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.
They are not exactly living on the poverty line. They have a large mansion, Meghan dresses in expensive clothes, there is talk of private education for the children. They have staff, so they are doing alright.

Indeed.

By almost any standard- I’d say their lifestyle is pretty opulent. They “only” have one (quite large) home, but that’s about it. They’re not living an upper middle class lifestyle. They’re living a wealthy person’s.

And it will take money to maintain. I doubt they can afford to live forever in the same lifestyle off of what they have now.
 
It's fascinating to realize that even the Sussexes most ardent admirers think they'd abandon all their philanthropy, morals, and high-minded ideals for the sake of remaining in the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed.

In any case, if they're hoping to guilt/coerce/blackmail Charles into bankrolling their lavish lifestyle, they'd better hope their ruinous downfall happens while he's still on the throne. I don't think William would be inclined to give them anything. And should they align themselves with unsavory individuals/world leaders while William is king, I think acts of parliament are more likely than a bailout.
 
Can parliament change Harry's DNA so that he's not related to William?

The hypothetical question isn't which of Harry's relatives would be sympathetic enough to the Sussexes to bankroll them to prevent awkward dealings; it's whether or not the BRF or Great Britain can afford for someone contrary to British interests proclaiming that they're close to the son/brother of the King of England. Whether their diplomatic relations will accept that Harry is a rogue agent rather than an unofficial liaison. Whether making him just Mr. Henry Mountbatten-Windsor (itself a name closely tied to the current British Royal Family) and removing him and his from the line of succession will be enough to divorce him from the institution (and counting on said shady characters not continuing to call him Prince Harry or the Duke of Sussex anyway).

And Harry and Meghan don't have to worry about Sussex fans. There are Sussex fans that will support them in anything they do. Heck, putting the BRF in a situation where they have to support the Sussexes in spite of everything may lead to them supporting them more.
 
It's fascinating to realize that even the Sussexes most ardent admirers think they'd abandon all their philanthropy, morals, and high-minded ideals for the sake of remaining in the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed.

In any case, if they're hoping to guilt/coerce/blackmail Charles into bankrolling their lavish lifestyle, they'd better hope their ruinous downfall happens while he's still on the throne. I don't think William would be inclined to give them anything. And should they align themselves with unsavory individuals/world leaders while William is king, I think acts of parliament are more likely than a bailout.
Philanthropy was just a ruse in my opinion. You don’t abandon a platform where you have the easiest path to make an impact, if you possess high minded ideals. Morality? Not demonstrated by the way in which they treated others, especially family.

The royal family has been saying no thanks since after coronation. It’s high time Harry realizes that the world owes him nothing. The universe took care to give him an over privileged life, yes, with its headaches like everyone else, but he threw all of it away. He needs to leave everyone alone with his champagne problems.
 
Last edited:
Even if every business venture of the Sussexes fail, I think they'll be fine. As a matter of fact, I predict the BRF is going to start supporting them again in the near future.

The last thing the BRF would want is the son and daughter-in-law of the king cozying up to a warlord or an oligarch or a British enemy for the sake of their lifestyle. No amount of "The Sussexes are not affiliated with the British Royal Family" will change how it looks on a global scale.

What do they have to lose? Public respect? They barely have that anyway. Family regard? They barely have that anyway. Security? Said rich oligarch/warlord/enemy will probably work to protect their investment and even if they don't the "Why didn't the British Royal Family protect the Sussexes more?" stories write themselves.

The BRF, however, can't afford headlines like "The son of the king shakes hands with a Russian general" for example. As others have pointed out in this thread, regardless of what the Sussexes do or don't do, they'll always be connected to the BRF. The British people would hate having to support the Sussexes for doing nothing, but I presume they would hate having their patriotic and cultural institution associated with, say, terrorism, because the Sussexes are desperate.

So, I hope for all parties involved, the Sussexes are successful in their business endeavors. Otherwise, imho, it's a choice between the BRF being connected to shady characters because the Sussex have run out of options, or paying the Sussexes to do absolutely nothing.

I got my popcorn ready either way.
Sorry but that ship sailed when it became apparent that rachel & H accepted " free flight's", to /from nigeria from an individual wanted in the usa in connection with a $20.000000 fraud , Whilst I do accept that they may not have known the all the facts before they eagerly accepted the "freebies ", that is no excuse .
 
