General News about the Sussex Family, Part Two: April-August 2020

[Durham]

Yes I noticed that too. Quite sly really.

The statement from the duke was intemperate almost aggressive in tone I thought although others may interpret it differently I guess. The statement from the Royal Foundation was much more brief & matter of fact.

 

[Alison H]

It looks as if their argument is conflict of interest, i.e. that the Royal Foundation would not have given the money to Travalyst were Harry not involved in it. That's true enough, but a) a sibling who is not part of the same household is not usually classed as a "related party" and b) I don't think there's any rule to say that Charity A cannot make a grant to Organisation B just because it's run by a relative, as long as Organisation B is above board and involved in appropriate activities (which would include environmentalism).


Harry has flown off the handle, though. All sorts of organisations get complaints made against them all the time. It's not pleasant, especially when it's clearly done just to get at the royals rather than out of public concern, but it's just the way it goes.

 

[ACO]

I have no issue with Republic doing what they did though it is clear it is more of a stunt than anything just based off the tweets about hoping media picks it up. I also have zero issue with TRF and Harry's comments. My guess is Republic didn't expect such a direct response which is kind of comical. They made it public instead of letting it play out properly. So it is what it is.

 

[Durham]

I'd think Republic would be more than happy with the publicity. A member of the royal family like the duke punching down is not a good look.

 

[akina21]

I have no issue with Republic doing what they did though it is clear it is more of a stunt than anything just based off the tweets about hoping media picks it up. I also have zero issue with TRF and Harry's comments. My guess is Republic didn't expect such a direct response which is kind of comical. They made it public instead of letting it play out properly. So it is what it is.

That's sort of Harry and Meghans main issue with how they deal with stuff . They just can't let anything work its way out or wait for the process to work , they always have to have the last word and see attacking enemies everywhere.

 

[poppy7]

That's sort of Harry and Meghans main issue with how they deal with stuff . They just can't let anything work its way out or wait for the process to work , they always have to have the last word and see attacking enemies everywhere.

Harry has deep rooted issues, and I say this as someone who went to therapy to deal with the fact I couldnt handle criticism because I thought it was the end of my life. Turns out I deep rooted issues. No kidding


It is just a downward spiral at the moment.

 

[ACO]

That's sort of Harry and Meghans main issue with how they deal with stuff . They just can't let anything work its way out or wait for the process to work , they always have to have the last word and see attacking enemies everywhere.

Harry didn’t make it public— Republic did. They didn’t wait to let it play out properly. They should have filed the complaint and kept it moving. Instead they announced it and insinuated things. Of course they responded.

 

[Curryong]

Maybe Harry's response may have something to do with the tabloid reporting on this issue (and on others.) Most of them have emphasised the Sussexes in their headlines on this story, and in fact the Express was gleefully reporting on the complaint with emphasis on Harry and Travalyst almost immediately after Graham Smith of Republic publicly signalled that he had contacted the Charity Commission.

There is criticism and there is IMO wholesale bullying of one couple in particular by the Press which has been going on for years. There is a difference.

 

[poppy7]

Maybe Harry's response may have something to do with the tabloid reporting on this issue (and on others.) Most of them have emphasised the Sussexes in their headlines on this story, and in fact the Express was gleefully reporting on the complaint with emphasis on Harry and Travalyst almost immediately after Graham Smith of Republic publicly signalled that he had contacted the Charity Commission.

There is criticism and there is IMO wholesale bullying of one couple in particular by the Press which has been going on for years. There is a difference.

It isn't bullying. Its nothing. I hadn't heard anything until I came on here and then read the statements. It's an over reaction in a life of over reactions.

Yo me it seems reasonable that this is something you question. If you have nothing to hide. So be it.

 

[tommy100]

Something along the lines of "We welcome the the Charity Commissions investigation as we are confident it will show everything has been done in accordance with the law" would have been better than just making it sound like the Commission had already looked into it. If you make a big deal out of the media reporting lies and half truths you have to be above reproach and it makes it worse to say something that isn't entirely true or taken out of context.

 

[Curryong]

It isn't bullying. Its nothing. I hadn't heard anything until I came on here and then read the statements. It's an over reaction in a life of over reactions.

Yo me it seems reasonable that this is something you question. If you have nothing to hide. So be it.

The online tabloids have been reporting on this, and emphasising the Harry part, for at least twelve hours, more like fourteen.

 

[Durham]

The duke & duchess have certainly been subjected to relentlessly negative press attention over a long period of time but I was under the impression that the statement from Harry was aimed directly at Republic.

Republic is a fringe pressure group of no importance or influence. This looks more like the duke bullying than being bullied really.

 

[poppy7]

The online tabloids have been reporting on this, and emphasising the Harry part, for at least twelve hours, more like fourteen.

Does that surprise you? They report morsels of news. They have 24 hours to fill. The reaction was OTT. Let someone question what you do. If you have nothing to hide. It will play out. It was an unnecessarily vicious response to a valid question. Why couldnt he have put out a response like a royal foundation which was measured and intelligent.

I think the question of how charity funds are transferred to a private company is valid and quite alarming to be honest.

 

[Curryong]

My reply was to your observation that you hadn't seen anything of the Republic action until you came on the forum.

Harry's response was due to being constantly criticised for years by people who should know better. If I was constantly criticised by all and sundry, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, month after month for years I'd hit back hard as well.

And in case you missed it, Travalyst did give a measured response to the claim.

 

[poppy7]

My reply was to your observation that you hadn't seen anything of the Republic action until you came on the forum.

Harry's response was due to being constantly criticised for years by people who should know better. If I was constantly criticised by all and sundry, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, month after month for years I'd hit back hard as well.

And in case you missed it, Travalyst did give a measured response to the claim.

He did not. It was aggressive.

I am tired of this constant tirade against the media. are they the worst of us? Sometimes
But they reflect us. Let's look at ourselves.

Harry needs to cope better

 

[Alison H]

Reading about in in more detail, there've actually complained about three separate transactions. And one of the three hasn't even happened.


The Royal Commission made a grant to Sussex Royal. That was one charity making a grant to another, which was carrying out similar work.


The Royal Commission made a grant to Travalyst. The fact that it's a limited company isn't relevant: it's a not-for-profit organisation, working to promote sustainable tourism. Environmental concerns class as charitable objects under the Charity Commission's guidance.


Sussex Royal's allegedly going to transfer its funds to Travalyst. Is that even true? I thought the funds were going to Archewell.

I can't see how there's a legal issue. William isn't even a trustee of the Royal Commission, only a patron. There is no problem with a charity making a grant to a not-for-profit organisation which is involved in environmental work, unless the funds were donated specifically to be used for some other named purpose, which they presumably weren't. There is possibly an ethical issue in terms of Harry being William's brother, but I can't see how it's a problem unless either Sussex Royal or Travalyst have used the funds inappropriately.


Do the people who run Republic have nothing better to do with their time? Evidently not ...

 

[tommy100]

My reply was to your observation that you hadn't seen anything of the Republic action until you came on the forum.

Harry's response was due to being constantly criticised for years by people who should know better. If I was constantly criticised by all and sundry, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, month after month for years I'd hit back hard as well.

And in case you missed it, Travalyst did give a measured response to the claim.

"being criticised for years and years" is not a reason for the media NOT to report that a public pressure group has made a formal complain to a public regulator about the conduct of a charity that has accepted donations from the public. The media mentioning the link between the money and any family issues (if that is what is being perceived here as bullying) is because that is what Republic have claimed in their complaint.

The likelihood is - given the RF can afford the best advisors - there is no issue here, yes the media reported the complaint but very soon I'm sure the story will be the response by Harry. Giving a very simple statement which would (again almost likely) be soon followed by the Charity Commission saying there was no merit to the complaint would have made much less a fuss and given the issue much less airtime and less weight. IMO, of course.

Yes there almost certainly has been unfair criticism of Harry and Meghan over time but that is no reason to effectively censor the media about something that is 100% in the public interest here. I've become a bit of a G.R.R Martin fan in lockdown and this reminds me of his line - “When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”

 

[Curryong]

This is the statement I was referring to in the previous post ref Travelyst. I believe it is measured. It was reprinted in Vanity Fair.



“Grants made to the non-profit organization Travalyst are for the ongoing development of projects that will support communities, wildlife, and the environment through sustainable travel and tourism. All grants have been made impartially and objectively, fully in line with governance requirements, and have been reported transparently in full accordance with regulations," said a spokesperson, who worked with Sussex Royal.

 

[akina21]

Harry didn’t make it public— Republic did. They didn’t wait to let it play out properly. They should have filed the complaint and kept it moving. Instead they announced it and insinuated things. Of course they responded.

It's a bait and Harry took it , hook, line and sinker .

 

[poppy7]

I have decided I am tired of the toxicity around these too and frankly of the drama and misery. I don't want to comment on here anymore when frankly we have so many wonderful life events. Bea's marriage. George's birthday. So much of the good of life and I want to centrate on that. If covid has taught us nothing. So best if luck to Harry and Meghan I certainly wish them all the best.

 

[gerry]

Bravo Poppy. We need a lot more kindness in TRF!

