The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 6: Aug. 2021- Oct. 2022

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Kataryn

He has nothing to gain from voicing his opinion. He learned, so he stays quiet.

If that indeed is the case, that is great, and hopefully, will allow Harry to move on and rebuild his life. Lets just see what he has to say in his book.

[Vicky7]

Why should Harry have a say in Camillas future title anyway. He will not be king he will never have a say on such matters.

[Moran]

Didn't Harry say they loved Camilla to bits? It's certainly going to clash with any adversarial approach he might take now. It's going to sound like rewriting of history and it's going to reflect more poorly on him than anyone else. Perhaps that's why he keeps silent.

This said, these people are supposed to know better than us that some things just go with the territory, not any moral values. Harry's mother wasn't going to be Queen anyway and he knew it. I suppose he always knew that there's a great chance that Camilla would be, as she's married to his father. He's had had some twenty years to get used to it.

Why voice his opinion on a matter that doesn't reflect values and anything but sheer legality?

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Maybe, just maybe, because Camilla's title as Queen (consort) is a matter pertaining to the monarchy and the next reign, Harry doesn't feel he has to give his opinion on it. As angieuk said, "it is what it is". Whatever his stepmother's title is during the next reign has no reflection on his personal feelings towards her at all.

Only the DM would make a mountain out of a molehill.

I agree. While within the family (Charles and his sons) this might be discussed, there is no reason for a public statement from a prince who distanced himself from the workings of the BRF and doesn't want to be part of its future.

Originally Posted by Moran

Didn't Harry say they loved Camilla to bits? It's certainly going to clash with any adversarial approach he might take now. It's going to sound like rewriting of history and it's going to reflect more poorly on him than anyone else. Perhaps that's why he keeps silent.

This said, these people are supposed to know better than us that some things just go with the territory, not any moral values. Harry's mother wasn't going to be Queen anyway and he knew it. I suppose he always knew that there's a great chance that Camilla would be, as she's married to his father. He's had had some twenty years to get used to it.

Why voice his opinion on a matter that doesn't reflect values and anything but sheer legality?

Both William and Harry gave a rosier look of their relationship with Camilla at the time of the wedding than was the case. It was all about the 'image' of a family that had somewhat reconciled themselves with the past (marriage issues) and celebrated with their father that he had found a life-partner that truly worked for him.

[Moran]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Both William and Harry gave a rosier look of their relationship with Camilla at the time of the wedding than was the case. It was all about the 'image' of a family that had somewhat reconciled themselves with the past (marriage issues) and celebrated with their father that he had found a life-partner that truly worked for him.

This, definitely. In the same vein, though, if Harry starts disapproving now, it's going to sound (inevitably) like rewriting the past to make it worse than it was because his new "image" is of someone who escaped the clutches of their not so rosy family.

Better just to keep his silence. It doesn't concern him and his life in any way. It's a legality that simply doesn't have anything to do with him or honestly, with his mother.

[ACO]

Why do they care so much what Harry thinks? Is his opinion that important? I have yet to see an official comment from William, Kate, Edward, Sophie, Anne, etc.... so why are they losing it cause Harry has not done what the rest haven't either? Make it make sense.

[Ista]

A reminder that a quick reread of the moderator notes at the beginning of this thread might be in order for members. Several posts have ignored the rule:

....the thread will remain open for a period of 48hrs for discussion on the news only.


Any more off topic discussion and a moderator will close the thread.


Edited to add: And we're done.

[Marengo]

As sent to the mod. team by poster yukari:


***

Here's new article about the latest development of Harry's security dispute as below (behind paywall, no archive yet).

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-fa...lack-security/

(...)

As the case began, his QC Shaheed Fatima said: “This claim is about the fact that the Duke does not feel safe when he is in the UK given the security arrangements applied to him in June 2021 and will continue to be applied if he decides to come back.

“It goes without saying that he does want to come back to see family and friends and to continue to support the charities that are so close to his heart.