This brings up something here in the USA from last weekend, it was Father's Day. Anyone have news if the Sussex celebrated it or if any form of congrats from their camp was sent out in social media to grandparents, uncle(s) or their maternal Spencer uncle? I mean, if the brand is about family and family-oriented rhetoric, I expect them, as the saying goes, to talk the talk and walk the walk, too. Right?

Charles owns dogs and likes preserves, did he got a Montecito jar, too or will he get some Sussex dog biscuits later on for his pets? :unsure:

Hahaha....thanks for the laugh.

I am sure you are well aware that:

1. Had the Sussexes celebrated Father's day or let it be known that they sent Father's day wishes across the pond, that they would be accused of trying to compete with the Father's day photo of a cancer-stricken Princess of Wales.

2. Had it be known to the public that Sussexes sent King Charles biscuits for his dogs and/or jam- they would be accused of trying to cash in off royal connections, name dropping, and associations.

I can see the posts now!😂
 
Last edited:
It's fascinating to realize that even the Sussexes most ardent admirers think they'd abandon all their philanthropy, morals, and high-minded ideals for the sake of remaining in the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed.

In any case, if they're hoping to guilt/coerce/blackmail Charles into bankrolling their lavish lifestyle, they'd better hope their ruinous downfall happens while he's still on the throne. I don't think William would be inclined to give them anything. And should they align themselves with unsavory individuals/world leaders while William is king, I think acts of parliament are more likely than a bailout.

Which Sussex admirer thinks that? I'm genuinely curious. The Sussex's actually live a relatively modest life compared to many philanthropists. They have ONE home. There is no vacation home(s), there is no luxury car collection, ownership of a yacht, amassing a large jewelry collection, or having multiple (or any )private jets.

There is nothing lavish about their lifestyle.
 
Which Sussex admirer thinks that? I'm genuinely curious. The Sussex's actually live a relatively modest life compared to many philanthropists. They have ONE home. There is no vacation home(s), there is no luxury car collection, ownership of a yacht, amassing a large jewelry collection, or having multiple (or any )private jets.

There is nothing lavish about their lifestyle.
The philanthropy model you’re referring to is the Andrew Carnegie model, where people who have made a ton of money in some industry or other give away large amounts of it in their lifetime while still leading lavish lifestyles. They do not fundraise, they give away funds. Modern analogues are people like Michael Bloomberg and Mackenzie Scott. The Gates foundation follows that model, though I do think they occasionally accept unsolicited donations for some of their projects.

That is not the type of philanthropy Meghan and Harry do because they do not have access to that kind of capital. (Almost no one does!) Neither are wealthy at the level that supports big scale philanthropy and luxurious living at the same time.

I think many have noticed that their philanthropic commitments have scaled back considerably and some are wondering what it might mean if their private lifestyle also has to be scaled back at some point due to lack of funds, given that there’s obviously money going out but not obviously money coming in. Which is why many are also watching to see if they can establish a successful, sustainable commercial brand- hence the origin of this discussion, which started from wondering if ARO can possibly launch successfully and scale.
 
Which Sussex admirer thinks that? I'm genuinely curious. The Sussex's actually live a relatively modest life compared to many philanthropists. They have ONE home. There is no vacation home(s), there is no luxury car collection, ownership of a yacht, amassing a large jewelry collection, or having multiple (or any )private jets.

There is nothing lavish about their lifestyle.

A huge mansion in a celebrity enclave with far more space than they will ever need?

A private jet here, a private jet there; those that aren't freebies don't come cheap.

That's before we even get on to designer clothing, Hermes blankets, Dior suits etc. etc. (I don't want my post to compete with War and Peace).

With the greatest of respect Alisa, two things:

Firstly, only H&M know what they have and haven't got, and I would automatically question the veracity of anything they may have said about it, based on their (to put it politely) distant relationship with the truth.

Second, to suggest there is nothing lavish about their lifestyle is - and again I'm being as polite as possible - somewhat amusing. Admittedly I grew up in a council house and can only speak for myself, but from where I am standing, their lifestyle is most definitely lavish! Said huge mansion, private jets, Dior suits etc. etc. that is a lavish lifestyle IMHO regardless of who is paying for it. The problem is, H&M cannot afford it.

When they quit the BRF and moved to the US (their stop in Canada was only ever going to be a temporary one IMO) they anticipated boundless riches, and spent it before they earned it. They expected to live like...well, like royalty. Endless big deals a la Netflix and Spotify ad infinitum - but it hasn't happened (and we all saw what happened with Spotify). They thought everyone would want them; perhaps for the briefest moment in time, everyone did. Then, they didn't. I suspect the freebies and favours have rapidly dried up, especially when they have been seen to monetise betraying the BRF and the UK telling tales, and not be careful enough about who they associate with.

