Diana and James Hewitt

[acdc1]

I think that Harry is Charles' son. He doesn't look much like Charles because, IMO, he favors the Mountbattons and the Spencers. His face looks like a young Prince Philip. Charles, to me, looks like King Edward VIII and King George VI and the Windsor side of the family. They don't look alike, but Charles' family is there.

 

[scooter]

This afternoon I had the dubious pleasure of watching Fox News doing an article about "The Anniversary", the concert and the Princes.

The unequivical statement that Harry was absolutely not Charles natural son (backed up with a very fuzzy photo of Harry, James Hewitt and his uncle Charles as they look now and a black and white photo of Diana as a young girl as "proof" of lack of Spencer genes), it happens in all the "Best Families" over there don't you know, stated their expert journalist.

I know, I know, 'expert journalist' is one of the most definitive oxymorons!

However, since this statement was preceded by the claim that 'Harry was admitted to rehab when he was 16, ya just gotta wonda dontcha!

Consider the source. You really just must stop watching Fox. They are completely one sided rabble rousers in America. Sounds like the same where you are! They annoy me so much I just skip right over them. And frankly, isnt that the worst punishment for a station?

 

[BillW65]

Prince Harry, my DNA test conclusively shows......... is the son of........
the late Diana, Princess of Wales and..........

PRINCE CHARLES!​

It is with confidence that I say he has the Mountbatten lips, the Mountbatten ears, the Spencer hair, the Spencer shape of face, the Spencer nose, exactly the same shape and color of eyes that Prince Charles/Prince Philip have.
Trust me, if you really look closely a pic of Harry and a pic of Hewitt together (not just a first or second glance, really look) you will see no resemblance at all.

For me the most striking resemblance to Charles that Harry has is eyes that are close together. I see that as a Mountbatten trait coming from Prince Philip. I also think Harry has his father's ears.

(Sorry if similar thoughts have been expressed but I didn't read through all 12 pages of this thread!!)

 

[RachelD]

I think Harry has a resemblance to his Grand-Father, Prince Phillip.

 

[TonyaR]

It's too bad that something this erroneous is still being discussed. Prince Harry has already had his DNA tested when he was a child, and so has Prince William. Diana had both boys tested in 1995 when Harry was 11 and William was 13 at the request of "the Senior Royals" for just this reason.
They are both Charles' sons. Diana wasn't even involved with Hewitt when Harry was born, nor was she involved with him in the months before Harry was conceived.
As a member of the Royal Court, the daily whereabouts of Diana, Princess of Wales were recorded in meticulous detail. The records are public and can be examined by anyone who wants to see them (and they're published in The Times, anyway).

At the time that Prince Harry was conceived, Prince William (who was born 21st June 1982) was about 18 months old. He was 2 years, 3 months when Harry was born. Diana and Charles were actively still "a couple" at that time, and they were still sleeping together. Prince Harry was born on 15th September 1984.
The records are perfectly clear on this matter: Diana first met (then) Major James Hewitt in the summer of 1986. As an officer in the Life Guards - the Royal bodyguards, so to speak - Hewitt's movements are pretty much a matter of record, too, and any claim that he met Diana earlier than the official record states can be regarded as fiction.

It's unfortunate that Diana chose a lover who had red hair, it's given rise to a lot of unfair speculation. Diana might have some problems, but she knew her duty. She gave Charles an heir and a spare before she indulged in a relationship with anyone else.
Consider this:
Anyone could've obtained a sample of Harry's DNA and had it tested. Even leaving out the fact that Diana had her sons tested, if Prince Harry were NOT Charles' son, it would have been revealed well before now.

Could Harry have really gone through Eton and Sandhurst without one person somewhere, somehow, getting a sample of his DNA? It's not that hard to get hold of - a discarded bandaid, a hairbrush left in the bathroom, a sweaty facecloth, saliva, etc. It would be the work of a moment to check the DNA against the Royal bloodline - Prince Phillip's DNA is on record, as he gave a sample in order to help identify the remains of the Russian Royal family.



It's a titillating theory simply because it would cause utter devastation in the Royal Family (being illegitimate would prevent Harry's ascending to the throne, altering the succession, etc etc) and the scandal would be a wonder to behold, but it isn't going to happen.

