The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 7: Oct. 2022 - Apr. 2023


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Denville said:
doubt if Charles is negotiating with them
Click to expand...

You are 100% correct on that one.

He won't be seating at a table, nor a Zoom Meeting, to speak with them and I doubt other royals. This is delegated to committees dealing with protocols for this event and security for guests and public.

Royals in large governments are not out of the Princess Diaries engaging in small details since their calendars are already full for day. The King and Queen might have a say on it but these groups delegated to do the work must have security measures in place as the highest priority.

The seating arrangements for the Sussex couple, or what child or children gets to attend, is not as important as to secure the event in case a person or a terrorist group uses the opportunity to make a statement.

That said, see u in a few days.
 
Last edited:
Negotiations make complete sense. The couple has shown that no place is of limits and they were happy to bring cameras into Frogmore (though one can argue it was there home).

So it makes complete sense that if Harry and/or Meghan is to return for the coronation and if they are to stay in a Buckingham Palace apartment (as the press reports) that there would be certain stipulations and "rules".

If not we may end up seeing a Netflix series. Harry & Meghan: The Coronation Special.
 
Judging by that article (and it does read like a lot of gossip) the Sussexes want to stay at FC with the Brooksbanks, and if they’re all agreeable that sounds great. Archie and August aren’t too far apart in age. (Nor will Lili and the new Brooksbank baby when it arrives I guess.)
 
TLLK said:
Granada you are absolutely correct. While Spare has continued to sell well, the couple's popularity has plummeted in recent months. The South Park episode and a recent Saturday Night live skit reflect that many Americans see them as figures to be made fun of instead of the global leaders that they aspired to be. A growing number of Americans polled, believe that the couple's titles should be removed.

https://www.newsweek.com/why-prince...titles-prince-archie-princess-lilibet-1786536
Click to expand...

Newsweek here also use Convention instead of Letters Patent. Is the term correct or are they just using Meghan as a source? Also they should have mentioned Edward's children here.
 
Negotiations ? The non working Sussex's will be informed of where they will sit and how they are to proceed into The Abbey. By the Group that is tasked with making these complex arrangements.

If they don't like it, they can lump it and stay "home" in America. I bet that would make *most* of The Family relieved, as well as The Courtiers, Officials and Dignitaries invited too. The British Public, doesn't want this to turn into an opportunity to promote The Sussex's Royal connections either. To then monetize in The States.

One less chance for drama to rock the Coronation and take emphasis away from the "resplendent" Ceremony too !

I mean, what can The Sussex's negotiate for ? They left the Family and The UK in the dust.

The Jubilee will be used as the template for where they sit and such. And that was BEFORE all the malicious and damaging information The Sussex's alleged against the Family-Firm to malign and demean them in the World's eye.

No Balcony, no prime seating position, no walking in or out with Senior Royals. They will be the in second tier, behind The Duke of Kent and Duke-Duchess of Gloucester.

Again, The Family is in no mood for drama and discussion. The Sussex's need the association with them, much more than the other way around.
Something, I think is slowly dawning on our rogue Sussex's.
 
Last edited:
Granada said:
Negotiations ? The non working Sussex's will be informed of where they will sit and how they are to proceed into The Abbey. By the Group that is tasked with making these complex arrangements.

If they don't like it, they can lump it and stay "home" in America. I bet that would make *most* of The Family relieved, as well as The Courtiers, Officials and Dignitaries invited too. The British Public, doesn't want this to turn into an opportunity to promote The Sussex's Royal connections either. To then monetize in The States.

One less chance for drama to rock the Coronation and take emphasis away from the "resplendent" Ceremony too !

I mean, what can The Sussex's negotiate for ? They left the Family and The UK in the dust.

The Jubilee will be used as the template for where they sit and such. And that was BEFORE all the malicious and damaging information The Sussex's alleged against the Family-Firm to malign and demean them in the World's eye.

No Balcony, no prime seating position, no walking in or out with Senior Royals. They will be the in second tier, behind The Duke of and Duke-Duchess of Gloucester.

Again, The Family is in no mood for drama and discussion. The Sussex's need the association with them, much more than the other way around.
Something, I think is slowly dawning on our rogue Sussex's.
Click to expand...