The irony of it all is that in the BRF they had all the good things, the lavish lifestyle on a plate, and they threw it away; IMO because they thought they could be get rich quick in the US doing whatever they wanted and doing as little hard work as possible. A massive and critical miscalculation on their part.

Once again, to put it politely (and to avoid getting banned!!!) I think they're in big trouble, certainly financially speaking.

The philanthropy model you’re referring to is the Andrew Carnegie model, where people who have made a ton of money in some industry or other give away large amounts of it in their lifetime while still leading lavish lifestyles. They do not fundraise, they give away funds. Modern analogues are people like Michael Bloomberg and Mackenzie Scott. The Gates foundation follows that model, though I do think they occasionally accept unsolicited donations for some of their projects.

That is not the type of philanthropy Meghan and Harry do because they do not have access to that kind of capital. (Almost no one does!) Neither are wealthy at the level that supports big scale philanthropy and luxurious living at the same time.

I think many have noticed that their philanthropic commitments have scaled back considerably and some are wondering what it might mean if their private lifestyle also has to be scaled back at some point due to lack of funds, given that there’s obviously money going out but not obviously money coming in. Which is why many are also watching to see if they can establish a successful, sustainable commercial brand- hence the origin of this discussion, which started from wondering if ARO can possibly launch successfully and scale.

Thank you :flowers:

All I would add to this, for the record, is that I personally have never considered H&M to be genuine philanthropists on any sort of level.

And on that note, it is a beautiful day here and I am off out to make the most of it! Have a good day everyone! :)
 
Last edited:
Which Sussex admirer thinks that? I'm genuinely curious. The Sussex's actually live a relatively modest life compared to many philanthropists. They have ONE home. There is no vacation home(s), there is no luxury car collection, ownership of a yacht, amassing a large jewelry collection, or having multiple (or any )private jets.

There is nothing lavish about their lifestyle.
My understanding of philanthropy would be people who have mega riches, usually through their own endeavours , who then choose to support the less fortunate, or provide infrastruture for the general public to make use of. Near to where I live there is a beautiful old building which holds a library, the funding for that was from Andrew Carnegie many many years ago, there is a tribute to him on the wall.
I do not see Meghan and Harry in the same way, maybe it is my interpretation that is incorrect, but they appear to raise money from other people then donate it in the name of Archewell, for me that is not philanthropy.
By the way could I ask how you can be sure that they do not own the various items you have listed.
As an add on there is a jewellery collection, size means nothing but the value does, Meghan does have a valuable collection already, some of her pieces belonged to Harrys mother, when you consider the value of the provenance alone.
 
Last edited:
They want more and more and more though. They are restricted to just one home because they haven’t the faintest idea on how to make the kind of money they want. That’s the struggle and complaint.

You need real money to be a philanthropist. Giving out sandwiches is not it. The Carnegie, Gates, Ford of the world made billions and set up foundations to help people and do good work. I commend them, but even then, those are set up for tax break purposes as well.

Nothing is free. You have to work for those riches. Wealth is acquired over time. Unless you are talented at something that the public is willing to part with their money for, there are no get rich quick schemes. Well, you can try but that might land you in legal trouble or fraud or commit treason. Pick a poison…
 
Hahaha....thanks for the laugh.

I am sure you are well aware that:

1. Had the Sussexes celebrated Father's day or let it be known that they sent Father's day wishes across the pond, that they would be accused of trying to compete with the Father's day photo of a cancer-stricken Princess of Wales.

2. Had it be known to the public that Sussexes sent King Charles biscuits for his dogs and/or jam- they would be accused of trying to cash in off royal connections, name dropping, and associations.

I can see the posts now!😂
You're right, they'd have been criticized if they released a greeting for their respective fathers for Father's Day, or even released a photo greeting Harry, for many reasons, but mainly because 1) They're not on good terms with Harry's father, and 2) They're not on good terms with Meghan's father. It's a bit of sensitive day for them, all in all.

However, had they sent jam to Thomas Markle and the man let that be known to the public, I'm sure the Sussexes would have gaina bit of favor from the said public. But I doubt they did that.
 
A huge mansion in a celebrity enclave with far more space than they will ever need?

A private jet here, a private jet there; those that aren't freebies don't come cheap.

That's before we even get on to designer clothing, Hermes blankets, Dior suits etc. etc. (I don't want my post to compete with War and Peace).