 

[Iluvbertie]

It's too bad that something this erroneous is still being discussed. Prince Harry has already had his DNA tested when he was a child, and so has Prince William. Diana had both boys tested in 1995 when Harry was 11 and William was 13 at the request of "the Senior Royals" for just this reason.
They are both Charles' sons. Diana wasn't even involved with Hewitt when Harry was born, nor was she involved with him in the months before Harry was conceived.
As a member of the Royal Court, the daily whereabouts of Diana, Princess of Wales were recorded in meticulous detail. The records are public and can be examined by anyone who wants to see them (and they're published in The Times, anyway).

At the time that Prince Harry was conceived, Prince William (who was born 21st June 1982) was about 18 months old. He was 2 years, 3 months when Harry was born. Diana and Charles were actively still "a couple" at that time, and they were still sleeping together. Prince Harry was born on 15th September 1984.
The records are perfectly clear on this matter: Diana first met (then) Major James Hewitt in the summer of 1986. As an officer in the Life Guards - the Royal bodyguards, so to speak - Hewitt's movements are pretty much a matter of record, too, and any claim that he met Diana earlier than the official record states can be regarded as fiction.

It's unfortunate that Diana chose a lover who had red hair, it's given rise to a lot of unfair speculation. Diana might have some problems, but she knew her duty. She gave Charles an heir and a spare before she indulged in a relationship with anyone else.
Consider this:
Anyone could've obtained a sample of Harry's DNA and had it tested. Even leaving out the fact that Diana had her sons tested, if Prince Harry were NOT Charles' son, it would have been revealed well before now.

Could Harry have really gone through Eton and Sandhurst without one person somewhere, somehow, getting a sample of his DNA? It's not that hard to get hold of - a discarded bandaid, a hairbrush left in the bathroom, a sweaty facecloth, saliva, etc. It would be the work of a moment to check the DNA against the Royal bloodline - Prince Phillip's DNA is on record, as he gave a sample in order to help identify the remains of the Russian Royal family.



It's a titillating theory simply because it would cause utter devastation in the Royal Family (being illegitimate would prevent Harry's ascending to the throne, altering the succession, etc etc) and the scandal would be a wonder to behold, but it isn't going to happen.

Could you please provide a link to the story that Diana had the boys DNA tested at the request of senior royals?

I have been following the royals for well over 40 years now and I have never heard that story so a link would be appreciated.

 

[windsorbrides1]

Diana and Hewitt

James Hewitt stated and hoping once and for all to end the speculation that he did not get sexually involved with the Princess of Wales until 1986. He met her a couple of time before this in 1982 when he was playing polo with Charles. he shook her hand spoke to her a moment after the matches when the players and their wives would go to the tent for refreshments. He said he never met her on a more personal level until she came to the barracks for riding lessons in 1986. If you're interested read "Love And War" by James Hewitt

 

[acdc1]

I think it's a shame that people are spreading rumors like this. Sure, James Hewitt has red hair, but so do about 1 million other people in the world, including some of the Spencer's. It's a family trait that some people get. Besides, I think that Diana knew it was her duty to at least give Charles an heir and a spare, for the good of the monarchy and the people. She did her duty, gave birth to William then to Harry. I think that they are both Charles' sons. And, even though I'm certainly NOT suggesting having an affair if your marriage is in trouble, Diana wasn't the only guilty party, because Charles and Camilla were certainly faithful. I think Diana knew, since day 1 of the honeymoon til the day of the divorce, even to the day of her death, that Charles still loved Camilla. It's not that he didn't care for Diana, but he actually was in love with Camilla. I think that after a while, she got bored, so she decided she had to do something. But I think that something was after Harry, so he's safe.

 

[TonyaR]

Also read the the book "Diana: The Last Word" by Simone Simmons and Ingrid Seward (of Majesty Magazine)
In that book, Simone claims the late Princess Diana of Wales was ordered to arrange a blood test for her youngest son to prove James Hewitt was not his father. She says this followed Diana's Panorama TV interview in which she revealed she and Hewitt had been lovers. The book states that William also underwent a blood test but neither prince was told the reason. It states that both tests proved Charles was the father,

This all came out in 2005 and there was an article in The Sun and several other papers and tabloids. According to the article, Prince Philip hit the roof when he heard that rumours were circulating that Hewitt might be the father of Prince Harry.
The article said that Simone stated in her book that Diana showed her a letter from a 'Senior Royal' demanding the tests. It arrived after her admission about the affair with Hewitt to Martin Bashir in November 1995. The article said that Diana refused to confirm that Prince Philip was the author of the letter.
Supposedly Diana took the rumours seriously and said "If people worked the dates out properly they would see that it's nothing to do with Hewitt."
"It's pretty obvious he's a Windsor. In colouring he's a Spencer, but he has Charles' eyes."
James Hewitt himself has always claimed he didn't become accquainted with Diana until 1986, and also he's always denied paternity.