What is the likelyhood that H&M do not see it in quite those terms?
 
muriel, exactly.
They boxed themselves into this Corner though. And I didn't even bring up the fact that Harry said the Sussex's WOULD NOT come unless there was a discussion over past grievances he alleges, AND an apology to Meghan by The Family. Good luck with that.
Charles might be sad on *some* personal level if Harry (and Meghan) don't attend, but that's up to them. He has much bigger issues to deal with in Coronation Events and planning.

The Coronation isn't a Family Event to be held hostage to a renegade and perpetually aggrieved son and daughter in law demands for the Spotlight and their Position at The Coronation, that they feel they are owed.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
 
Toledo said:
Royal News on the Dukes of Sussex

source Woman and Home magazine / W&H
Elizabeth Culverhouse
2 hrs ago March 16 2023

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are negotiating the terms of their coronation attendance and the demands are pretty understandable.

"The alleged demands they have brought to the table are reasonable, with the couple now having to reach a compromise with the Royal Family to ensure their place at the coronation."
Click to expand...


Hmmm...


Archie's birthday- Will likely be acknowledged just like it has been for every birthday with a post on the Royal Family's official social media accompanied by whatever photo the BRF are able to use. Perhaps the one of the Guards' bands will film a performance of "Happy Birthday" to accompany the birthday post. However that will likely be the limit of the public acknowledgement as this is a private family occasion.



Security- Would be modeled on the same plan as for the 2022 Jubilee.



Lodging- Could be possibly be a mix of a London location the night before the Coronation to ensure that everyone is in place at the right time and they they'd move on to Frogmore Cottage.



Balcony-I do not see the Sussex family appearing on the balcony as the Duke and Duchess have created a tense atmosphere with the British Royal Family, the Government of the United Kingdom and the British public. Also I don't see the parents permitting their children to appear on the balcony without them and with very young children, this might be too overwhelming for them.
 
I wish the King would tell them that, if they don't like the arrangements, they can lump them.
 
I'm sure they have been told very politely what arrangements have been made for them should they choose to attend this historic occasion, along with many other far more important people!
 
He may be the King's son, but he's managed to reduce his importance in the grand scheme of things dramatically. Its what they wanted (apparently), and so they've got it. I have no doubts that Charles will be happy if his child is there on the day.
 
Asteria12 said:
He may be the King's son, but he's managed to reduce his importance in the grand scheme of things dramatically. Its what they wanted (apparently), and so they've got it. I have no doubts that Charles will be happy if his child is there on the day.
Click to expand...
I have doubts. He'd be happy if Harry is there AND behaving decently. Which he didn't do on the occasion of, say, The Queen's death. Charles missed time with his mother in her last day because Harry was throwing a tantrum that they couldn't disrespect HIS new mummy, Meghan, even after her recent threats of running her mouth again. And didn't do anything wrong with it if he wrote it on the book later without any regret.

Harry is capable of making anyone not want him anywhere.
 
Magnolia471 said:
Do you know how many copies he sold in US? Some sources indicate 1.4 million other 3.4 millions��
Click to expand...
It did do well in print in the U.S in its 1st week - 629,300 this is all I can find

ttps://www.npd.com/news/press-releases/2023/prince-harrys-spare-one-of-the-fastest-selling-adult-non-fiction-print-books-since-2004/

as for 2nd week 195,000 that a massive drop if this is the right number. The question is how many unsold books have been returned to the publisher. Penguin Random House have seemed to have gone quiet. I doubt the paper back will do any better.
 
Last edited:
Moran said:
I have doubts. He'd be happy if Harry is there AND behaving decently. Which he didn't do on the occasion of, say, The Queen's death. Charles missed time with his mother in her last day because Harry was throwing a tantrum that they couldn't disrespect HIS new mummy, Meghan, even after her recent threats of running her mouth again. And didn't do anything wrong with it if he wrote it on the book later without any regret.

Harry is capable of making anyone not want him anywhere.
Click to expand...

I cant see that Charles is going to be HAPPY to have him there, as one can never trust him
 
Posts about prince Andrew have been removed. This thread is about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
 
Some of the demands are just funny. Them staying with Eugenie and Jack seems fine, but the other demands are silly. They aren’t in a position to negotiate anything and if they don’t come, the show will still go on.
 
