The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 8: April - August 2023

[Sunnystar]

As Spare was a best seller lots of people have wanted one. Harry probably offered a copy that was in his hand luggage. And the air steward didn’t object, in fact wanted a pic with Harry and posed with him. That doesn’t sound like an unwilling participant to me!

Was anyone questioning the willingness of the air steward to accept the book or pose for the photo? I thought the questions here were "why is Harry carrying around a copy of the book in his luggage?"

 

[tommy100]

Well they could just go and buy one its not sold out and I've seen it heavily discounted in plenty of stores. But no one said the guy didn't want one, more why is Harry sad enough to be carrying copies around with him? I wonder where he'll leave one next...this could turn into a where's the spare book next game.

Quick someone rush to the courtroom see if he left one in the witness stand? I wonder if he has buried one in the gardens of Frogmore House?

 

[Ista]

Let's move on from worrying about why Prince Harry was carrying a copy of his book, or defending how many copies of the book sold.

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

Here is a piece from the New York Times about Harry “seeking revenge.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/10/...ytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

 

[Ghost]

Here is a piece from the New York Times about Harry “seeking revenge.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/10/...ytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

I love it when opinion pieces leave out details that don’t align with the opinion. In this one, Harry himself denied that “the royal family is racist” or something. But let’s continue with this line, it serves well. Also, when acknowledging that all married ins are subject to press abuse, let’s single out poor Meghan because sexism (all women who married in had it), classism (don’t get me started, the only one spared this was his mother) and racism (see above.) And so on.

 

[gerry]

I am delighted with the photo of flight attendant Holden Pattern (Holding Pattern!) and the Prince Harry. Clearly the NYTimes article describing the absurdity of a British Prince (Panda!) claiming to be just like the rest of us will provide much entertaining food for thought. Thank you!

 

[Queen Claude]

I don't think it's illegal to pay PIs to find and provide information, provided they don't use illegal methods so Harry's legal team would have to show evidence that those particular PIs did that, which they haven't been able to show, unlike in Nikki Sanderson's case.

The tracking device, which is a terrible thing to do, could have been put there by anyone so even though it's likely to have been linked to press stalking, there's no evidence it was so who are they going to pin it on? It could have been any PI working for any newspaper.

That was the question I asked earlier, so there has been cross-examination about about the PI invoices? Who was cross-examined and when? Thanks.

 

[Denville]

Is the court case over?

 

[Alison H]

Is the court case over?

There are two more cases to be heard.

 

[Alisa]

The Duke paid a visit to San Diego and attended the Warrier Games.

"The final day of competition for #WarriorGames2023 was extra special with a visit from Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex. Prince Harry spent time with athletes and their families, and watched the Sitting Volleyball Finals as the 2023 Warrior Games came to a close."

Article and photos:

Prince Harry Makes Surprise Appearance in San Diego to Root on U.S. Armed Forces at the Warrior Games

Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, sat court-side in a surprise appearance at the Warrior Games in San Diego, marking his first outing since testifying in a London court

people.com

 

[Somebody]

His visit to the Warrior Games in Colorado Springs in May 2013 was the inspiration for the Invictus Games, so it makes sense for him to visit - especially since it is taking place in California.

 

[Lori138]

The above story is the kind that I, and I think most people would prefer to see about Harry rather than all the negative headlines he perpetuates of his own accord.

 

[Alison H]

Agreed. It's nice to see him doing something positive.

 

[Asteria12]

The above story is the kind that I, and I think most people would prefer to see about Harry rather than all the negative headlines he perpetuates of his own accord.

I heartily agree!

 

[TLLK]

The above story is the kind that I, and I think most people would prefer to see about Harry rather than all the negative headlines he perpetuates of his own accord.

I agree. This is the type of story that I would prefer to read about Prince Harry.

 

[Toledo]

You know that expression be careful on what you say because it will come back to haunt you?

I assume this is what is called in the USA 'The Streisand Effect'. When you make noise to be private it only encourages people to dig deeper into your claims. In the case of Harry, he happily bragged about a lot of things he did and got away during his single life of wild parties in reckless abandon.

Doing drugs is nothing to brag about unless is followed by some form of line to acknowledge those were not the right choices and conduct for such a public figure.

I hope him well, but he is in a lot of legal Visa troubles in the USA.