Even though he isn't the most honourable man in the world, if he's saying he isn't Prince Harry's father it makes sense to believe him. He'd gain more if he were. I believe that if he were Harry's father, he would have tried to stake his claim years ago so that he could capitalise on it in some way.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Also read the the book "Diana: The Last Word" by Simone Simmons and Ingrid Seward (of Majesty Magazine)
In that book, Simone claims the late Princess Diana of Wales was ordered to arrange a blood test for her youngest son to prove James Hewitt was not his father. She says this followed Diana's Panorama TV interview in which she revealed she and Hewitt had been lovers. The book states that William also underwent a blood test but neither prince was told the reason. It states that both tests proved Charles was the father,

This all came out in 2005 and there was an article in The Sun and several other papers and tabloids. According to the article, Prince Philip hit the roof when he heard that rumours were circulating that Hewitt might be the father of Prince Harry.
The article said that Simone stated in her book that Diana showed her a letter from a 'Senior Royal' demanding the tests. It arrived after her admission about the affair with Hewitt to Martin Bashir in November 1995. The article said that Diana refused to confirm that Prince Philip was the author of the letter.
Supposedly Diana took the rumours seriously and said "If people worked the dates out properly they would see that it's nothing to do with Hewitt."
"It's pretty obvious he's a Windsor. In colouring he's a Spencer, but he has Charles' eyes."
James Hewitt himself has always claimed he didn't become accquainted with Diana until 1986, and also he's always denied paternity.

Even though he isn't the most honourable man in the world, if he's saying he isn't Prince Harry's father it makes sense to believe him. He'd gain more if he were. I believe that if he were Harry's father, he would have tried to stake his claim years ago so that he could capitalise on it in some way.

So you're saying this based on the version of events stated in a book and The Sun newspaper.

Whereas another book, which also has an author with connections equally strong, states that no DNA test ever took place namely 'After Diana: William, Harry, Charles and the Royal House of Windsor' by Christopher Andersen.
'Andersen knows his subject inside out, a fact acknowledged by Scotland Yard, who consulted him during Operation Paget, their investigation of Di's death. In the ten years since the horrific crash in the Alma Tunnel in Paris, Andersen recounts the spellbinding evolution of the Royals--and the interconnects, and many disconnects--between them, their subjects, and the world at large.' Amazon.com: Reviews for After Diana: William, Harry, Charles, and the Royal House of Windsor: Books: Christopher Andersen

I have read this book I might add.

Andersen even goes further:

Andersen says the paternity question has long gnawed at Harry and may have played a role in his occasionally boorish behavior in recent years. Andersen says Harry was concerned enough about his paternity that he volunteered for a DNA test — an idea quashed by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II. "Even if it were proven, it would not mean he'd be banished from the family — Charles would never change his feelings toward Harry," Andersen says. Question lingers 'After Diana': Who is Prince Harry's dad? - USATODAY.com

So if Seward et. al. are correct Diana had tests done at the insistence of senior royals while Andersen's version not only says no tests have been done but that Harry has asked for them and the Queen has said no.

I am waiting for definitive proof that DNA tests have actually taken place as we seem to have two versions: one that yes they have while others that no they haven't and that in both versions it was done/not done at the insistence of the Queen - strange!

 

[TonyaR]

I believe that Harry isn't James Hewitt's son. James Hewitt says he isn't, and I believe he knows who came from his loins and who didn't. Prince William and Prince Harry were conceived fairly close together, just two years between them. Since both Diana and James Hewitt have stated that they didn't become involved until 1986 and Prince Harry was born in 1984, (meaning he was conceived in 1983) but people refuse to acknowledge that as being a factor in him not being Harry's father, then perhaps we should start assuming that James Hewitt is Prince Williams father as well?