With the greatest of respect Alisa, two things:

Firstly, only H&M know what they have and haven't got, and I would automatically question the veracity of anything they may have said about it, based on their (to put it politely) distant relationship with the truth.

Second, to suggest there is nothing lavish about their lifestyle is - and again I'm being as polite as possible - somewhat amusing. Admittedly I grew up in a council house and can only speak for myself, but from where I am standing, their lifestyle is most definitely lavish! Said huge mansion, private jets, Dior suits etc. etc. that is a lavish lifestyle IMHO regardless of who is paying for it. The problem is, H&M cannot afford it.

When they quit the BRF and moved to the US (their stop in Canada was only ever going to be a temporary one IMO) they anticipated boundless riches, and spent it before they earned it. They expected to live like...well, like royalty. Endless big deals a la Netflix and Spotify ad infinitum - but it hasn't happened (and we all saw what happened with Spotify). They thought everyone would want them; perhaps for the briefest moment in time, everyone did. Then, they didn't. I suspect the freebies and favours have rapidly dried up, especially when they have been seen to monetise betraying the BRF and the UK telling tales, and not be careful enough about who they associate with.

The irony of it all is that in the BRF they had all the good things, the lavish lifestyle on a plate, and they threw it away; IMO because they thought they could be get rich quick in the US doing whatever they wanted and doing as little hard work as possible. A massive and critical miscalculation on their part.

Once again, to put it politely (and to avoid getting banned!!!) I think they're in big trouble, certainly financially speaking.



Thank you :flowers:

All I would add to this, for the record, is that I personally have never considered H&M to be genuine philanthropists on any sort of level.

And on that note, it is a beautiful day here and I am off out to make the most of it! Have a good day everyone! :)

We can only speak of what we know. For example, we know they live in a 14 million dollar mansion in Montecito. Until we know that they OWN private jets (hitching a ride doesn't count) , are buying mass quantities of jewelry, and/or have multiple or vacation homes that's all we can say. You say they get freebies- so again what is lavish. The recent trip to Nigeria Megan wore nothing but recycled outfits and lower-mid-level priced clothing.

In Canada and even the first stint out in Los Angeles, they stayed at other people's homes. How did they spend boundless riches before they earned it. Imo, that's actually frugal!

Enjoy your day!
 
I think the Sussex family will be fine. They may not be living the opulent life that members of their family are, but I think they are enjoying the life they chose. Hopefully their future endeavors are successful, and they can give their children a wonderful, loving life.

When all King Charles' grandkids reach the teenage years, we will see how it turns out for one set to be in the UK with a large family support structure and another set in California near every trend, out of control celebrity kids and... Hollywood shamans and their kin.

The life they associate themselves with in California is a culture all on its own like no other place on Earth. It's based on looks, vanity and entertainment. And how successful was your last accomplishment. I recall it was Sylvester Stallone that ages ago said in Hollywood you are as good as your last movie box office.

As an actress of a TV series hardly anyone knew existed, she was destined to fade into the background like the rest of the actors on that show. She got lucky to marry quick and to get good insurance, in the form of two royal kids, for a prosperous future.

But they both need to concentrate on a formula that works in 2024 and not on hit and misses that seem improvised attempts to draw press and People magazine snuff articles. The novelty in the USA wore off fast after the South Park parody. It's like how do you recover when your cover is blown, and you still don't seem to have a solid business to produce revenue unless is a 'let me tell you my story' line of work?
 
Last edited:
I would call that free loading. Frugal is managing your own funds carefully and wisely. Not spending on unnecessary ththings.
To me that is being smart and frugal. Why waste money renting or buying a house in Canada when they had no plans to stay there permanently? It makes more sense to stay with friends until they sorted themselves and decided where they would buy there home.
 
To me that is being smart and frugal. Why waste money renting or buying a house in Canada when they had no plans to stay there permanently? It makes more sense to stay with friends until they sorted themselves and decided where they would buy there home.
That being the case, why did they not choose something cheaper? (in Montecito). They didn't have to buy anything quite so big and expensive. They would have saved a few million just by doing that; I'm assuming they did buy that house but if they didn't, the rent must be colossal.

With respect, being frugal is not buying a mansion with rooms you don't need or hiring private jets to pick up awards and such - I'm assuming here that H&M didn't take a Greyhound bus to New York to pick up her award back along! It's not even about getting freebies off someone else, because that can't always be guaranteed. Being frugal, to me, is spending your own money, carefully, and with an eye on the future.

