The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 6: Aug. 2021- Oct. 2022

[Lori138]

I am sure that the Duke's law firm are loving every minute of this! $$$$

 

[hereditarytitles]

I am sure that the Duke's law firm are loving every minute of this! $$$$

I don't believe harry's lawfirm will win. He is only claiming that he doesn't get full security protection as a royal such as he used to have. Maybe that is how he explains that he doesn't take his wife and children to GB because of securtiy. He claimed that the royal security plus Metro police (which he was used to) dont cover visits for his wife and children, His private security in the US which he is paying himself doesen't get access to information that the GB police has (such as people who have threatened to kill him and his family, some of that racist antiroyal and radical). And i read somewhere that the MP says "Nobody can rent us"

I don't think that this applies to prominent and famous people.

Does anybody know how securtiy was handled in Britain about Edward and Wallis Simpson, which is the only example that might apply to Harrys andMeghans situation.
Many things have changed since then, but it would still be interesting to know what kind of securtiy they had in their exile in France (if at all) and when they visited in GB. (which I cannot remember ever ocurred)

 

[Alison H]

I find this whole situation extremely bizarre. What does he hope to achieve by it? He is no longer a working royal, so he is no longer entitled to publicly-funded security. End of. He may feel at risk, but the same applies to a lot of famous people and they all have to fund their own security, and, no, that does not include access to the police force. If the police received any intelligence of a direct threat to him and his family, they would pass it on. Are the police meant to provide security to all footballers, pop stars, actors, politicians, top business people and anyone else high-profile?

 

[camelot23ca]

Ironic a Prince of the Realm is at odds with his grandmother's government to the pojint of legal action; when will he see sense?

To me, the sensible thing would have been for them to say nothing about the security issue and then discreetly see what arrangements could be made with the police once some time had passed. By that I don’t mean asking for an arrangement identical to what they had before they stepped down as working royals, but rather to see what sort of flexibility and room for compromise might have existed based on their new situation.

It sounds like Harry was used to receiving blanket security because of his position in the Royal Family, and then once he and Meghan stepped down and decided to leave the country they became “regular” VIPs, with their access to security in the UK based on ongoing assessments of their risk level. I think we can take it as a given that the police and the government wouldn’t want any harm to come to Harry or his family on their watch, and would be more likely to err on the side of caution when determining how much security they’d require. But by continuing to bring these lawsuits, Harry is forcing them to take a hard line, which they’ll need to maintain for as long as this issue has the attention of the media and the public.

.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

I find this whole situation extremely bizarre. What does he hope to achieve by it? He is no longer a working royal, so he is no longer entitled to publicly-funded security. End of. He may feel at risk, but the same applies to a lot of famous people and they all have to fund their own security, and, no, that does not include access to the police force. If the police received any intelligence of a direct threat to him and his family, they would pass it on. Are the police meant to provide security to all footballers, pop stars, actors, politicians, top business people and anyone else high-profile?

He hopes to "be proved right" publicly, because he can't let anything go since he feels so hard done by.

He needs to prove he was right about what was said or not said during the meetings before he left the UK; he needs to prove he is right about the "right or wrong" people surrounding and influencing The Queen; he needs to prove certain of his family members are acting in concert against him and acting to influence decisions concerning him. In short, he needs to prove that Harry's side of every story is the only side of the story.

This is a man who feels he was denied the right to tell his side of things his whole life, and now he just can't stop. Not only does he need to share his perspective on everything, his is the only perspective.

Of course it has nothing to do with actual security concerns. As you rightly point out, the police will respond to prevent any risk to Harry and his family in the appropriate manner, as they always have. This is not a gamble they will take.

 

[Leopoldine]

The more fuss the Sussexes make about security, the more attention they will get, both positive and negative. You could make the case that they are striving to create controversy so that their need for state security seems more justified amidst the inevitable negative stories.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

I am curious as to whether he has asked for 24/7 protection from the Santa Barbara police, since there have been several attempted break-ins at his home. I suspect if he did contact the police, they have not provided round-the-clock protection even if he offered to pay for it. They may increase patrols around the mansion but I suspect that area is pretty well guarded since it is a gated community and a lot of high profile people live nearby.