Other than balding at an early age, Prince William is every bit a Spencer. He doesn't have very many Windsorish looks. Prince Harry looks like a Spencer as well, AND he has Prince Phillip's looks also. The older Harry gets the more he looks like his grandfather, whereas William doesn't look like his grandfather or his grandmother or his father.
Red hair isn't the only trait that people can share in common. James Hewitt and Prince Harry look nothing alike in the face or in the body. Hewitt is short, shorter than Prince Charles and Princess Diana both. If people want to believe he's Harry's father, it would make just as much sense to assume that he's is William's father as well.

If Diana and Hewitt are assumed to be lying about having an affair in 1986, when would they have spent time together prior to that time?
Prince Charles himself said he didn't become intimate with Camilla again until 1985. Prior to that time Charles and Diana were still a couple and they were still spending time together.
So if can be assumed that Hewitt was intimate with Diana in 1983, then shouldn't it be assumed that he was intimate with Diana in 1981 also? Prince Harry actually looks much more like a Windsor than Prince William does, so perhaps William is another person we should be asking about DNA tests for?

By Charles and Diana's own admission, the part of their marriage where they lived as an actual couple lasted 5 years, until 1985. Diana wasn't the first to cheat, Charles was.
But if Hewitt were Prince Harry's father, then Diana would have been the first to cheat. Both of them have said that she was not. Also if Hewitt were Harry's father, that would mean that they lived their lives as a couple less than 3 years instead of the 5 that they both claimed. Of course everyone could be lying just to cover up, but what would James Hewitt gain out of that?

 

[Elspeth]

I think this would have stopped being an issue if he hadn't piped up about this hypnosis business and said he knew Diana earlier than 1986. Even though he said it was just a casual acquaintanceship, people are going to wonder why he bothered to put himself through hypnosis in order to remember whether he'd said "hello" to her in passing a couple of times at parties, and certain elements of the press are expert at insinuation.

 

[TheTruth]

I agree Elspeth, and I don't really believe in hypnosis (sorry to be so down-to-earth lol). He seems to want everybody to doubt about Diana. I mean, nobody cares if he saw her one or two times at parties beside the 'anti-diana' who would probably turn that into a conclusion of Diana being unfaithful since 1981. That's really poor of him to give such things to TV, a guy like him knows very well what people and media will say about it. They had an affair for 3 years if I remember correctly. Doesn't he have a little of affection left for her ?

 

[Skydragon]

then perhaps we should start assuming that James Hewitt is Prince Williams father as well?

Why should anyone make that assumption? William is every bit a Windsor x Spencer, apart from the teeth.
As I have said, I and many people do not see any resemblance to Philip.

If people want to believe he's Harry's father, it would make just as much sense to assume that he's is William's father as well.

Again why, many a wife has passed off a 2nd or 3rd child as her husbands after an affair.

Diana wasn't the first to cheat, Charles was. But if Hewitt were Prince Harry's father, then Diana would have been the first to cheat. Both of them have said that she was not.

According to who? I have been unable to find any statement from Charles or Camilla to back up that statement, perhaps you can provide a link.

 

[TheTruth]

According to who? I have been unable to find any statement from Charles or Camilla to back up that statement, perhaps you can provide a link.

Even if I like Diana, I must agree with you Skydragon lol. The couple was broken into pieces. The two were totally deseperate. Who can blame them for having an affair with someone? When you don't have anybody that understands you then you go look for a person who will confort you. It's a human situation.

 

[Skydragon]

Even if I like Diana, I must agree with you Skydragon lol. The couple was broken into pieces. The two were totally deseperate. Who can blame them for having an affair with someone? When you don't have anybody that understands you then you go look for a person who will confort you. It's a human situation.

I don't blame any of them for having an affair, if both parties in a marriage are perfectly happy, then neither looks elsewhere, IMO.

 

[TheTruth]

I don't blame any of them for having an affair, if both parties in a marriage are perfectly happy, then neither looks elsewhere, IMO.

Yep, absolutely . Hewitt wasn't as faithful to Diana as Camilla was to Charles. I wonder what happened in this man's head to use a person he has loved for 3 years and turn her in a buisness .

 

[branchg]

I think it's ridiculous to think that Diana would be so foolish as to give birth to a child who was not of the blood royal while still married. As willful and difficult as she could be, she wasn't crazy.

Harry is clearly the son of Prince Charles.