Duke of Sussex argued he could not pay for private security until he had a job

Archive

(...)

Prince Harry sent an email to Sir Edward Young, the late Queen’s private secretary, in April 2020 in which he says he “made it clear we couldn’t afford private security until we were able to earn”.

The *message was disclosed in legal documents relating to the Duke’s*libel claim against the Mail on Sunday, which hinges on a “false claim” concerning his willingness to pay for his own police protection in the UK.

(...)
Click to expand...

Live tweeting of the hearing for more details (several threads):

https://twitter.com/x/status/1636671778884911106

https://twitter.com/x/status/1636729605666086912

https://twitter.com/x/status/1636740427599495174

https://twitter.com/x/status/1636750139506192386

Points I find interesting in that live tweeting:
- that solicitors for Harry did ask the Mail by email about the story, after being tipped off about it and the leak came from someone in Home Office.

- the argument about "Honest Opinion" (ANL's defence) while Harry's team argued that there's factual allegation and it failed "honesty test". And I quote the tweets:
(...)

Counsel quotes a statement from a background briefing that Harry's safety was more at risk in the UK than the USA.

Says that Harry taking the decision to call for a judicial review of the decision to remove his security detail in the UK did not mean he had withdrawn his offer to pay for it. Says articles saying that were an "illegitimate leap."

Counsel says that the Press Association too had "got the wrong end of the stick," over the judicial review, but this did not justify the Mail on Sunday's articles.

Judge asks if this was not lying, but just "spinning the facts."?

Counsel says the facts show it was more than this as it accused Harry of "attempting to mislead the public."

Judge says the issue is "Could an honest person have drawn that conclusion given the facts?"

Points to the fact a reporter from the Press Association had drawn the same conclusion.

(...)
Click to expand...
And this is my biggest question since the beginning of this lawsuit: Why he only sue ANL? IIRC, ANL isn't the only and not even the first to come out with that story (inferring that Harry misled the public about his offer to pay). And now there's even email proof that initially he insisted he can't afford to pay (post Sandringham Summit), but there's offer to pay around the time of judicial review ... Is it just me, why this sounds like someone is being semantic/pedantic?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
From Granada:
So here we are, two "rogue Royals". One an Actress, the other a Prince, who feel entitled and empowered to lecture People on complicated and controversial topics on matters from mental self healing to hot button social issues like Racism. All the while trading on, invoking their Royal connections AND usually blaming the Royal Family for personal complaints and perceived slights too. Constantly.

How long a shelf life can that possibly have ? They are quickly becoming boring, tedious and repetitive in their allegations.
Click to expand...

It's been three years since the duo took off overseas to do their own thing - and yet here we are, although we all (mostly) agree their 'appeal' is wearing off, we are still talking incessantly about them. This thread has multiple postings every day. YouTube has a small group of people making a bit of a living talking about them (and yes, I do watch some of them). The couple are interesting. Not particularly nice people IMO but interesting. We're fascinated. Why? Is it because we are waiting for this very... slow... train wreck... to come to its inevitable conclusion? It just can't end well.... but is it going to drag on forever? Like the D&D of Windsor.

I haven't got a leg to stand on myself; personally I agree with just about nothing they've done and said almost since they got married (I was one of those millions who watched the wedding and wished them nothing but happiness and believed in their 'love story'.) And yet I read and watch a lot of content about them (except for 'Spare', no way I'm buying that.) Now I'm much more cynical. They're after money and fame but not putting in much effort (beyond effortless trashing the Royal family). But I'm still reading about them. If they're as publicity-hungry as they appear to be, then apathy would be the last thing they would want, because negativity still gets them column inches.

I had no problem with them leaving and starting a new life. I was surprised Harry (at least) ended up in California, considering their desire for privacy. They could have left with dignity and made a lovely life for themselves, and still have been invited to every major Royal occasion and treated well if they had been loyal and discreet. Actually, come to think of it, they're still being treated well even though they have NOT been loyal and discreet. Invitation to the Coronation after all they've put the family through. And the titles for the American children (who have no need of them and are probably going to be mercilessly teased during their school years, I would imagine). The RF have taken the moral high ground IMO.

And after all this, we still haven't lost our fascination with this couple... yet.
 