I'm sorry, but their lifestyle is IMO excessive and extravagant, and unsustainable; we will have to agree to disagree. :flowers:


...

Enjoy your day!

Thank you! Enjoy yours also!
 
They are not good at planning, even though they wrote a manifesto of demands, the strategery (lol) behind it was somewhat lacking. None of what they’ve engaged in (past and present) is what I would call smart. I’m not going to belabor the definition of frugal because I know we all know what it means.
 
Can parliament change Harry's DNA so that he's not related to William?

The hypothetical question isn't which of Harry's relatives would be sympathetic enough to the Sussexes to bankroll them to prevent awkward dealings; it's whether or not the BRF or Great Britain can afford for someone contrary to British interests proclaiming that they're close to the son/brother of the King of England. Whether their diplomatic relations will accept that Harry is a rogue agent rather than an unofficial liaison. Whether making him just Mr. Henry Mountbatten-Windsor (itself a name closely tied to the current British Royal Family) and removing him and his from the line of succession will be enough to divorce him from the institution (and counting on said shady characters not continuing to call him Prince Harry or the Duke of Sussex anyway).
The problem for Harry is that familial relations don't exist in a vacuum. Yes, Harry is the future king's brother. But that carries zero currency because everyone around the world knows that, at the moment, DNA is pretty much the only thing they share. No matter how much Harry and his friends let it be known that he'd be open to a reconciliation, it's clear that William has no desire to communicate with Harry, not even to inform him that his wife is seriously ill.

Harry has no sway with William, so if he starts vacationing on the private islands of shady billionaires or visiting nations with interests hostile to the UK, everyone will see it as Harry going rogue. No one is going to worry about whether those individuals might capitalize on Harry's close connections to the crown because everyone knows Harry burnt those connections to the ground. Had he kept his mouth shut about his family and publicly preserved the impression of being a "much-loved" member of the family, then maybe being related to William could be useful to him. But since Harry, Omid Scobie, and Gayle King have delighted in telling us how awful William has been to poor Harry, we're all well aware how broken their fraternal relationship is. So how is it of any benefit to anyone who would seek to use it for self-gain? At this point, who would look at anything Harry does and think it has William's blessing or that Harry could persuade his brother to do a "favor" for a friend? Who looks at Harry's actions these days and think they reflect the position of the BRF or the UK government?

Bottom line, there were reasons is was advantageous for the BRF to finance the Duke of Windsor's exile. There's no good reason to finance Harry's because he can no longer leverage his position in or his relation to the family.
 
Harry inherited a considerable amount of money from Diana. He probably also inherited money from the Queen Mother and from his grandparents. If carefully invested, that should be plenty to live on ... *if* you live according to your means.
 
Bottom line, there were reasons is was advantageous for the BRF to finance the Duke of Windsor's exile. There's no good reason to finance Harry's because he can no longer leverage his position in or his relation to the family.
That very much gets to the heart of the issue, and as I implied, I think that’s the biggest reason there has been no public overtures of good will or reconciliation.

I very much hope it doesn’t come to that for Harry. Really, a steady stream of income from something as uncontroversial as jam and dog biscuits would be the best thing for everyone and I sincerely hope it comes to pass, even though I don’t think it will.
 
Without rehashing old news I would suggest that William had valid reasons not to inform Harry.
Oh, for sure. I 100% supported that decision.
I very much hope it doesn’t come to that for Harry. Really, a steady stream of income from something as uncontroversial as jam and dog biscuits would be the best thing for everyone and I sincerely hope it comes to pass, even though I don’t think it will.
Same. I find the conversation about what they'll do if the money runs out fascinating, but I certainly don't wish that on the Sussexes. I think it's better for everyone if they remain comfortably ensconced in their current circumstances,
 
The problem for Harry is that familial relations don't exist in a vacuum. Yes, Harry is the future king's brother. But that carries zero currency because everyone around the world knows that, at the moment, DNA is pretty much the only thing they share. No matter how much Harry and his friends let it be known that he'd be open to a reconciliation, it's clear that William has no desire to communicate with Harry, not even to inform him that his wife is seriously ill.