Prince Harry's US visa legal battle escalates as scathing statement released

Excerpt:
"There are only three possible ways in which the Duke of Sussex could have entered the United States on a visa:
(1) Prince Harry disclosed the full extent of his drug use and received a waiver;
(2) DHS blatantly ignored the law; or
(3) Prince Harry lied on oath."

 

[Prinsara]

Without getting political, this very right-wing foundation is attempting to score points by attacking the current administration for "lack of transparency" (and what could be argued as a cheap publicity stunt while seeking very private information) while entirely ignoring the fact it was the previous administration who admitted him.

I wasn't aware there were things like waivers for drug use.

 

[Queen Claude]

Behind a paywall, https://www.wsj.com/articles/meghan-markles-archetypes-podcast-at-spotify-wont-be-renewed-44311f4f

Meghan Markle’s ‘Archetypes’ Podcast at Spotify Won’t Be Renewed
Duchess of Sussex’s show is casualty of audio company’s revamped approach
By Anne Steele and Sarah Krouse
Updated June 15, 2023 5:23 pm ET

https://deadline.com/2023/06/meghan-markle-prince-harry-spotify-archetypes-1235418471/

Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Part Ways With Spotify
By Anthony D'Alessandro
June 15, 2023 3:26pm

The Sussexes have separated from Spotify, Deadline has confirmed.

As part of their reported $20M deal with Spotify, inked back in 2020, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle had the podcast Archetypes, which the latter hosted.The podcast [...] won’t be getting a second season despite talks.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are rethinking their deals to find better homes and partnerships for content. There’s also a chance that Archetypes could wind up elsewhere, we hear. At the end of April, the Duchess of Sussex signed with WME with the agency also repping Archewell, her content creation label with Prince Harry. Building the duo’s film and TV production, brand partnerships and overall businesses is the priority at WME.

 

[Iluvbertie]

You know that expression be careful on what you say because it will come back to haunt you?

I assume this is what is called in the USA 'The Streisand Effect'. When you make noise to be private it only encourages people to dig deeper into your claims. In the case of Harry, he happily bragged about a lot of things he did and got away during his single life of wild parties in reckless abandon.

Doing drugs is nothing to brag about unless is followed by some form of line to acknowledge those were not the right choices and conduct for such a public figure.

I hope him well, but he is in a lot of legal Visa troubles in the USA.

Prince Harry's US visa legal battle escalates as scathing statement released

Excerpt:
"There are only three possible ways in which the Duke of Sussex could have entered the United States on a visa:
(1) Prince Harry disclosed the full extent of his drug use and received a waiver;
(2) DHS blatantly ignored the law; or
(3) Prince Harry lied on oath."

I query this point.

I have applied for a US visa - in 2018 - and all I had to do was fill in a form 'on line'. At no time was I required to take any 'oath' when filling in the form - either when filling in the form or on arrival.

I don't even remember being asked about use of drugs but a friend has told me the question is 'convicted' of drug use not just drug use'. If it is 'convicted' then Harry can rightly answer 'no' as he hasn't been convicted of drug use.

 

[Somebody]

The signature for visa application states 'I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.' - so, it is treated as an oath. Otherwise perjury wouldn't apply.

See this example (a different visa type than Harry most likely used but I assume they all have the exact same statement).

The relevant question on the form (see page 34) about drug use is not about being convicted but about abusing or being addicted to drugs - something that clearly applies to Harry per his own memoir:
- Are you or have you ever been a drug abuser or addict? Yes/No, Explain

(and the question above is: Do you have a mental or physical disorder that poses or is likely to pose a threat to the safety or welfare of yourself or others?)

The question that your friend referred to is probably the one on the next page:
- Have you ever violated, or engaged in a conspiracy to violate, any law regarding controlled substances?

 

[Iluvbertie]

I didn't sign any form - it was done online so no way to sign. At no time did I print the form or have any opportunity to sign anything so no way did I take any oath. An oath is also only taken with a bible in hand and I certainly didn't do that.

The visa application I filled in didn't go for 34 pages - it took me all of 3 minutes to fill in and was two pages in length. The UK visa must be different to the one Aussies need.

 

[Prinsara]

I didn't sign any form - it was done online so no way to sign. At no time did I print the form or have any opportunity to sign anything so no way did I take any oath. An oath is also only taken with a bible in hand and I certainly didn't do that.

