The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 9: August 2023 -


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
What an interesting report on the podcast, Change, and thanks for posting it. This just confirms what I have read many times from people who have met Harry and Meghan socially, more deeply through their charity work or who knew them in their earlier lives. This includes people saying again and again how down to earth Harry is, how genuinely kind and thoughtful Meghan is with those she meets (I remember she handed out mittens to people in the crowds at an early wintry engagement) and how warm and natural both of them are.

Wise and honest words too from David Wiseman who knew Harry through comrades in the Walking With the Wounded enterprises. And of course Invictus, which has been deep in Harry’s heart and soul for years.
Glad to hear that David and his wife had a ball at the Sussex wedding, especially the banter with Elton! So good to read the positivity from those who have actually met this couple, rather than negativity and gossip. Also that the couple are happy in California.
 
Last edited:
They appear to have thought the money from Charles would continue , they said on the prepared statement that they would not take money from the Sovereign grant but that was a small percentage of Harry’s income.
From reading the statement they shared on the Sussex Royal website, it appears that they firmly believed that as "internationally protected persons" they would receive tax payer funded security from some nation(either the UK, Canada or the U.S. ) Note the couple withdrew the security comment from their original announcement.https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/prince-harry-meghan-sussexes-security-a4334516.html Plus they seemed to be confident that there would be continued funding from the then Prince of Wales too. All of this even though they were stepping back from royal duties to pursue commercial opportunities. The Sussexes have tried to suggest that other members of the royal family have the "half in and half out" role that they desired, but in reality that doesn't exist with the perks the Sussexes assumed they would receive. They wanted to be free to pursue commercial deals like Zara Tindall, Peter Phillips, Princess Michael of Kent but without taking into consideration that Harry's cousins do not receive taxpayer funded security as private citizens. The York princesses lost their security in 2011 and have careers, but only very rarely perform royal duties. They are not part of the working royal roster.
I have to believe that nearly four years later, that they still are under the impression that they should have received everything they claimed in that Sussex Royal statement.
 
Last edited:
IIRC from his memoir Spare, Meghan expressed concern to Harry that they would lose their security and Harry's response was something to the effect that their security was a sure thing since Prince Andrew had not lost his security. Harry miscalculated, presumably not taking into account that Prince Andrew is based in the UK and lives on royal property.
 
From reading the statement they shared on the Sussex Royal website, it appears that they firmly believed that as "internationally protected persons" they would receive tax payer funded security from some nation(either the UK, Canada or the U.S. ) Note the couple withdrew the security comment from their original announcement.https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/prince-harry-meghan-sussexes-security-a4334516.html Plus they seemed to be confident that there would be continued funding from the then Prince of Wales too. All of this even though they were stepping back from royal duties to pursue commercial opportunities. The Sussexes have tried to suggest that other members of the royal family have the "half in and half out" role that they desired, but in reality that doesn't exist with the perks the Sussexes assumed they would receive. They wanted to be free to pursue commercial deals like Zara Tindall, Peter Phillips, Princess Michael of Kent but without taking into consideration that Harry's cousins do not receive taxpayer funded security as private citizens. The York princesses lost their security in 2011 and have careers, but only very rarely perform royal duties. They are not part of the working royal roster.
I have to believe that nearly four years later, that they still are under the impression that they should have received everything they claimed in that Sussex Royal statement.

In my view it was a hasty, not thought out let alone through, decision. They wanted it to happen now and hadn’t ever really had any response from the family. Everything they thought was what they imagined and not in any way pragmatic. And then reality hit. If they had taken it calmer, it would have moved slowly of course, but it would have happened the right way amd they may have ended up with more. Look there are ways of leaving the box you’ve been put in (and their life as a type of box) without ripping the box, planting dynamite and under the box, and blowing yourself up in the process.

If I wanted to open a coffee shop I would have to put forward a business plan. Harry was being asked for such a plan and for some reason just could t put up with the delays this would cause.
 
