Le Soir, does anyone have full access to it?

[Reinosa]

Originally Posted by Prinsara

Albert dropped Delphine like a stone when she became too inconvenient. That's why he gets blamed, and that's why he's far more to blame. Sybille is not the one who denied and lied to their child.

From time to time I read this thread and from time to time I find people saying exactly what I think. Thanks, Prinsara.

[leidi]

https://twitter.com/lapremiere/statu...77815495737345

Well, something tells me she's gonna cash in on this for all it's worth... ¬¬

[Skippy]

https://www.hln.be/showbizz/royalty/...ader~a4693025/

All she really wanted was a conversation with her father, an explanation why he denied her being his daughter.
She tries to understand him, sees mitigating circumstances for his behaviour.

The entire time, she hoped for a signal from her father, to privately work it out. But nothing. That's why she decided to have the law prove whether she was right. She never expected to win.

She doesn't expect anything anymore from the royal palace and doesn't ask for anything anymore.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Skippy

https://www.hln.be/showbizz/royalty/...ader~a4693025/

All she really wanted was a conversation with her father, an explanation why he denied her being his daughter.
She tries to understand him, sees mitigating circumstances for his behaviour.

And what did she get instead of the man that used to visit her regularly and gave her presents as a child?Snubbed.
OK,that comes with a prize,to make someone look like a fool and a nausius creature.You re not much of a man Albert II...nor is your Queen the dolce Paola in this case.They ve both had affairs and yes well,if you burn your behind,you have to sit on the blisters.Chapeau Delphine!

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by leticia.h

me too!
I thought only legitimate children got titles

In modern EU countries the term "legitimate children" does not exist. A child is always legitimate. He or she is always the product of two parents, married or not.


Any son or daughter of a nobleman is "legitimate" for law, irrespective the marital status of the father.


See the case Carlos Klynstra (natural son of The Duke of Parma, whom succesfully made use of his right to be known with his natural father's surname and title and so become HRH Prince Carlos de Bourbon de Parme).

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

In modern EU countries the term "legitimate children" does not exist. A child is always legitimate. He or she is always the product of two parents, married or not.


Any son or daughter of a nobleman is "legitimate" for law, irrespective the marital status of the father.


See the case Carlos Klynstra (natural son of The Duke of Parma, whom succesfully made use of his right to be known with his natural father's surname and title and so become HRH Prince Carlos de Bourbon de Parme).

There is a clear distinction still. Name one title where the child born out of wedlock is in line for the throne or in case of nobility, their fathers title? There is none. Because the distinction still exists.

Is prince Carlos (as you seem unable or unwilling to call him) heir to the duchy? If no distinction is made he and not his half brother should be heir to defunct Duke of Parma title. Yet he is not. Because while the courts ruled he was entitled to his father's last name and rank, it didn't make him a member of the royal house. Dutch courts ruled that was a private matter.


That is the big difference here. Delphine hasnt simply been given a title but it's been ruled she has the same rights as her siblings. That is totally different then Prince Carlos who has the name but nothing else.

At least in Carlos case his parents weren't committing adultry.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

In modern EU countries the term "legitimate children" does not exist. A child is always legitimate. He or she is always the product of two parents, married or not.

Any son or daughter of a nobleman is "legitimate" for law, irrespective the marital status of the father.

See the case Carlos Klynstra (natural son of The Duke of Parma, whom succesfully made use of his right to be known with his natural father's surname and title and so become HRH Prince Carlos de Bourbon de Parme).

Dutch law does not apply to other EU countries where "legitimacy" for civil law does not correspond to "legitimacy" for nobiliary law.

Benjamin Lascelles, eldest son of the British Earl of Harewood, is indeed legitimate for modern British law, but he remains legally incapable of inheriting the earldom because of his birth out of wedlock.

In Belgium, the standard remainder for nobiliary titles is inheritance in the legitimate male line only.

https://diplomatie.belgium.be/en/ser...s/nobility/faq

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

There is a clear distinction still. Name one title where the child born out of wedlock is in line for the throne or in case of nobility, their fathers title? There is none. Because the distinction still exists.

Duc_et_Pair was accurate in naming the Dutch nobility, where there is no distinction for titles of nobility due to a legal amendment in 1994.

In the Dutch Royal House, the distinction is between children born from an approved marriage and children not born from an approved marriage.

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

Is prince Carlos (as you seem unable or unwilling to call him) heir to the duchy? If no distinction is made he and not his half brother should be heir to defunct Duke of Parma title. Yet he is not. Because while the courts ruled he was entitled to his father's last name and rank, it didn't make him a member of the royal house. Dutch courts ruled that was a private matter.

Hugo Klynstra was his name at the time he applied to take his father's title and name.

The ducal title is a pretended one and is not legally recognized as a title of the Dutch nobility. If it were, then I suppose Hugo would be its heir indeed.

The Dutch Royal House continues to distinguish between children born in and out of approved marriages.

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

That is the big difference here. Delphine hasnt simply been given a title but it's been ruled she has the same rights as her siblings. That is totally different then Prince Carlos who has the name but nothing else.

Delphine asked for the same rights as her siblings, but it is unclear whether the court granted her request. Only the titles and last name were explicitly confirmed by her lawyers.

[Addapalla]

Originally Posted by leidi

Well, something tells me she's gonna cash in on this for all it's worth...

Good for her. Well-connected men too often evade the consequences of their cruel misdeeds. Which of us here would do what Albert did to their own daughter? -- A daughter who could be a clone of the mother whom Albert himself was cruelly deprived of.

[Skippy]

https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/10/05/delphine-boel-het-was-nooit-mijn-bedoeling-dat-mensen-mij-met/

Albert's rejective tone in his admission last January, that he never truly considered her as his daughter, made her go for the entire package.