 

[Roslyn]

I have previously stated here that I believe Harry is Charles' son, because of physical features and mannerisms and because Hewitt denies paternity. As wel as that, I do not believe that during her marriage Diana would have given birth to a child that was not - or might not have been - Charles'. Diana would not have exposed a child to the risk of being discovered as the child of an adulterous relationship. She would never have been so cruel to a child.

 

[Vanesa]

I don't understand why people has all their opinions mixed up with their liking-disliking feelings. I noticed that people who are Prince Charles supporters, seems to believe that James Hewitt really is Prince Harry's father, and Lady Diana supporters seems to wanting the opposite. We are looking for the truth, and truth has nothing to do with our own wishes or likings.

All of you knows that I'm not a big Lady Diana fan. I accept she has a certain charisma and she was really a beauty. Some modern people took her as the symbol of new Royalty and calls her "The Princess of the people", a thing I think she was not. But I think that Prince Harry IS NOT James Hewitt's son. We are repeating ourselves but Mr. Hewitt himself never claimed to be the Prince's father, and as ToniaR wrote there were DNA test on both Princes. I believe what the book she quotes says, why not? After all the turmoil this affair is causing, do you really believe that Her Majesty the Queen would let things like they are, and accept as her grandson and Prince a boy who isn't so? British intelligence service is very active, and if Prince Harry wasn't the Queen's grandson they would have already know it. Be sure of it...Diana could have been childish, too modern for my taste, etc, etc, but she was not fool and know her duties better than anyone.

I also noticed that Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall supporters seems to believe that Lady Diana meet Hewitt before 1986. I'm not against the Prince of Wales and I'm happy he could have married the woman he truly loved, but I reckon he must have wait to his divorce before they indulged himself to go with Camilla Parker-Bowles. So, I'm not a fanatic but a person who tries to see the truth beyond the persons who are involved in the facts. I can criticize Lady Diana when she deserves it, but not when she is innocent. Some people jumps over her only for she is Lady Diana and this is unfair. And I normally supports Prince Charles, but when he is wrong, he is wrong and I don't hide it. It seems that some of his supporters should want that Lady Diana had had an affair with Hewitt only for, as the Prince was unfaithful to his wife while he was still married, they could make people forgive this. So, it's a little like saying: "Prince Charles was unfaithful to Lady Diana, but look! She also was unfaithful to him!".

People: the truth is the only thing in thw world that makes people really free. If we search the truth in all, we should be less unfair every day and our life more close to goodness.

Vanesa.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I don't understand why people has all their opinions mixed up with their liking-disliking feelings. I noticed that people who are Prince Charles supporters, seems to believe that James Hewitt really is Prince Harry's father, and Lady Diana supporters seems to wanting the opposite. We are looking for the truth, and truth has nothing to do with our own wishes or likings.

All of you knows that I'm not a big Lady Diana fan. I accept she has a certain charisma and she was really a beauty. Some modern people took her as the symbol of new Royalty and calls her "The Princess of the people", a thing I think she was not. But I think that Prince Harry IS NOT James Hewitt's son. We are repeating ourselves but Mr. Hewitt himself never claimed to be the Prince's father, and as ToniaR wrote there were DNA test on both Princes.

I have asked for links to this evidence and received a version based on ONE book and a reported article in The Sun (hardly a reliable newpaper). I then showed how another book reports the exact opposite.

I am not convinced that DNA testing has ever taken place particularly as the two sources mentioned - mine and TonyR's both claim that the DNA tests were done/not done on the orders of the Queen.

If you have additional sources, from somewhere other than a tabloid newspaper or a book by Seward and Simone please show it as the Andersen book clearly says the opposite.

Personally I don't believe that DNA has taken place for the simple reason that, in law, there is no need for it.

Once Charles accepted Harry as his child Harry became his child and as Charles has never disowned Harry then Harry is legally Charles' child and entitled to all the benefits and other things associated with being Charles' child.

I also believe very strongly that Charles is Harry's father based on Harry's resemblance to Charles paternal grandfather as a young boy.

 

[GömdNatt]

Consider the source. You really just must stop watching Fox. They are completely one sided rabble rousers in America. Sounds like the same where you are! They annoy me so much I just skip right over them. And frankly, isnt that the worst punishment for a station?

without getting into politics, fox is not the worst. I can't stand CNN, personally. Although, Fox really has started to get on my nerves lately. I have found no good news station, with the exception of BBC America.

But, getting back on topic, looking at harry, I find it hard to believe he isn't Charles son. I can see Charles in him, not as much as in William, but I see it.