 

[TLLK]

I am curious as to whether he has asked for 24/7 protection from the Santa Barbara police, since there have been several attempted break-ins at his home. I suspect if he did contact the police, they have not provided round-the-clock protection even if he offered to pay for it. They may increase patrols around the mansion but I suspect that area is pretty well guarded since it is a gated community and a lot of high profile people live nearby.

Interesting question US Royal Watcher as Santa Barbara Co. is the place where they've had the most security breaches, not the UK.

 

[yukari]

I am curious as to whether he has asked for 24/7 protection from the Santa Barbara police, since there have been several attempted break-ins at his home. I suspect if he did contact the police, they have not provided round-the-clock protection even if he offered to pay for it. They may increase patrols around the mansion but I suspect that area is pretty well guarded since it is a gated community and a lot of high profile people live nearby.

Well, for one his private security (in US) is armed. Second, maybe they get inside information from CIA.
That's what he wants, right? The rights to carry gun while in UK and intelligence information.

Just wondering how much of his perceived potential threats are real/valid threats and how much of it are his own paranoia. Many famous celebrities have unhinged fans and anti-fans, so there's potential threats there, yet they manage without having round the clock police protection and Intelligence inside information
Maybe instead of "investing" his money to his lawyers, joining therapy will be better investment for him ...

 

[Prinsara]

He's not getting a thing from the CIA. I will state that with confidence.

For one thing, any major threats to them in the US that aren't handled by the police would be domestic and go to the FBI.

The CIA has far more pressing things to deal with than the Sussexes.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Well, for one his private security (in US) is armed. Second, maybe they get inside information from CIA.
That's what he wants, right? The rights to carry gun while in UK and intelligence information.

Just wondering how much of his perceived potential threats are real/valid threats and how much of it are his own paranoia. Many famous celebrities have unhinged fans and anti-fans, so there's potential threats there, yet they manage without having round the clock police protection and Intelligence inside information
Maybe instead of "investing" his money to his lawyers, joining therapy will be better investment for him ...

You're right about his private security being armed in the U.S. I doubt that the FBI or the CIA would share information with Harry's security. In the U.S., Federal agencies are not responsible for uncovering threats against private persons. If a Federal agency learns about a threat to a private person, they would share the information with the local authorities. It is very rare that local law enforcement would actual protection but they would inform a person that there is a threat.

 

[FigTree]

I don't really understand this. He never for one minute thought his life would he removed from him. To me all of these cases is throwing all the toys and baby out with the bath water. I mean why?

 

[Sun Lion]

I don't really understand this. He never for one minute thought his life would he removed from him. To me all of these cases is throwing all the toys and baby out with the bath water. I mean why?

They truly wanted the half-in/half-out arrangement FigTree.

I mean, that was their long-term plan.

That was going to solve everything … all their problems with the British media, the Palace machinery and courtiers, where they stood in regards to the other members of the Royal Family and having their projects bumped to favour the higher-ups, all those issues.

They both wanted the life away from Palace control, but hadn’t sorted out all the nuts and bolts before leaving suddenly when the leaks started to come out.

Now they are having to deal with the consequences of their fears … which may be based more on paranoia than reality … and the financial cost of providing a sense of safety to themselves must be astonishing.

Even when living at Frogmore Cottage they feared a random attack, not just media intrusion.

People living and working around them were ordered to not wave at or approach Meghan when she was out with their dog in the secured part of Windsor Great Park … an area not accessible to the general public.

Perhaps their concerns about security come from them feeling this is something that can be controlled.

Whereas all the other stresses in their new life are not under control either, focussing on this helps with those, with having at least some control over something.

I think, despite many pluses, their Californian life must also have many drawbacks that they have to surmount.