Asteria12 said:
I'm sure they have been told very politely what arrangements have been made for them should they choose to attend this historic occasion, along with many other far more important people!

JR76 said:
Harry is the King's son. There will only be few more important people than him and his wife present at the coronation.

Denville said:
I cant see that Charles is going to be HAPPY to have him there, as one can never trust him
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Whilst I am sure that certain arrangements will already have been made it is undeniable fact that he is the son of the King. Our new king, Charles III, has always been a kind man and, it is worth noting that many decisions regarding his life and those of both his wives and both of his sons were shaped by who he is and how long his mother reigned. Many decisions were made by his mother in consultation with her advisors.

Those decisions did not always work for good for Charles and his family and we would all be fools to think they did. Her late Majesty was an incredibly pragmatic woman with the only real wobble being Andrew. Charles probably doesn't like his youngest son very much at the moment, but I believe he really does love his "darling boy" and wants him to share in his coronation.
Needless to say, he is being pulled hither and yon by those with differing agenda's but, if Harry is not there, he and by inference the UK Government will be thought less of by many internationally, because it does not inspire international admiration if, in the grand scheme of things, petty family quarrels are allowed to override the good of the nation.

We have to remember that while it is Charles that is being Crowned, it is an official "State" occasion which will hopefully facilitate an increase trade and tourism with a side of discreet meetings and discussions between the good and the great to mutual advantage.
 
I really can't see how Harry's presence contributes to the good of the nation. It isn't as if he contained his attacks on a personal level only. He thrashed the UK and its past as a whole, basically accusing everyone of not tormenting his angelic Meghan.

It isn't as if the nation is clamouring for him to return while Charles puts his own good ahead of his people's. In fact, everything points out at the nation generally wants Harry for the coronation as much as about his family. I can't see how this is good for the nation.

It doesn't exactly inspire admiration that after all the cheap shots Harry and his new mummy fired at the King, the RF, the monarchy, the past of the UK, Charles is still seen as giving up to him.
 
MARG said:
Whilst I am sure that certain arrangements will already have been made it is undeniable fact that he is the son of the King. Our new king, Charles III, has always been a kind man and, it is worth noting that many decisions regarding his life and those of both his wives and both of his sons were shaped by who he is and how long his mother reigned. Many decisions were made by his mother in consultation with her advisors.

Those decisions did not always work for good for Charles and his family and we would all be fools to think they did. Her late Majesty was an incredibly pragmatic woman with the only real wobble being Andrew. Charles probably doesn't like his youngest son very much at the moment, but I believe he really does love his "darling boy" and wants him to share in his coronation.
Needless to say, he is being pulled hither and yon by those with differing agenda's but, if Harry is not there, he and by inference the UK Government will be thought less of by many internationally, because it does not inspire international admiration if, in the grand scheme of things, petty family quarrels are allowed to override the good of the nation.

We have to remember that while it is Charles that is being Crowned, it is an official "State" occasion which will hopefully facilitate an increase trade and tourism with a side of discreet meetings and discussions between the good and the great to mutual advantage.
Click to expand...

It doesn’t reflect badly on the royal family. They are still a united family. If they had fallen apart maybe. But they haven’t.

They have been invited. All the family can do. Duke of Windsor was never invited.

Time moves on faster than we think, and the family will just seal up the hole he has left. In fact really they already have. It’s his father and brother this hits hardest and it will be a scar.

If they come, I have a feeling this will be the last time for years, unless we do have a mending. Hoping for Charles a good innings yet, so the next events, as with all families, is probably weddings and that may be years in the future and none of them have to invite Harry…they probably by that stage hardly know him.

The Wales children don’t know him. There is no chat between the parents.
So not even FaceTime chats and Louis doesn’t know him at all.

Even Eugenie will drift. It’s just life.

Families drift when parental units die anyway. The royals don’t seem to have done that, with the exception of Harry.
 
Last edited:
Moran said:
I really can't see how Harry's presence contributes to the good of the nation. It isn't as if he contained his attacks on a personal level only. He thrashed the UK and its past as a whole, basically accusing everyone of not tormenting his angelic Meghan.

It isn't as if the nation is clamouring for him to return while Charles puts his own good ahead of his people's. In fact, everything points out at the nation generally wants Harry for the coronation as much as about his family. I can't see how this is good for the nation.