 

[Roslyn]

I don't understand why people has all their opinions mixed up with their liking-disliking feelings. I noticed that people who are Prince Charles supporters, seems to believe that James Hewitt really is Prince Harry's father, and Lady Diana supporters seems to wanting the opposite. We are looking for the truth, and truth has nothing to do with our own wishes or likings.

I hope the proximity of your post to mine does not mean that you inferred from mine that I am a Diana "supporter". I didn't like Diana much at all, but I try to give credit where I think it is due.

I also noticed that Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall supporters seems to believe that Lady Diana meet Hewitt before 1986.

I am in this camp, but believing Diana met Hewitt before 1986 is not the same as believing they commenced their affair before that time.

 

[Avalon]

I don't understand why people has all their opinions mixed up with their liking-disliking feelings. I noticed that people who are Prince Charles supporters, seems to believe that James Hewitt really is Prince Harry's father, and Lady Diana supporters seems to wanting the opposite. We are looking for the truth, and truth has nothing to do with our own wishes or likings.

All of you knows that I'm not a big Lady Diana fan. I accept she has a certain charisma and she was really a beauty. Some modern people took her as the symbol of new Royalty and calls her "The Princess of the people", a thing I think she was not. But I think that Prince Harry IS NOT James Hewitt's son. We are repeating ourselves but Mr. Hewitt himself never claimed to be the Prince's father, and as ToniaR wrote there were DNA test on both Princes. I believe what the book she quotes says, why not? After all the turmoil this affair is causing, do you really believe that Her Majesty the Queen would let things like they are, and accept as her grandson and Prince a boy who isn't so? British intelligence service is very active, and if Prince Harry wasn't the Queen's grandson they would have already know it. Be sure of it...Diana could have been childish, too modern for my taste, etc, etc, but she was not fool and know her duties better than anyone.

I also noticed that Prince Charles and Duchess of Cornwall supporters seems to believe that Lady Diana meet Hewitt before 1986. I'm not against the Prince of Wales and I'm happy he could have married the woman he truly loved, but I reckon he must have wait to his divorce before they indulged himself to go with Camilla Parker-Bowles. So, I'm not a fanatic but a person who tries to see the truth beyond the persons who are involved in the facts. I can criticize Lady Diana when she deserves it, but not when she is innocent. Some people jumps over her only for she is Lady Diana and this is unfair. And I normally supports Prince Charles, but when he is wrong, he is wrong and I don't hide it. It seems that some of his supporters should want that Lady Diana had had an affair with Hewitt only for, as the Prince was unfaithful to his wife while he was still married, they could make people forgive this. So, it's a little like saying: "Prince Charles was unfaithful to Lady Diana, but look! She also was unfaithful to him!".
Vanesa.

I'm a Charles & Camilla supporter and in my opinion, Prince Harry is 100% Prince Charles' son - I just see too much of Charles and Philip in Harry, to believe the opposite.

If I like Charles and Camilla, I don't think that must necessarily mean I don't like Diana.
I don't know when Hewitt and Diana met - only Hewitt, Diana and possibly Charles could give a definite answer to that. But I do believe Diana wouldn't be stupid enough to have someone else's child during her marriage.

And in any case, even if I theoritically accepted Harry is not Charles's biological son, does it change much? Charles is the only father Harry has ever had, he loves him, he took care of him and brought him up - if it was theoritically proved Harry is not his son, I don't think Charles's feelings for him would change in any way.

This said, I stand by what I say - I'm convinced Prince Charles is Harry's biological father. Harry's mannerism that resembles Charles may be obtained in years, but ears, nose, eyes, hands - all of these are identical for both Harry and Charles.
In fact, Harry' face looks exactly like his father's, minus chin and hair colour. At least to me.

 

[TheTruth]

Some people jumps over her only for she is Lady Diana and this is unfair. And I normally supports Prince Charles, but when he is wrong, he is wrong and I don't hide it. It seems that some of his supporters should want that Lady Diana had had an affair with Hewitt only for, as the Prince was unfaithful to his wife while he was still married, they could make people forgive this. So, it's a little like saying: "Prince Charles was unfaithful to Lady Diana, but look! She also was unfaithful to him!".

People: the truth is the only thing in thw world that makes people really free. If we search the truth in all, we should be less unfair every day and our life more close to goodness.

Vanesa.