The visa application I filled in didn't go for 34 pages - it took me all of 3 minutes to fill in and was two pages in length. The UK visa must be different to the one Aussies need.

Presumably you applied through something like this: https://visaguide.world/us-visa-2/how-to-apply-for-us-visa/australia/ and were not seeking an immigration visa, which has no waiver and is exponentially more complicated?

Although the US has been known to deny entry to foreign travellers with a drug history. It's basically never a good idea to assume that they will go easy on you whether perjury comes into it or not.

 

[Noble Consort Ming]

I didn't sign any form - it was done online so no way to sign. At no time did I print the form or have any opportunity to sign anything so no way did I take any oath. An oath is also only taken with a bible in hand and I certainly didn't do that.

The visa application I filled in didn't go for 34 pages - it took me all of 3 minutes to fill in and was two pages in length. The UK visa must be different to the one Aussies need.

An oath is not only taken with a bible. I took an oath when I became a US citizen. No bible or any other item in sight. Likewise when I applied for a passport.

Also, you didn't apply for a VISA. You got an ESTA which is the only thing required for Australians for short visits.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Behind a paywall, https://www.wsj.com/articles/meghan-markles-archetypes-podcast-at-spotify-wont-be-renewed-44311f4f




https://deadline.com/2023/06/meghan-markle-prince-harry-spotify-archetypes-1235418471/

And Daily Mail has reported that they won’t get the 20 million dollar payout

 

[Kenya]

And Daily Mail has reported that they won’t get the 20 million dollar payout

I guess that makes sense. According to The Hollywood Reporter:

The end of the partnership was in part due to Archewell’s low output of content, given that Spotify typically requires multiple series or multiple episodes of a show released on a regular basis for its exclusive podcast deals, a person with knowledge of the matter told THR.

It will be interesting to see if they're able to get a deal elsewhere like the Obamas did with Audible. Given the lack of output at Spotify, it's hard for me to imagine it, but who knows.

I'll be really interested to see if their deal with Netflix survives. Their documentary was obviously a success, but "Pearl" was scrapped and nobody cared about the leadership documentary they helped produce. I suppose a lot will depend on how Heart of Invictus does and if they can prove people care about them in a context not related to his family.

 

[wbenson]

It's not a huge surprise that Spotify would want to make changes. Spotify has apparently never turned a profit, and interest rates have gone up since 2020, so there's less money to throw around.

 

[Alison H]

The visa application I filled in didn't go for 34 pages - it took me all of 3 minutes to fill in and was two pages in length. The UK visa must be different to the one Aussies need.

No - if we're going to the US on holiday, we fill in an ESTA application, which'll be the same as the one you did. It's valid for 2 years, but only for trips of 3 months maximum. If you're applying to live and work in the US, it's a much longer form, which'll be the one Harry had to fill in.

 

[muriel]

No - if we're going to the US on holiday, we fill in an ESTA application, which'll be the same as the one you did. It's valid for 2 years, but only for trips of 3 months maximum. If you're applying to live and work in the US, it's a much longer form, which'll be the one Harry had to fill in.

Quite right. Two different applications, one for a visitor, one as a resident.

 

[Somebody]

Exactly. A visa waiver (ESTA) is not a visa but a travel authorization, so you may travel to the USA without a visa.

A visa not only requires a much longer form, it also requires a visit to a US embassy to be interviewed (as does a change in type of visa - the first time you are abroad you'll have to go to an embassy for another interview).

Depending on your nationality you might be eligible for a visa waiver as a visitor (or still need to go through the whole visa application process), however, if you want to live in the USA either as a temporary or permanent resident, you need to go through the whole process independent of nationailty.

 

[Kataryn]

Exactly. A visa waiver (ESTA) is not a visa but a travel authorization, so you may travel to the USA without a visa.

A visa not only requires a much longer form, it also requires a visit to a US embassy to be interviewed (as does a change in type of visa - the first time you are abroad you'll have to go to an embassy for another interview).

Depending on your nationality you might be eligible for a visa waiver as a visitor (or still need to go through the whole visa application process), however, if you want to live in the USA either as a temporary or permanent resident, you need to go through the whole process independent of nationailty.

But with a diplomat's passport?