It doesn't exactly inspire admiration that after all the cheap shots Harry and his new mummy fired at the King, the RF, the monarchy, the past of the UK, Charles is still seen as giving up to him.
Click to expand...

I just believe that the King does not want to totally give up on his son.

He is as another poster pointed out ' his darling boy'.
The only tightrope I see the King walking is between his two sons, I understand why he would want his youngest son to attend, but his oldest son and heir must be really hurt by Harrys words and deeds.

The general public do not appear to want the couple to attend, they offended a lot of people , not just the royal family. Having said that I don't think they would see Charles as weak by inviting them but more a loving father.

A balcony appearance might be a different matter .
We do not know as yet if they are attending, although they might have already sent their RSVP just not announced it.
 
Of course he doesnt wnat to give up on his son. Even if Harry is unpleasant and selfsih, he is also damaged and Charles must wonder how much of it is due to him and his bad marriage to Diana. He will always hold out a hand to hsi son, and yes He must feel that WIlliam is very hurt and he has to support his older son as well.
 
Hallo girl said:
I just believe that the King does not want to totally give up on his son.

He is as another poster pointed out ' his darling boy'.
The only tightrope I see the King walking is between his two sons, I understand why he would want his youngest son to attend, but his oldest son and heir must be really hurt by Harrys words and deeds.

The general public do not appear to want the couple to attend, they offended a lot of people , not just the royal family. Having said that I don't think they would see Charles as weak by inviting them but more a loving father.

A balcony appearance might be a different matter .
We do not know as yet if they are attending, although they might have already sent their RSVP just not announced it.
Click to expand...


I agree. The public will likely understand Charles' desire to have his son, daughter-in-law and brother Andrew at the coronation as his family members. However the public will likely be unhappy if they were to all appear on the balcony.
 
The troubled threesome (sorry for the pun, I was watching old episodes of classic Batman and Robin just now and the way they describe things using the first letter is now in my head :lol: ) Andrew, Meghan and Harry have to stay off the balcony. They will be booed and no one wants King Charles' big moment to be taken away by negativity toward the troubled threesome.
 
yukari said:
Duke of Sussex argued he could not pay for private security until he had a job

Archive



Live tweeting of the hearing for more details (several threads):

https://twitter.com/x/status/1636671778884911106

https://twitter.com/x/status/1636729605666086912

https://twitter.com/x/status/1636740427599495174

https://twitter.com/x/status/1636750139506192386

Points I find interesting in that live tweeting:
- that solicitors for Harry did ask the Mail by email about the story, after being tipped off about it and the leak came from someone in Home Office.

- the argument about "Honest Opinion" (ANL's defence) while Harry's team argued that there's factual allegation and it failed "honesty test". And I quote the tweets:

And this is my biggest question since the beginning of this lawsuit: Why he only sue ANL? IIRC, ANL isn't the only and not even the first to come out with that story (inferring that Harry misled the public about his offer to pay). And now there's even email proof that initially he insisted he can't afford to pay (post Sandringham Summit), but there's offer to pay around the time of judicial review ... Is it just me, why this sounds like someone is being semantic/pedantic?
Click to expand...



I’m also very baffled by this lawsuit and curious to how it goes, because it doesn’t appear to me that Harry has a strong case. Additionally, information like Harry not agreeing to notify the home office a month in advance of return trips to the U.K. so security can be arranged just make him look petulant and entitled. He seems to only want the exact same security he had as a senior working royal and nothing else will do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Marengo
  • Locked
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 8: April - August 2023
53 54 55
Replies
2K
Views
242K
Marengo
Marengo
Marengo
  • Sticky
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 9: August 2023 -
70 71 72
Replies
2K
Views
342K
Mirabel
M
Marengo
Princess Elisabeth, Duchess of Brabant News and Events 2, Feb 2024 -
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
Prinsara
Prinsara
Marengo
Iñaki Urdangarín, News and Events 1: Jan. 2024 -
Replies
2
Views
1K
Toledo
Toledo
iceflower
The Duchess of Sussex's Fashion and Style Part 1: November 2023 -
2 3
Replies
65
Views
8K
Granada
G

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom