Battle of Brothers: William, Harry and the Inside Story of A Family in Tumult

[Sandy345]

Nothing has been proven nor disproven.

[Moran]

That's why I said "the alleged". But since the entire discussion is about the claims in a book in a thread about this book, perhaps I didn't even need to.

Nothing has been proven or disproven about the staff either, BTW.

[Osipi]

All of this is what I'd deem as things that have happened in the past and were solely internal matters and shouldn't have ever reached the public domain. Now the public is being drawn into what is basically a "he said, she said, they said" situation that will never be totally factualized and resolved as to who was the victim and who was the bully or who took the high road and who took the low road and we're left with "recollections may vary".

All of this could have been avoided and worked out internally had one party decided to just move forward in life and leave what they deemed as "toxic" behind them and look to the future to thrive rather than just survive. This doesn't seem the case though as the intent is to rehash, relive and report on each and every "wrong" done to them and in doing this, they're basically, IMO, hanging themselves with their own rope.

When one throws toxic garbage to the curb and the garbage truck comes and takes it away, you don't see very many people chasing that truck down wanting their garbage back. This, actually, is in effect what the Sussexes are doing each and every time they bring up the past and why they had to "find freedom", escape a toxic environment and focus on that to keep themselves relevant in today's world.

The odd thing is, though, that no matter what they do, it will never change what was nor will they be able to completely step into an alternate reality where they regain the respect, the dignity and the admiration of the court of public opinion.

And so it goes.... on and on and on and on.

[camelot23ca]

Originally Posted by Denville

But the guy who mentioned Meg as driving out two PAs IS an American. So it seems as if he thought she was acting in a bullying fashion.

Yes, as I said, I don’t think the workplace cultures in the US and UK are different enough that Meghan - as an American - would have truly confused about what was appropriate behaviour when it came to issues like how to interact with the staff at KP.

If the description of Meghan’s actions in Jason Knauf’s email is accurate, I think overall people employed in the US and the UK would describe it as bullying and consider it to be unacceptable behaviour. If there was significant variation in opinions I think it would be between industries, not between countries.

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by Heavs

Jason Knauf is American and worked for RBS. He's seen high pressure work environments. Simon Case (William's private secretary at the time who was also involved) is now the top civil servant in the UK answerable to the PM. He has to be able to deal with 500 different expectations, demands and personalities in a day.

What is being alleged here isn't a simple case of culture clash. "Meghan governed by fear,” claimed one courtier. “So many people said it. Nothing was ever good enough for her. [She] humiliated staff in meetings, [would] shout at them, [would] cut them off email chains — and then demand to know why they hadn’t done anything.”

In the article one staffer alleges she was a "narcissistic sociopath" - rather extreme for misunderstandings and culture clashes.

The archived article is here if anyone hasn't read it:

https://archive.ph/vDCzZ

As for Harry bringing his own reporter. I guess I just don't understand why? Their friendly reporters can write whatever they want to about the day whether they're there or not. Just like other columnists and reporters in the UK won't be there but will analyse it. Unless they want to use footage in any of their upcoming projects or something.

Thank you Heavs for sharing the link to The Times article. It's interesting to note that Jason Knauf was one of Meghan's most senior advisors who had assisted her with PR and initially was one of her strongest supporters. He'd also helped Prince Harry write the statement regarding the press reaction to the news that he and Meghan were dating.



However at some point it appears that Knauf could no ignore the concerns that some of KP's female staff were sharing with him regarding their interactions with the Duchess of Sussex.

Before that, Knauf had helped Harry to word the fierce anti-media statements that he had framed to try to protect Meghan from press harassment, both as his girlfriend and then as his fiancée. The PR man had taken considerable stick from some of his non-royal contacts who criticised him as being overprotective in fighting the newcomer’s corner. Like so many people in all the palaces, Knauf had started off on Meghan’s side.But as the months went by the American’s feelings became more ambiguous, as numerous colleagues — women whom he greatly respected — continued to bring him stories of what they said they had suffered at Meghan’s hands.
“I can’t stop shaking,” one aide had told a colleague in anticipation of an encounter with Meghan. Another reported that the prospect of confrontation with the duchess had made her “feel sick”. “Emotional cruelty and manipulation”, were the words of a third, “which I guess could also be called bullying.”
The b-word featured prominently in the accounts of several, along with an even more sinister set of initials: PTSD. Post-traumatic stress disorder was a deeply serious condition to allege — flashbacks, nightmares and feelings of deep anxiety — but that was how one complainant said that they had felt.

I can see why Jason Knauf believed that he had a duty to alert HR and to share this with Simon Case. Case then in turn sent the information on to Prince William who determined that splitting the office was the only way forward.


Apologies if this has already been shared but it appears that the verdict in the investigation might not be delivered until 2022.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/p...year-f9q2s0kc2

Buckingham Palace’s investigation into claims that the Duchess of Sussex bullied royal staff is still under way after more than three months, it has emerged.
Results from the highly sensitive inquiry, which is being conducted by an independent law firm, were expected to be announced in the annual Sovereign Grant report to be published this week. But royal sources have confirmed the investigation is “ongoing”.

[Moran]

Ah. The new excerpt is in The Times. I now rest assured it's Lacey indeed who's writing this book. Who else would write about the BP's decision to entrust the bullying investigation to an external entity with derision, implying that it should have stayed private and possibly manipulated in the RF members' favour?

[Marengo]

Posts that have nothing to do with the topic of this thread have been moved to the Sussex-thread.

Updates of the book can be discussed here. Analysis and opinions about the claims that are made in the book should be taken to the Sussex-thread in the Sussex forum, which you can find here.

[AC21091968]

[Mod. note Marengo] - this content has been copied from the Sussex-thread to keep this thread updated. Please discuss these claims in the Sussex-thread, not here.
---

There has been 6 articles in the Times relating to Robert Lacey's updated book.

From the oldest to newest, the first article reported on Robert Lacey, experts and insideres claim that "Charles has no power to stop Archie becoming a prince — or his sister Lilibet a princess — when the Queen dies". Lacey later added that Archie and Lili will have a choice to be called HRH Prince/Princess at age 18 similar to Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor and Viscount Severn.

Battle of Brothers book extract: Archie can wait until 18 to choose if he’ll be prince
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...ince-j5z25flr2
Archived link: https://archive.ph/iM50L#selection-917.41-917.151

The second article is about Robert Lacey's claim that Meghan walked out of an engagement at a market in Fiji due to a "feud" or argument with UN Women.

Meghan walked out of Fiji engagement over feud with UN Women, says Robert Lacey book
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/m...book-wns93zw9m
Archived link: https://archive.ph/ww9u0#selection-737.0-737.84

The third article is an extract Robert Lacey's updated book, focusing on the relationship between Charles and Sussexes and Archie's title. It's similar to the first article, except it's coming straight from Lacey's mouth.

What went wrong between Prince Charles and Prince Harry
In his new book, Battle of Brothers, Robert Lacey unpicks the Sussexes’ Oprah interview — and says Meghan was right to cry foul when she discovered her father-in-law might not make Archie a prince
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...ract-2n8j8bmbp
Archived link: https://archive.ph/TVs0Q

The fourth article is another extract from Robert Lacey's updated book. More specifically, it focuses on the diamond earrings controversies. This is third one of the four book extract released on The Times.

Meghan’s diamond earrings: the ugly truth about her wedding gift
Historian Robert Lacey examines what led to the Duchess of Sussex’s inappropriate choice of jewellery after the murder of Jamal Khashoggi
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/m...gift-8vhtwshtz
Archived link: https://archive.ph/2021.06.21-231856...n-739.0-739.64

The fifth article is again the (fourth and final) book extract, which is on Prince Philip's funeral. The first two paragraphs were on Prince Philip's admission to hospital

How anger at Harry and Meghan ran deep at Prince Philip’s funeral
Despite outward appearances of reconciliation, ill feeling still pervaded the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral, writes historian Robert Lacey
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...eral-t3sxnzzwc
Archived link: https://archive.ph/pLMgM#selection-739.0-739.65

The sixth article is written by Valentine Low releasing Robert Lacey's claim that The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge fear that conversation with the Duke of Sussex will be leaked out.

William and Kate feared private talks with Harry would be leaked
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...aked-ndrmb3klz
Archived link: https://archive.ph/OPp0w#selection-737.0-737.64

As mentioned earlier, there may be some overlap between these Times articles. Some of the book extract showed Lacey being sympathetic to the Sussexes. I do wonder if there is a huge promotion deal between Lacey and The Times.

[Marengo]

A ludicrous discussion about font sizes has be deleted by the mod. team from the Sussex-thread. It has shocked the mod. team as it has shown just how obsessive and how toxic the discussion is and how entrenched posters are in their positions. After several years of constant fights we simply can not go on like this.

The mod. team is therefore currently re-assessing the future of the Sussex-discussion in this forum. This thread will remain closed until a decision has been made about if and how this topic can be discussed in the future.

In the mean time do not post any Sussex-related information anywhere else on this forum. It will be considered as an attempt to undermine moderation and will be dealt with accordingly.