I don’t think it is all friends, fun and sunshine, being feted and looked after, having succes just land on their doorstep.

I think there must be a lot of downside and it was not what they actually wanted, but what they ended up with when their original dream was stopped, the half and half.

 

[Curryong]

[.....]

And as for threats and danger, an envelope containing suspicious white powder was sent to the couple quite early on in the marriage and the Palace and authorities had to test it and deal with it.

https://www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-sent-envelope-of-white-powder-2018-2

https://time.com/5170283/london-police-white-powder-meghan-markle/

There was also a court case a couple of years ago involving racists who made viable threats against Harry about Archie and ‘race treason’ for marrying Meghan and having a child with her. That may have been just the tip of the iceberg.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-19/teen-neo-nazi-jailed-for-terror-threat-prince-harry/11223274


And another case, earlier this year, involving racist threats and calling for Archie to be ‘put down’ on a podcast in Britain. Court case.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-podcast-hosts-who-praised-ariana-grande-bomb

https://www.yahoo.com/news/racist-podcast-hosts-issued-death-085520394.html

 

[Sun Lion]

I am curious as to whether he has asked for 24/7 protection from the Santa Barbara police, since there have been several attempted break-ins at his home. I suspect if he did contact the police, they have not provided round-the-clock protection even if he offered to pay for it. They may increase patrols around the mansion but I suspect that area is pretty well guarded since it is a gated community and a lot of high profile people live nearby.

I’m not sure it is a gated community US Royal Watcher, though I’ve seen that said in some places on the internet.

When Harry and Meghan where first moved there, a local went along and posted several photos of the guardhouse … empty at the time, I mean looking like it wasn’t in use … the front gate, house number etc.

I think the entrance is up a bit of a private road/laneway, but the main road you drive in from doesn’t have a barrier across it.

That road is quite busy as it is where a lot of people park to then walk one of the trails … the trailhead is not far away apparently.

Well, pre-Covid it was popular.

There was nowhere else for people to park, no car park provided, so people parked around there in the street.

There was one man caught on their property, but I think he didn’t know they lived there and there were no charges if I remember properly.

I can imagine anyone living in their house could feel quite isolated, especially at night. The grounds are extensive and there doesn’t seem to be anyone nearby.

Great for privacy, but that would be a drawback if you are nervous about being in a big empty house at night.

The Tyler Perry house was at the end of its road, and there was a manned barrier across that road for several homes I think. Plus I believe Mr Perry lent his own security people.

And then when the trails around the Perry house were re-opened after Covid restrictions, screens had to be erected to stop people being able to look in from the surrounding hills.

The safest house seems to have been the one in Canada, on an island and all.

Same time zone as the couple’s Los Angeles based business staff, but not the California lifestyle.

I do think there is good security where Harry has been playing polo … I saw something about which entrance you had to use if you had applied for a ticket etc. I think that is very controlled, no-one can just wander in.

 

[FigTree]

I’m not sure it is a gated community US Royal Watcher, though I’ve seen that said in some places on the internet.

When Harry and Meghan where first moved there, a local went along and posted several photos of the guardhouse … empty at the time, I mean looking like it wasn’t in use … the front gate, house number etc.

I think the entrance is up a bit of a private road/laneway, but the main road you drive in from doesn’t have a barrier across it.

That road is quite busy as it is where a lot of people park to then walk one of the trails … the trailhead is not far away apparently.

Well, pre-Covid it was popular.

There was nowhere else for people to park, no car park provided, so people parked around there in the street.

There was one man caught on their property, but I think he didn’t know they lived there and there were no charges if I remember properly.

I can imagine anyone living in their house could feel quite isolated, especially at night. The grounds are extensive and there doesn’t seem to be anyone nearby.

Great for privacy, but that would be a drawback if you are nervous about being in a big empty house at night.

The Tyler Perry house was at the end of its road, and there was a manned barrier across that road for several homes I think. Plus I believe Mr Perry lent his own security people.