Part of what it comes down to me is that they did not actually NEED help. You’re saying they “needed” help. I don’t see it that way. People facing literal homelessness who lack financial means need help with a home.

They WANTED a certain extravagant lifestyle, in a certain location, at an exact moment in time. Which was ALL apparently non negotiable to them.

They either couldn’t or wouldn’t fund exactly what they WANTED.

To say multi- millionaires NEEDED the help of Tyler Perry is just not something I agree with. He offered them a lifestyle they thought they “had” to have. It was not something they needed though.

They also didn’t plan ahead and think things through before making major life decisions.

I agree with you, they didn’t.

But one never had anything but arranged for him and the other obviously, and I do feel for her with this, massively misunderstood royal life and had watched one too many hallmark films about meet and marrying a Prince.
 
I agree with you, they didn’t.

But one never had anything but arranged for him and the other obviously, and I do feel for her with this, massively misunderstood royal life and had watched one too many hallmark films about meet and marrying a Prince.

You have hit the nail on the head, that is exactly what took place,
 
I think Meghan maybe misjudged the protocols that run the BRF. She was off and running between her cookbook, Smartworks and the Vogue edition. I think it most likely eclipsed the work being done by other members.
As for her thinking that marrying a prince was going to be like something out of a hallmark movie the amount of work she put in before stepping down from being a working member of the BRF shows that she was willing to do the work.
 
Last edited:
I think Meghan maybe misjudged the protocols that run the BRF. She was off and running between her cookbook, Smartworks and the Vogue edition. I think it most likely eclipsed the work being done by other members.

I believe the royals are used to the new member taking the attention etc, but I would agree she misjudged the protocols, I do not think she realised that she couldn't just do as she wanted there were other things/ people to be taken into consideration. IMO she found this frustrating. All history now, lets hope the couple have found their niche and are happy with it.
 
I would say that the photo of Dan wouldn’t hold weight if they were just at a media event. But no, it was a personal party of 20 people that Dan paid for himself, posted and was proud of with the hearts and etc. And it wouldn’t be much weight if Simon Case when looking into it, hadn’t said there was no connection at all but managed to miss this photograph.

If this was a photo of some tabloid event, a gala or anything like that. Then it’d be fine. Because people would move in those circles but that photo was from a private dinner hosted by Dan for the people he called close. It wasn’t a random meet up or then happening to be in the same place at the same time. It’s a dinner at a party in a hotel paid for by Dan that he did then go on to post about.

It should’ve been looked into at the time and still looked into now but if you look into that connection then you might stumble across the bigger issue of how shady deals and selling information and a look into the palace machine overall. The one that most want to ignore or pretend like isn’t happening.

The photo doesn’t have to be a smoking gun but it does show that either someone lied about their connection or that Simon Case is a horrible investigator and that would be even more of a reason for it to be legally dealt with.
My response to this is still even though Dan Wootton and the aide, Christian Jones, were at a social event together and that they were in the same group photo together does not mean that they were friends,nor does it mean that Jones and/ or his partner were Wootton's sources, nevertheless Wootton was getting information from a source that had inside information because the source was the insider themselves, or was close enough to an insider.

However, I did read the article and what is damning was that the social event was Dan Wootton throwing himself a birthday party and he invited his closest friends, so to me that is a smoking gun that Christian Jones is/was a good friend of Wootton, or the plus one of a good friend of Wootton. Now according to the article, Jones represented during a palace investigation that while he and his partner knew Wootton, neither he nor his partner are/were friends of Wootton. My conclusion is that if the Byline Times story correctly reflects the social event, then Christian Jones gave misleading information. While it is still not a smoking gun that Jones and/or his partner were leaking information, for me I can no longer give Jones the benefit of the doubt by default.

Interestingly, Christian Jones joined KP in December 2018, Wootton broke the tiara story a month earlier, so if Christian Jones or someone in his circle fed information to Wootton, it looks like Wootton also had other sources.
 
Does anybody know the timeline of events, i.e. the party that both parties attended in relation to the information allegedly leaked.
 
Does anybody know the timeline of events, i.e. the party that both parties attended in relation to the information allegedly leaked.
The first of the stories where it is alleged that Jones / his partner were the source was late Spring / early Summer 2019, shortly after Archie's birth.

I think the party was in 2018 prior to Christian Jones joining KP. I will double check and confirm or correct.

ETA:
The birthday party was March 2018.
 
Last edited:
I agree with you, they didn’t.

But one never had anything but arranged for him and the other obviously, and I do feel for her with this, massively misunderstood royal life and had watched one too many hallmark films about meet and marrying a Prince.
Yes. Based on Prince Harry's memoir "Spare" he realized that his bachelor home at Nottingham Cottage and that he did his own grocery shopping was a bit surprising to Meghan. She appeared to have different expectations for how royals lived.
 
Yes. Based on Prince Harry's memoir "Spare" he realized that his bachelor home at Nottingham Cottage and that he did his own grocery shopping was a bit surprising to Meghan. She appeared to have different expectations for how royals lived.

I think she was living more comfortably in Toronto than the life he was living as a member of the BRF. I remember reading that she bought him a couch and I was surprised looking at pictures of his closet which was pretty small and sparse. I think she knew before she married him that it wasn't going to be a life of sitting around being waited on.
 
I think she was living more comfortably in Toronto than the life he was living as a member of the BRF. I remember reading that she bought him a couch and I was surprised looking at pictures of his closet which was pretty small and sparse. I think she knew before she married him that it wasn't going to be a life of sitting around being waited on.

I came away with a different impression after reading Prince Harry's recollections in "Spare." However we can agree to disagree.
 
I don't think that has been posted, but ITV aired a report that corroborates the Byline Times report regarding Harry being cut off financially.

I am not trying to get anyone to drink my Kool-Aid, but I think that Harry, or someone on his behalf, is the source to both the Byline Times and ITV of the allegation that his father stopped supporting him due to him refusing to remove the aide's name from his legal papers. I am not stating that he was not asked to remove the name and Charles / his proxy, expressed displeasure, but I don't think that this was the sole infraction. Although to backpedal a bit, if the Sandringham Agreement included something to the effect that Harry cannot involve royal staffers in legal proceedings and he did exactly that, and furthermore was asked to remove the name as part of compliance with the agreement but he refused, oh well...

~~~

Prince Harry 'cut off' after refusing to remove name of palace aid from legal papers
Thu 26 Oct 10pm • ITV News understands that Prince Harry was cut off financially after he refused to remove the name of a palace aide from legal action against The Sun.


https://www.itv.com/watch/news/prin...-name-of-palace-aid-from-legal-papers/j9wc2x7
 
Well we shall see what else Byline publishes regarding this.
 
I don't think that has been posted, but ITV aired a report that corroborates the Byline Times report regarding Harry being cut off financially.

I am not trying to get anyone to drink my Kool-Aid, but I think that Harry, or someone on his behalf, is the source to both the Byline Times and ITV of the allegation that his father stopped supporting him due to him refusing to remove the aide's name from his legal papers. I am not stating that he was not asked to remove the name and Charles / his proxy, expressed displeasure, but I don't think that this was the sole infraction. Although to backpedal a bit, if the Sandringham Agreement included something to the effect that Harry cannot involve royal staffers in legal proceedings and he did exactly that, and furthermore was asked to remove the name as part of compliance with the agreement but he refused, oh well...

~~~

Prince Harry 'cut off' after refusing to remove name of palace aid from legal papers
Thu 26 Oct 10pm • ITV News understands that Prince Harry was cut off financially after he refused to remove the name of a palace aide from legal action against The Sun.


https://www.itv.com/watch/news/prin...-name-of-palace-aid-from-legal-papers/j9wc2x7

He continued to be financed by his father for I think 6 months, a great deal of money. His father had agreed to help during the transition.
Has this accusation been brought up before , or has it just appeared now. So either Harry is providing this information or there are leaks from the palace. I bit ironic that. Maybe it is true but Charles didn’t think there was the evidence to support the accusation, there could be a dozen versions of this. Why has it taken all this time to come out. Did it appear in spare. How many more lives are they going to destroy.if the name remained in the legal papers why did it take so long to become public or was nobody interested so they are bumping it up again.
 
Harry lived the way he lived because he was a bachelor prince who wanted to be London based, so yes his London digs were modest.

Meghan knew that royals had grand accommodations because we know for sure that she had been to second son Andrew's Royal Lodge residence. Per Harry in Spare, Meghan repeatedly said "wow" while walking through the now Wales' KP residence, although the "wow" visit took place after their wedding, I doubt if that was the first time Meghan was in the Wales' London home. As the girlfriend / fiance, she had also been in the homes of The Queen and Charles.

To be honest, living in some form of grandeur was not an unrealistic expectation, it really was a matter of when not if. Where Meghan may have been misguided is that the grandeur comes over time which may have clashed with the Sussexes Veruca Salt ethos.
 
He continued to be financed by his father for I think 6 months, a great deal of money. His father had agreed to help during the transition.
Has this accusation been brought up before , or has it just appeared now. So either Harry is providing this information or there are leaks from the palace. I bit ironic that. Maybe it is true but Charles didn’t think there was the evidence to support the accusation, there could be a dozen versions of this. Why has it taken all this time to come out. Did it appear in spare. How many more lives are they going to destroy.if the name remained in the legal papers why did it take so long to become public or was nobody interested so they are bumping it up again.

It did not appear in "Spare". I checked earlier, as I have the book.

On page 390, Harry wrote:

"Meg and I sat down to work out exactly how much security we could afford, and how much house. Exactly then, while we were revising our budget, word came down: Pa was cutting me off."

This was around the time the press found out they were at Tyler Perry's house.

There is no mention anywhere of legal paper disputes in relation to the monetary support being terminated. In fact, Harry doesn't suggest any reason for the cut-off.

I was wondering if he got legal advice to keep it out of the book.
 
It did not appear in "Spare". I checked earlier, as I have the book.

On page 390, Harry wrote:

"Meg and I sat down to work out exactly how much security we could afford, and how much house. Exactly then, while we were revising our budget, word came down: Pa was cutting me off."

This was around the time the press found out they were at Tyler Perry's house.

There is no mention anywhere of legal paper disputes in relation to the monetary support being terminated. In fact, Harry doesn't suggest any reason for the cut-off.

I was wondering if he got legal advice to keep it out of the book.


Good question Leopoldine. Thank you for finding the answer from Prince Harry's "Spare."
 
Pa was cutting me off!

This does make me chuckle. He was only 35 poor thing. :lol:
 
Pa was cutting me off!

This does make me chuckle. He was only 35 poor thing. :lol:

Indeed, Harry himself wrote in the very next paragraph:

"I recognized the absurdity, a man in his mid-thirties being financially cut off by his father. But Pa wasn't merely my father, he was my boss, my banker ... "

The para ends with Harry stating that he was "being cast into the void after a lifetime of service. More, after a lifetime of rendering me otherwise unemployable."

The rest of this chapter (81) is the same kind of sympathy-garnering writing.

The thing is, the next chapter is a crisp recounting of details pertaining to Meghan's Daily Mail legal actions regarding The Letter. So, it's not like Harry is reticent to discuss legal matters.

I do think he was advised to not include anything about the aforementioned legal action in which an aide's name may have been mentioned.
 
Well I think you're very admirable for wading through all of that self pitying nonsense! :flowers:
 
Well I think you're very admirable for wading through all of that self pitying nonsense! :flowers:

It's no chore. I love wading through my royal books!

And, this particular Byline revelation about the named aide in legal papers seems to be a Gordian Knot of British libel law, NDA agreements, loyalty and rage. It's interesting.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, Harry himself wrote in the very next paragraph:

"I recognized the absurdity, a man in his mid-thirties being financially cut off by his father. But Pa wasn't merely my father, he was my boss, my banker ... "

The para ends with Harry stating that he was "being cast into the void after a lifetime of service. More, after a lifetime of rendering me otherwise unemployable..."

My head is still spinning on a grown man in his mid-thirties, with so many resources, connections and influence not concerned with making an independent decision, investments, etc. to separate himself from public funds and the mandatory duties of his position.

From what I read, many in the Hollywood community don't know where the next job opportunities will come about and from the start they tend to invest what they earn for any difficult times. Like if a TV series gets canceled, a movie deal doesn't happen, record sales kaput, etc. Most of the celebrities get advice from their wealth management lawyers to invest what they can in things like real estate and such to have income during the in-between job deals.

People like Oprah, Ellen, David Beckman didn't become wealthy overnight. They saved, invested and became self-sufficient.

Harry had everything he could wish for at arm's length, yet failed to prepare for growing up independently of Pa's money. I think is kind of late to recover from that now and the image I have of Archwell is of a pretend non-profit solely based to maintain the lifestyle he is used too with minimum effort. :ermm:
 
Last edited:
It did not appear in "Spare". I checked earlier, as I have the book.

On page 390, Harry wrote:

"Meg and I sat down to work out exactly how much security we could afford, and how much house. Exactly then, while we were revising our budget, word came down: Pa was cutting me off."

This was around the time the press found out they were at Tyler Perry's house.

There is no mention anywhere of legal paper disputes in relation to the monetary support being terminated. In fact, Harry doesn't suggest any reason for the cut-off.

I was wondering if he got legal advice to keep it out of the book.
This in interesting because according to ITV Harry got "cut off" in July 2020 and it supposedly happening suddenly. The media started reporting that they were in California in March 2020 and living at Tyler Perry's house in May 2020. Harry also states that the cut off happened the first half of 2020 and then corrected himself and said the first quarter of 2020.
 
To be fair to Prince Harry I can understand what he means by being unemployable. He was part of the working BRF which meant visiting different charities, representing the Crown abroad etc. it’s not as if he can send in his resume to a law firm or look for something in investment banking. Being a full time working royal doesn’t really transfer over to “real employment” for lack of better words.So what are your options to stay doing what you were doing even though you are miserable or start from scratch and build something that you are passionate about.
 
To be fair to Prince Harry I can understand what he means by being unemployable. He was part of the working BRF which meant visiting different charities, representing the Crown abroad etc. it’s not as if he can send in his resume to a law firm or look for something in investment banking. Being a full time working royal doesn’t really transfer over to “real employment” for lack of better words.So what are your options to stay doing what you were doing even though you are miserable or start from scratch and build something that you are passionate about.

He was in the Army. He could have gone back.
 
To be fair to Prince Harry I can understand what he means by being unemployable. He was part of the working BRF which meant visiting different charities, representing the Crown abroad etc. it’s not as if he can send in his resume to a law firm or look for something in investment banking. Being a full time working royal doesn’t really transfer over to “real employment” for lack of better words.So what are your options to stay doing what you were doing even though you are miserable or start from scratch and build something that you are passionate about.

There are plenty of jobs that don't require a special degree such as law. Harry was never cut out for any kind of academic career. Had he not been a member of the royal family he most likely would not have been able (or ever fancied) the type of lifestyle he now aspires/takes for granted.

Still, with his connections, he could easily have gotten some kind of job in which his skills to connect people would have been valuable - especially if he had gone about leaving the BRF a bit more carefully.
 
Back
Top Bottom