[Marchesina]

Originally Posted by leidi

https://twitter.com/lapremiere/statu...77815495737345

Well, something tells me she's gonna cash in on this for all it's worth... ¬¬

Pretty predictable

[Marengo]

The press conference has started 45 minutes ago.

There were tears when somebody asked how important the support of her partner, Jim O'Hare had been. And Mr. O'Hare duly brought her a handkerchief & returned to his spot in the back of the room where he was filming the event.

There are around 60 journalists, photographers and cameramen in the room.

---
A clip from the VRT where Princess Delphine explains her motivation. Delphine spoke in English to them as she tends to do when she talks to the Flemish press:

https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/10...ensen-mij-met/

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Marengo

There were tears when somebody asked how important the support of her partner, Jim O'Hare had been. And Mr. O'Hare duly brought her a handkerchief while he was in the back of the room filming the event.

Did she clarify whether they are legally married?

If not, it would explain why nothing was said in the announcement from her lawyers about him receiving a title, in contrast to their children.

Originally Posted by Somebody

You omit one very important detail: a comma!

'children and grandchildren' can be omitted for the primary meaning to remain the same.

So, without this subordinate phrase it reads "Princes and Princesses in direct descent from HM King Albert II carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium"

So, children and grandchildren is somehow a specification of those princes and princesses in direct descent.

If we go a completely different route:
Cats and dogs living in the streets are put in shelters.

Adding a subordinate phrase:
Cats and dogs, smaller and bigger animals, living in the streets are put in shelters.

In the example above, it mainly confirms that it applies to cats and dogs independent of their size.

IF: However the order was different:
Smaller and bigger animals, cats and dogs, living in the streets are put in shelters.

Now, it suddenly seems to change the meaning as no longer all smaller and bigger animals living in the streets are put in shelters but only the cats and dogs...

Not sure, what this exercise teaches us about the interpretation of the Royal Decree (other than: we really need to understand how those two parts of the sentence should be linked together; is it X equals Y?; is it a restriction?, is it irrelevant information? but it is clear that it wasn't phrased clearly because it can be easily interpreted differently.

What I attempted to say is that if I read "Cats and dogs, smaller and bigger animals, living in the streets are put in shelters", I would not assume that animals which were neither cats nor dogs would be put in shelters.

Originally Posted by leidi

https://twitter.com/lapremiere/statu...77815495737345

Well, something tells me she's gonna cash in on this for all it's worth... ¬¬

Originally Posted by Addapalla

Good for her. Well-connected men too often evade the consequences of their cruel misdeeds. Which of us here would do what Albert did to their own daughter? -- A daughter who could be a clone of the mother whom Albert himself was cruelly deprived of.

I don't think I see the connection.

[Addapalla]

Originally Posted by Marchesina

Pretty predictable

...as are the usual cynical reactions from many of both sexes when a woman has the toughness to persist and win a battle with a well-connected wealthy man. Too many still see deference and submissiveness as feminine virtues and are quick to imagine the worst about a strong woman.

[Marengo]

Did she clarify whether they are legally married?

No, it is not a question that seems to be top of mind for the press. They always use the word 'partner' to describe Mr. O'Hare. Logically speaking that would mean that they are not married as they would not be using that terminology if they were. Of course these days over 50% of the baby's in Belgium are born out of wedlock. Most of these couples will have a registered partnership which gives rights equal to those of a marriage.

--

Another quote from Delphine, when asked if money was an issue on her mind in this case: "If I had done it for the money, it would have been rather silly from me to go that way.”. She describes Jacques Boël as "a very, very, very wealthy man, from a very wealthy family".

https://twitter.com/WDehandschutter/...795609601?s=20

[Prinsara]

I'm giggling just a little bit that she already sounds like a princess. Wow, she has a posh accent (yes, I know how much money and class she was brought up with).

"I loved him."

If that doesn't 'get you in the feels', as the kids say...

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Marengo

No, it is not a question that seems to be top of mind for the press. They always use the word 'partner' to describe Mr. O'Hare. Logically speaking that would mean that they are not married as they would not be using that terminology if they were.

Thanks for the clarification.

ETA: But did Delphine and James themselves use the word "partner", or only the press?

Originally Posted by Marengo

Of course these days over 50% of the baby's in Belgium are born out of wedlock. Most of these couples will have a registered partnership which gives rights equal to those of a marriage.

Still, it seems likely that the court ruling did not make him a prince (or the lawyers would surely have mentioned it) and that may have been due to being legally unmarried.

Originally Posted by Addapalla

...as are the usual cynical reactions from many of both sexes when a woman has the toughness to persist and win a battle with a well-connected wealthy man. Too many still see deference and submissiveness as feminine virtues and are quick to imagine the worst about a strong woman.

The above comments were neither discussing her battle for recognition nor her "toughness".

[Skippy]

Originally Posted by Marengo

The press conference has started 45 minutes ago.

There were tears when somebody asked how important the support of her partner, Jim O'Hare had been. And Mr. O'Hare duly brought her a handkerchief & returned to his spot in the back of the room where he was filming the event.

There are around 60 journalists, photographers and cameramen in the room.

---
A clip from the VRT where Princess Delphine explains her motivation. Delphine spoke in English to them as she tends to do when she talks to the Flemish press:

https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/10...ensen-mij-met/

Double link, I posted it earlier

Anyway, she said she wanted to sort it out in private and gave King Albert enough chances, but he never came forward.

If what you previously said about church officials (rather than Queen Paola, although I don't want to diminish her influence either) influencing him to continously deny his fatherhood is true, I suppose he has a bunker of either conservative or rigid people surrounding him. And I don't want to dive into the combination of church and hypocrisy.