And then when the trails around the Perry house were re-opened after Covid restrictions, screens had to be erected to stop people being able to look in from the surrounding hills.

The safest house seems to have been the one in Canada, on an island and all.

Same time zone as the couple’s Los Angeles based business staff, but not the California lifestyle.

I do think there is good security where Harry has been playing polo … I saw something about which entrance you had to use if you had applied for a ticket etc. I think that is very controlled, no-one can just wander in.

But even his sister in law was seen chatting to people on a public train only last week.

No one is saying they shouldn't have security if they want it...but I do not think the tax payer should pay for it. They pay for their own fine. I mean his aunt and uncle don't have any in their private life. Neither do his cousins. Harry would have lost his as time went on too.

Pay for his own fine but I do not think for one minute that aside from staying on royal properties and accompanying his family in the UK that he should have publically funded ones.

 

[Hallo girl]

But even his sister in law was seen chatting to people on a public train only last week.

No one is saying they shouldn't have security if they want it...but I do not think the tax payer should pay for it. They pay for their own fine. I mean his aunt and uncle don't have any in their private life. Neither do his cousins. Harry would have lost his as time went on too.

Pay for his own fine but I do not think for one minute that aside from staying on royal properties and accompanying his family in the UK that he should have publically funded ones.

He has already been told that each visit will be judged on an individual basis, and his needs assessed. He was getting his security, just low profile, with little publicity.

The rest of us would never have really known what was involved and at what cost, but he has now turned it into a court case where everything will be for the public to scrutinise, well maybe not all of it for security reasons.

The cost of the royal security will become a talking point at a time of rising living costs and the public will not like it.


It is almost like having the security is not enough but that he needs everybody to know that he has it, he needs to win, this man has a huge chip on his shoulder and he is going out to get people.

If he thinks he will have outriders and blacked out cars everywhere they go he is in for a shock, it doesn't work like that and he knows it. In general it is more discreet.

Other family members appear to be able to conduct a private life with little attention and low profile security. Sometimes the more obvious the security more dangerous the situation.

For somebody who wanted out of the RF and all its faults as he sees them he is still desperate for the benefits.

 

[FigTree]

For somebody who wanted out of the RF and all its faults as he sees them he is still desperate for the benefits.

He wanted out of the parts he didn't want and pursumed he could keep others. As with everyone I suppose a lot of his life was taken for granted and he didn't associate that with the job of being a Prince. Unfortunately his whole life was to do with being a Prince. And when he left he lost it all. But he does have more to loose potentially as well.

I would concentrate on my current life and just let go.

 

[yukari]

But even his sister in law was seen chatting to people on a public train only last week.

No one is saying they shouldn't have security if they want it...but I do not think the tax payer should pay for it. They pay for their own fine. I mean his aunt and uncle don't have any in their private life. Neither do his cousins. Harry would have lost his as time went on too.

Pay for his own fine but I do not think for one minute that aside from staying on royal properties and accompanying his family in the UK that he should have publically funded ones.

Actually in this second lawsuit, he's suing the gov and Met police for refusing his offer to pay them (because obviously, Met police are not hired armed bodyguards).

However, in his first lawsuit (which still not over yet even though some of media already putting the headline that Harry "won" it), the judge gave him a go for his judicial review request, but he dismissed his argument that he has rights for Met protection because of his status as 6th in line to the throne. Meaning if he insists to pay for Met protection, it will be as a private citizen and not as a royal. If he succeed winning this 2nd lawsuit, it will give precedent to other private citizen (including people like Abramovich and other billionaires) that as long as they can pay, they can hire Met police as their personal security protection.
(As discussed in this thread few months ago, the Met can be 'hired' for event security protection, but not as round the clock personal protection).

Because apparently for Harry, hiring ex-RPO as his bodyguards is not enough because they can't carry gun and they don't have access to Intelligence information.

 

[Somebody]

So, the MET is available for rent? But only for events? In that case Harry could argue that his trip is the event that needs protecting...

Looks like the MET is already muddling the waters...

 

[yukari]

So, the MET is available for rent? But only for events? In that case Harry could argue that his trip is the event that needs protecting...

Looks like the MET is already muddling the waters...

I believe it's not that simple and it's been discussed extensively here few months ago so I won't repeat it. But to put it simply, if Harry organised an event at Hide Park attend by 1000 people yes he can 'hire' Met service to police the event and not as his protection, but if he makes private visit to a charity or just stop by at a pub he can't 'hire' Met police. What Harry wants is hiring round the clock protection and not them policing a single event.

Here's one of the previous discussion, you can start from here:

(...)


Section 25 of the Police Act 1996, which your last screencap cites, says:

25 Provision of special services.

(1)The chief officer of police of a police force may provide, at the request of any person, special police services at any premises or in any locality in the police area for which the force is maintained, subject to the payment to the [F1local policing body] of charges on such scales as may be determined by [F2that body].

[F3(1A)The Chief Constable of the British Transport Police Force may provide special police services at the request of any person, subject to the payment to the [F4British Transport Police Authority] of charges on such scales as may be determined by that Authority.]

(2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .​

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/16/section/25

So, yes, the police forces may provide "special police services" which are billed to the person to whom the services are provided, if the person has requested those services.

However, "may" is not "must", and I cannot see anything in Section 25 or the screencaps that would imply the police would be legally liable if they had refused to police Ms. Moss's wedding. In fact, the part of the article visible in the screencap does not even specify whether she requested the police presence or if it was the police who deemed it necessary.

(...)

 

[Hallo girl]

So, the MET is available for rent? But only for events? In that case Harry could argue that his trip is the event that needs protecting...

Looks like the MET is already muddling the waters...

I think it is important to appreciate that police provided for events and paid for by an individual / organisation would probably not be armed.

The ordinary policeman on the street in the UK is not armed, although we do have armed police at various locations and on hand if required.

Harry has made it clear he wants armed protection that is why his own US security is not good enough in his eyes, also information from the security services with regards threats which to be honest I am sure he would be made aware of .

He wants RPO's , and I am not sure if they are available to hire.

 

[Alison H]

Police can be hired, for example by football clubs. But not for private protection. Security guards can be hired, but they can't be armed. Armed protection is only available for senior British or visiting royals, politicians or diplomats. Harry opted out of being a senior working royal. The protection goes with the job. He gave up the job.

 

[TLLK]

A member of Ukraine's Invictus team recalls her phone call with Prince Harry.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...n-medic-53-fighting-war-torture-Russians.html

A Ukrainian medic who was tortured and held captive by Russian forces for three months says a phone call from Prince Harry after her release inspired her to 'continue fighting' for her country.
Volunteer paramedic Yulia Paievska, 53, was kidnapped by Russian soldiers in March while she was heading to treat injured members of public after a bomb attack on a theatre in Mariupol.
She described being interrogated for three months and being told lies that Ukraine had been eradicated in the invasion, The Telegraph reports.
Ms Paievska, a member of Ukraine's team for the Invictus Games, received a phone call from the Duke of Sussex one week after she was released by her captors. She said he spoke 'strongly and sincerely' about the conflict in Ukraine.

'He simply inspired me to continue to fight,' said Ms Paievska. 'He said that he supports Ukraine and all of us.'

 

[Queen Claude]

My understanding is that Harry is willing to pay for Met protection. For me the big question is what is it about Met protection that differs from getting security from a top-notch private security firm, and then once those differences are identified, are those differences relevant to Harry and his family's security needs? The two areas that I am aware of are carrying fire arms and intelligence gathering.

If Harry and his family visit the UK, they will likely be in London when not on protected royal property. London is not some backwater and is in fact a world city, and undoubtedly has private security firms staffed by former Met Police, MI5 and other police and intelligence agencies. If anything, I would think that Harry hiring a global security firm, staffed by former operatives from elite forces from around the globe, and I suspect that London would have one or more security firms of that type, would be better protection than him demanding to pay whatever random Met Police officers get assigned to him / his family when in the UK.

Back to the differences between the Met Police and a private security firm. Regarding being able to carry firearms, while certain Met Police officers can carry firearms, my understanding is that there are very few times those officers have had to use their weapons. IMO Harry would have to show why it is that he feels he needs to be protected by armed security. When he lived in the UK, were there multiple incidents where the RPOs had to deploy firearms to protect Harry, Meghan and / or Archie? Other royals?

Regarding the sharing of information, I think that it should be noted that if TPTB determine that there is a threat then protection is provided at no cost. My understanding is that there is not a lot of information sharing, but that may not be correct. I can see Harry wanting his security team being looped in regarding threats to him and his family and if he can set a precedent for that happening in a non-disruptive, non-discriminatory way that does not compromise intelligence gathering, then fine by me. But again, I want to step back and raise the question, are there previous incidents that can be cited that support that information needs to be shared and if not shared, then Harry and his family are at risk?

 

[Lee-Z]

From what i read, it seems to me that Harry sees threats in the UK that the official parties like the MET don't regard as a threat, like the english gossip press.
I think Harry really considers them just as dangerous as terrorists and imo that's why he's not satisfied with "protection will be given (free) if the MET believes there's a threat" (english not my first language so i can't write it how it should be worded officially).
I think he also doesn't distinguish between 'media' and 'social media' (and the brutal stuff occassionally uttered on the last by individuals).

imo as long as Harry views the UK media that way, there is no possible way he will be happy or considers certain protection 'enough'...no matter how much he sues..

just my 2 cts

 

[Lee-Z]

A member of Ukraine's Invictus team recalls her phone call with Prince Harry.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...n-medic-53-fighting-war-torture-Russians.html



'He simply inspired me to continue to fight,' said Ms Paievska. 'He said that he supports Ukraine and all of us.'

Lovely to read, there is so much positive Harry can bring to the world, i hope he can find the peace of mind to focus on that..

 

[camelot23ca]

If Harry and his family visit the UK, they will likely be in London when not on protected royal property. London is not some backwater and is in fact a world city, and undoubtedly has private security firms staffed by former Met Police, MI5 and other police and intelligence agencies. If anything, I would think that Harry hiring a global security firm, staffed by former operatives from elite forces from around the globe, and I suspect that London would have one or more security firms of that type, would be better protection than him demanding to pay whatever random Met Police officers get assigned to him / his family when in the UK.

But can he afford to pay for that calibre of private firm indefinitely? Harry’s frame of reference is the level of security provided to the nation’s head of state and her direct heir. A lot of that security is centred on the Queen’s property, or government property made available for use by members of the royal family, including Harry, and it’s that level of coverage that looks normal to him (which doesn’t mean that’s the level of security that an objective assessment would determine Harry, Meghan and their children actually need).

 

[FigTree]

But can he afford to pay for that calibre of private firm indefinitely? Harry’s frame of reference is the level of security provided to the nation’s head of state and her direct heir. A lot of that security is centred on the Queen’s property, or government property made available for use by members of the royal family, including Harry, and it’s that level of coverage that looks normal to him (which doesn’t mean that’s the level of security that an objective assessment would determine Harry, Meghan and their children actually need).

Well that is exactly the problem. But in the normal flow of things his security would have decreased anyway.

 

[Queen Claude]

But can he afford to pay for that calibre of private firm indefinitely? Harry’s frame of reference is the level of security provided to the nation’s head of state and her direct heir. A lot of that security is centred on the Queen’s property, or government property made available for use by members of the royal family, including Harry, and it’s that level of coverage that looks normal to him (which doesn’t mean that’s the level of security that an objective assessment would determine Harry, Meghan and their children actually need).

I can't say for sure if he can afford to pay that caliber of firm indefinitely. but if he is willing to pay the legal fees needed to take action against the Home Office and the Met Police, and if he prevails, is willing to pay for Met Police protection, then presumably he has the means in the short-term.