“This is and always will be his home."

(...)

The preliminary hearing at the High Court in London on Friday is expected to cover which parts of the court documents can be made public or must be kept private.

It is focussing on whether the details of the case regarding security arrangements for public figures and members of the Royal family can be kept hidden from the public.

(...)

[AC21091968]

Here is the archived link to the Telegraph article: https://archive.ph/KsT0M

Though some rehashing previous events, the bit that caught my eyes is the "telling off" or "slapped down" by the judge towards Shaheed Fatima QC on going off topic, which was about whether security details and court documents should be kept hidden or made public.

However, Ms Fatima was rebuked by the judge who told her: “Can you just focus on the issues in dispute today.”

[TLLK]

I'm unfamiliar with these types of legal proceedings, so would any of my fellow posters know how long it might take for the judicial review to come to an end and when would we expect a decision?

[yukari]

Matt Wilkinson (The Sun) seems to be at the hearing.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MattSunRo...49415533015043

Strong words from Home Office in response to Harry's claims he would fund private security. In documents handed to the court, the Home Office states Harry did not offer private funding when he returned in June 2021 or "any of the pre-action correspondence which followed".

The Home Office docs also say government "attributed to the Claimant a form of exceptional status whereby he is considered for personal protection security by police with precise arrangements being dependent on the reason for his presence in Great Britain" on "case-by-case" basis.

Wow it gets worse, the Home Office skeleton argument adds: "The Claimant has failed to afford the necessary measure of respect to the Defendant and RAVEC as the expert, and democratically accountable, decison-maker on matters of protective securoty and associated risk assessment."

Harry HAS now offered to pay for Met security in his confidential 250-page witness statement and exhibits document and also in his 33-page confidential Statement of Facts and Grounds filed last September, the Home Office say. Harry's skeleton argument is also confidential

[HighGoalHighDreams]

The dig about Harry failing to defer to the experts as expert hits on what members of this forum said when this dispute first became public knowledge. While few would question that Harry's perception of danger for himself and his family is real, he apparently refuses to accept the reality that those in power to make this decision are the ones best equipped to make it.

[Granada]

Sometimes, and this is one of those times, The Sussex's are their own worst enemies and act out in ways that only harden Public perception of their entitlement and arrogance.
From what I'm reading in various UK Media, this legal action is very unpopular there and it *seems* Harry's bid to have "rent a cop" ( as one poster called it) Royal Protection Services for future visitis of The Sussex Family is doomed to fail.
Not quite sure why he went this route ? Charles offered them accommodations at Clarence House for a proposed visit. It was pointed out that while Harry and Family was staying there, and involved at events WITH the Royal Family they would have complete RPO Security.

But on their own private visits and events, NO Govt provided security. Seems entirely reasonable for a Couple that "quit" and left in such a manner that hurt, confused, angered and dumbfounded their previous supporters. Not to mention the Family and Government. Less than two years into married life as popular Senior Royals....Also were The Commonwealth Ambassadors. But not only did they quit their positions, They left the Country all together for life in the USA.

What REALLY is the problem with that ? Take your own private Security Team as you visit Friends, Relations or Events.
It actually smacks to me of the ill received 'half in-half out' proposal that Harry and Megan just can't seem to let go of.
They want to have the perks and privilege of Govt Security when they are "private individuals" that do not work or represent the Family or Government anymore. I think this petty and foolhardy attempt will fail too.

Again, who is advising these two ?

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Granada

Sometimes, and this is one of those times, The Sussex's are their own worst enemies and act out in ways that only harden Public perception of their entitlement and arrogance.
From what I'm reading in various UK Media, this legal action is very unpopular there and it *seems* Harry's bid to have "rent a cop" ( as one poster called it) Royal Protection Services for future visitis of The Sussex Family is doomed to fail.
Not quite sure why he went this route ? Charles offered them accommodations at Clarence House for a proposed visit. It was pointed out that while Harry and Family was staying there, and involved at events WITH the Royal Family they would have complete RPO Security.

But on their own private visits and events, NO Govt provided security. Seems entirely reasonable for a Couple that "quit" and left in such a manner that hurt, confused, angered and dumbfounded their previous supporters. Not to mention the Family and Government. Less than two years into married life as popular Senior Royals....Also were The Commonwealth Ambassadors. But not only did they quit their positions, They left the Country all together for live in the USA.

IWhatREALLY is the problem with that ? Take your own private Security Team as you visit Friends, Relations or Events.

I thought that he felt his own private security people would not have the inside knowledge that Met officers would have

[angieuk]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...me-Office.html

The Home Office through their Legal Team have said at Court; it is irrelevant whether he offered to pay for police protection himself; as the Met Police are not for Hire under any circumstances!

I don't know why everything has to be dragged through the Courts all the time.

[Claire]

what is sad and rather oblivious - is that this could and should have remain private. However Harry and his advisors thought it was better to have it in the public arena.

[Granada]

Denville, I still believe if there was ANY credible inside knowledge of information by Security Officials suggesting that The Sussex's were in ANY kind of danger, "the power that be" there would certainly act. No expense spared.

However, as of now, they are not going to allow Resources or RPO's to be diverted to The Sussex's, to allay Harry's possible 'fears' as he goes about visiting People and Events of Harry and Megan's choosing, while on their "private time" in the UK.
Cressida Bonas, his ex girlfriend allegedly said that Harry ranted and complained about "paparazzi lurking around" when clearly there wasnt any.

It will be interesting to see in any case, how the ruling comes down AND how The Sussex's react.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Denville

I thought that he felt his own private security people would not have the inside knowledge that Met officers would have

They wouldn't. The Met Police RPOs have a connection to British intelligence similar to what the US Secret Service have. Ordinary police protection accorded in the US to people that need it don't have that kind of connection to US intelligence agencies that the Secret Service have if I'm not mistaken.

In the US Harry wouldn't be able to "rent" security from the Secret Service or the FBI or the CIA or any other government funded organization responsible for national security. He shouldn't be surprised too that it's not available for him in the UK the way he wants it to be. The BRF and their security is part of national security and as a private citizen now, there's nothing that ties Harry (or his family) to a need for national security when they're on their own. As was stated earlier in a post, he *would* have that kind of protection should he actually be with the BRF somewhere.

I personally think Harry is grasping at straws to retain something that he didn't give enough thought to when he upped stakes and rode off into the sunset in California. He basically *is* irrelevant to the UK these days and that has to sting. But that was his choice to make. I just don't think either Harry or Meghan thought things through and were blinded more by what they hoped to gain rather than take into account all they had to lose.

[Durham]

Thanks to Yukari for this :

"The Home Office docs also say government "attributed to the Claimant a form of exceptional status whereby he is considered for personal protection security by police with precise arrangements being dependent on the reason for his presence in Great Britain" on "case-by-case" basis.

Wow it gets worse, the Home Office skeleton argument adds: "The Claimant has failed to afford the necessary measure of respect to the Defendant and RAVEC as the expert, and democratically accountable, decison-maker on matters of protective securoty and associated risk assessment."



So the police will provide protection if it is considered necessary. I think that's reasonable. As it says they're the experts. Not sure why he's unhappy with that.

The comment about not affording respect to the defendent is about as close as it gets to telling Harry to go take a hike. Or jog on as we say in Britain. I wonder who gave that form of words the nod?

We have a Home Secretary (a woman of colour as it happens) who takes no prisoners.

[Sionevar]

One interesting aspect of Harry's lawsuit - he claims he is still in the immediate line of succession to the throne.

I don't know how he defines 'immediate', but my definition would be The Queen - Prince Charles - Prince William - Prince George. I would treat Harry as being in the collateral line of succession.