 

[Leopoldine]

Charity law is messy ... there's "restricted income" and "non-restricted income", and a lot depends on the wording of the charity deed, and the wording involved in the donation of the particular funds. For example, a church could be a charity, but, if they asked people to donate money to repair the roof but then spent that money on replacing the organ, technically that would be misuse of restricted income, because it was supposed to be for repairing the roof.


Newer charities usually have fairly vague wording in the deeds, but it depends on the detail.


I can't believe that they'd have transferred the money without getting a lawyer to check that it was all above board. If the wording of the deed says something about raising money for the general good, then sustainable tourism would probably come under that heading.

Regarding the misuse of restricted income -- I suspect that if you get permission from the original donors and they agree to let their donations go to a different charitable target, then it's OK. There are similar regulations in the US for political campaign donations.

 

[Alison H]

I have decided I am tired of the toxicity around these too and frankly of the drama and misery. I don't want to comment on here anymore when frankly we have so many wonderful life events. Bea's marriage. George's birthday. So much of the good of life and I want to centrate on that. If covid has taught us nothing. So best if luck to Harry and Meghan I certainly wish them all the best.

Well said.

In February, when Caroline Flack - who was briefly linked to Prince Harry in 2009 - sadly took her own life, there was a lot of talk about how toxic the media and society in general have become, and the need to be kinder. In the first few weeks of lockdown, there was a lot of talk about the Spirit of the Blitz, and people helping out vulnerable friends and neighbours, and everyone coming together. It's very sad that, a few weeks later, it all seemed to have been forgotten and we were back to people posting nasty comments on social media, political points-scoring, and the press having a go at anyone well-known. We don't learn, do we :-( .

 

[poppy7]

I think people are doing fine. I just have enough of these two and the constant toxicity they are involved in. Life is worth more. The royal family have moved on. I would prefer to put them behind me too.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Sussex Royal's allegedly going to transfer its funds to Travalyst. Is that even true? I thought the funds were going to Archewell.

Do the people who run Republic have nothing better to do with their time? Evidently not ...

The transfer from SR to Travalyst has occurred when SR was shut down a couple of weeks back.

I also don’t understand why the money couldn’t go to Archewell, why the middle step?

Republic is an organisation set up to do its level best to promote the downsides of having a monarchy, they have chosen this as one of them. This is what they do with their time, all the time.

 

[ACO]

I think people are doing fine. I just have enough of these two and the constant toxicity they are involved in. Life is worth more. The royal family have moved on. I would prefer to put them behind me too.

I don't even really see what is all that toxic about them. Honestly I feel people just fixate on them to the point of it being that way. I would agree life is way to short for all of that.

 

[Jacknch]

Let's move on please. Members who do no wish to discuss the Duke and Duchess of Suffolk's general news are at liberty not to do so. Thank you.

ETA - Posts relating to a recent Poll have been moved to the Support for the Monarchy in the UK thread: https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...-monarchy-in-the-uk-32807-23.html#post2266194

 

[Sun Lion]

I am sorry for my post of a week ago and wish to apologise to everyone - fellow posters and moderators.

I am sorry for acting dramatically and wish to say so to you all.

I have missed your views, and the posts of many regular contributors, over these last days.

Please accept my apology to any and all, if I caused you any offense.

After a week away I have been able to go back to my original post.

Many thanks to the posts of those who reached out, and to the moderators for not deleting those as off-topic, as I wouldn't have seen them.

My kindest regards to all here at TRFs.

I am returning as I find this situation - of the sixth and seventh in line to the throne living in another country/culture, while still being in the line of succession - a truly unique situation that we are experiencing. And, I want to discuss it. To me this is astonishing.

May I say I am neither pro nor anti the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I was certainly very taken with them during their time here in Sydney.

I follow a lot of un-important, even gossipy, updates about the couple, but that doesn't mean I believe it.

I hope not to cause any upset here by my future sharing of information. To me it is all interesting and worth noting.

It seems the couple themselves are on top of what is being reported about them as there is another legal action being undertaken by them that I will post about below.

Thank you again everyone.

 

[Sun Lion]

A new legal action being undertaken by the Duke and Duchess - this time about the photos published by German magazine "Bunte".

Against "unknown paparazzi" - as the photographer is currently unidentified.

Just reported by the "LA TImes", but will be picked up soon by the British media no doubt.


https://www.latimes.com/entertainme...-sue-paparazzi-after-photos-of-archie-at-home


Being reported that holes have been cut into the privacy fence that was put up by the Duke and Duchess a few months ago. I'm suprised people have taken that risk with so many security guards in place, not to mention cameras, being arrested for property damage etc.

 

[ACO]

It would seem based on the filing that Harry, Meghan, and their neighbors are all suing over illegal droid usage. The images of Archie were not picked up anywhere because I assume most realized they were illegal pictures.