Harry has no sway with William, so if he starts vacationing on the private islands of shady billionaires or visiting nations with interests hostile to the UK, everyone will see it as Harry going rogue. No one is going to worry about whether those individuals might capitalize on Harry's close connections to the crown because everyone knows Harry burnt those connections to the ground. Had he kept his mouth shut about his family and publicly preserved the impression of being a "much-loved" member of the family, then maybe being related to William could be useful to him. But since Harry, Omid Scobie, and Gayle King have delighted in telling us how awful William has been to poor Harry, we're all well aware how broken their fraternal relationship is. So how is it of any benefit to anyone who would seek to use it for self-gain? At this point, who would look at anything Harry does and think it has William's blessing or that Harry could persuade his brother to do a "favor" for a friend? Who looks at Harry's actions these days and think they reflect the position of the BRF or the UK government?

Bottom line, there were reasons is was advantageous for the BRF to finance the Duke of Windsor's exile. There's no good reason to finance Harry's because he can no longer leverage his position in or his relation to the family.
Kenya, this is so well written and contains excellent points. You’re right - due to all of the bridges they’ve torpedoed, anyone who might want to take advantage of Harry’s “connections” will know that he no longer has them.
I think his position is somewhat similar to the Duke of Windsor, but David didn’t write books or give interviews blasting his family. Churchill and the RF agreed to send him to be governor of the Bahamas - some say to get him out of the way. I’ve read that he thought at some point he’d be allowed to move back to Britain but that never happened. I believe that the BRF did not trust the Windsors then any more than they trust the Sussexes now. And I absolutely cannot see William agreeing to fund them the way David and Wallis were funded.
 
Prince Harry opens up about pain of losing Princess Diana

Harry has spoken to the organisation Scotty's Little Soldiers, of which he is a patron, to urge young people not to remain silent when they are grieving.

The emotionally charged video was made in May, when he last came to the UK, and sees the prince talk to Nikki Scott, founder of Scotty's Little Soldiers, as she recounted the harrowing moment she had to tell her five-year-old son, Kai, that his father, Cpl Lee Scott, who served with the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment, had been killed in Afghanistan in 2009. She also had a seven-month-old daughter, Brooke, at the time.

It has been released by the charity in the lead-up to Armed Forces Day on Saturday to highlight the ongoing needs of bereaved military children in the UK
 
Prince Harry will be honored at this year’s ESPYs. The ESPYs are ESPN’s prestigious awards for athletes, sports commentators and people adjacent to sports. This year’s ESPYs will be held on Thursday, July 11th at 8 PM on ABC, and they’re being hosted by ESPY winner and GOAT Serena Williams. ESPN just announced the recipients of their special awards, like the Arthur Ashe Award for Courage (which is going to Steve Gleason) and the Pat Tillman Award for Service. Which is going to Harry. Per ESPN’s media release:

In honor of his tireless work in making a positive impact for the veteran community through the power of sport, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex will receive the Pat Tillman Award for Service, an award given to a person with a strong connection to sports who has served others in a way that echoes the legacy of the former NFL player and U.S. Army Ranger, Pat Tillman.
After serving for 10 years in the British Armed Forces, including two tours of duty in Afghanistan as a forward air controller and Apache helicopter pilot, Prince Harry founded The Invictus Games Foundation, continuing his service by creating an international platform to support wounded, injured, and sick servicemen and women – both active-duty and veterans – who are navigating both physical and invisible injuries. Since inception, the Games have transcended borders and impacted lives across every continent, bringing together competitors from 23 nations, with continued support and programming 365 days of the year.
Now celebrating its tenth year, The Invictus Games has evolved into a globally celebrated and acclaimed organization that celebrates resilience, community, and healing through the power of sport. Past recipients of the Pat Tillman Award for Service include Jake Wood (2018), Kirstie Ennis (2019), Kim Clavel (2020), Marcus Rashford (2021), Gretchen Evans (2022) and the Buffalo Bills Training Staff (2023).
“It’s our privilege to recognize three incredible individuals – Steve Gleason, Dawn Staley and Prince Harry,” said Kate Jackson, VP, Production, ESPN. “These honorees have used their platforms to change the world and make it more inclusive for marginalized and suffering communities, demonstrating incredible resilience, positivity and perseverance, and we’re thrilled to celebrate them at The 2024 ESPYS.”
 
Last edited:

Prince Harry ‘deliberately destroyed’ potential evidence relating to phone hacking claim, court hears​

News Group Newspapers seeking release of emails, as well as texts and WhatsApps, sent and received by Duke of Sussex
27 June 2024 • 12:45pm

Whoaaa… He really is the husband of his wife.
 
Those statements by the newspaper group’s legal representatives are allegations only. It’s usual to have those sort of assertions thrown at the other side during a Civil case.
 
Back
Top Bottom