Finally someone who doesn't stay still on his position ! Thank you so much Vanesa for reconizing that we can sort things out in an objective way, without involving our personal feelings about who we like and who we hate. Those who like Prince Charles and make Diana a stupid woman for having a child with someone else get it all wrong IMO. I can't choose between Charles and Diana, I mean I don't have to neither. I love Diana and Charles, they were so different. Even as a Diana 'supporter', I admitt she has made mistakes (Panorama Interview, getting with Dodi Al Fayed (IMO) , etc ...) and I'm not going to defend her for that, she's a big girl (well 'was'...). Although I refuse to believe that James Hewitt is Harry's father. Like I said in a previous post, those who think that are somehow the ones who don't like Diana. Sad for them if they can't see the truth and put their hatred beside for one moment ...

 

[Duchess]

i was a diana fan and i also like charles and camilla so the argument about like/dislike isn't a valid one for me. i also feel that IF harry were hewitt's son the argument that it COULDN'T/WOULDN'T be hidden isn't valid either. before charles and diana's divorce we were all saying there's no way that they could ever divorce but look what happened. never say never, especially in this day and age. i remain open minded as to the biological parent. i do, however, firmly believe that charles is a wonderful and devoted father. we have no valid proof that diana and hewitt carried out their affair before the already acknowledged dates and we have no valid proof if dna tests have been carried out. suppose dna tests have been done and he were hewitt's son. would HM let the information become public knowledge??? i don't think she would. i think she would do everything she could to make sure that it was kept private.

 

[TheTruth]

would HM let the information become public knowledge??? i don't think she would. i think she would do everything she could to make sure that it was kept private.

But you can hide the truth from the people endlessly.

At the time Harry was made, the couple had already problems although after his birth Diana described this part of her married life like one of her best. If Charles had realised he couldn't possibly be the father of Harry, it wouldn't have been a happy time for them. You know what I mean ?

 

[Duchess]

But you can hide the truth from the people endlessly.

At the time Harry was made, the couple had already problems although after his birth Diana described this part of her married life like one of her best. If Charles had realised he couldn't possibly be the father of Harry, it wouldn't have been a happy time for them. You know what I mean ?

i'm assuming that you mean you "can't" hide the truth endlessly and i would agree with you. if hewitt were the father then it could very well become public knowledge at some point, totally against the wishes of HM.

as for that period being one of the happiest, that's only based on what diana has said. i believe that she may have had a false sense of security at this point or that she was putting a positive twist on the state of the marriage for the sake of media. it's my firm belief that this marriage was doomed to failure before it even got off the ground.

 

[TheTruth]

i'm assuming that you mean you "can't" hide the truth endlessly and i would agree with you. if hewitt were the father then it could very well become public knowledge at some point, totally against the wishes of HM.

Lol, yes sorry for the wrong spelling.

as for that period being one of the happiest, that's only based on what diana has said. i believe that she may have had a false sense of security at this point or that she was putting a positive twist on the state of the marriage for the sake of media.

Maybe, but I believe it was a spontenous declaration, not a considered answer to avoid press speculations. I think she said that in the 'secret tapes'. To be sure of it, we should ask Charles but I doubt he will ever tell us...

 

[Skydragon]

Like I said in a previous post, those who think that are somehow the ones who don't like Diana. Sad for them if they can't see the truth and put their hatred beside for one moment ...

I think it is immaterial as to whether you are a Charles & Camilla supporter or not. The only reason it might come across as that is because they are the ones willing to consider all possible scenarios. IMO, there are people about that no longer believe the sun shone out of Diana's proverbial and they also see that as with very many marriages, what you see is not always what you get.

Back when Harry was born, DNA testing, as we know it today, did not exist.

Traditional blood tests involve the study of genetic traits or "markers" such as blood types (A, B, AB or O) and Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA). A battery of tests is necessary, requiring a relatively large blood sample. This is often a problem with newborns and young infants. DNA-based testing, which studies the genetic material directly, is 10 to 100 times more precise than traditional testing and requires only a few drops of blood or a swab of the mouth

Charles is the only father Harry has ever had, he loves him, he took care of him and brought him up - if it was theoritically proved Harry is not his son, I don't think Charles's feelings for him would change in any way

I agree with that 100%

would HM let the information become public knowledge??? i don't think she would. i think she would do everything she could to make sure that it was kept private.

We are in total agreement on that!