Royal News and Views

Royal News and Views
[ Royal News and Views ]

March 28 - Sussex Thread

Posted by Susan T on March 28, 2023, 7:34 am

n/t

This message is locked.

Private investigator denies allegations which triggered Harry's action

Posted by Susan T on March 28, 2023, 7:38 am, in reply to "March 28 - Sussex Thread"

A private investigator whose 'confessions' form a key element of a privacy case being brought against Associated Newspapers by Prince Harry, Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Sir Elton John and others has denied their allegations that he acted illegally against them on behalf of the Daily Mail or Mail on Sunday.

(snip)

The case has not yet come to trial and yesterday's hearing was to hear three applications to the judge, Mr Justice Nicklin.

The judge quickly awarded the Mail victory in the first application it made. It asked for anonymity for journalists named in the claims, in order to prevent distinguished journalists having their reputations destroyed in the event that the claims never proceeded to a full trial. Mr Justice Nicklin said this was justified.

The Mail's second application yesterday related to documents – accounting ledgers – which were confidentially supplied by the Mail to the Leveson Inquiry 12 years ago. Those documents are now being used in this case – in breach of a restriction order and confidentiality undertakings given to the inquiry, the newspaper group said.

Mr Beltrami told the judge: 'We are in a situation, I am sorry to say it, where the only clear evidence of the use of unlawfully obtained information is from the claimants themselves.'

The judge has yet to decide on this application. In its third application the publisher asks the judge to rule that the claims are time-barred. They relate to events said to have taken place up to 30 years ago, the vast majority before 2007.

Under the law, privacy claims must be brought within six years. This is to ensure justice for all parties, and to prevent evidence being tainted by fading memories, mental incapacity and/or the death of potential witnesses (at least three are known to have died in this case).

Link: Daily Mail

This message is locked.

Re: Private investigator denies allegations which triggered Harry's action

Posted by Hollie24 on March 28, 2023, 11:28 am, in reply to "Private investigator denies allegations which triggered Harry's action"

It doesn't sound like Harry has much of a case, but I'm not a legal beagle. What's the score so far in terms of cases won/lost/gone to a draw?

This message is locked.

Re: Private investigator denies allegations which triggered Harry's action

Posted by karenl on March 28, 2023, 3:32 pm, in reply to "Re: Private investigator denies allegations which triggered Harry's action"

I found a link to a Barrister who has broken down the case, so far.
After the Levison Inquiry the Statute of Limitations was set at 6 yr. to file any legal actions, the results of the Inquiry were published /revealed in 2011 so anyone wanting to file legal action had until 2017, if I'm understanding it correctly. Here in the US, if someone tries to file a lawsuit after the SOL has expired, then he/she is up the creek, tough cookies, because he/she should have been aware of the time limits imposed.
Next Harry et al want the confidential info/results of the Inquiry made public. That's hitting sacred territory. If the Inquiry's confidentiality is breached, then in future investigations for any reason, people are not going to cooperate giving testimonies, providing highly confidential info for the reason that they're names may be exposed and the info they may have provided. There goes the reason for whistle blowing if the person is not protected for providing vital info.
I'm profoundly sorry the Baroness lost her child in a violent act, but waiting 30 yr.? No. Harry and William went through this in 2011 and with the Inquiry of their mother's death, he shouldn't have brought this up again it's beyond the SOL. Same with EJ and the rest. I love it that EJ didn't seem to have a problem with the DM when he allowed the paper to publish excerpts from his book for a nice sum. Hypocrite.
It's interesting they're going after the DM alone and not including the Murdoch Corp. where it all started...they know why. Fergie tried and got knocked out. In the US the complaints would have been dismissed.

This message is locked.

Harry Claims "Without Doubt" Withheld Info About Phone Hacking

Posted by karenl on March 28, 2023, 3:46 pm, in reply to "Re: Private investigator denies allegations which triggered Harry's action"

"Harry claimed that he became "aware" that the had a claim to bring to the courts in 2018.

He said: "The institution was without a doubt withholding information from me for a long time about NGN's phone hacking.

"That has only become clear in recent years as I have pursued my own claim with different legal advice and representation."

The publisher denies all claims made against them."

"He said: "It is not an exaggeration to say that the bubble burst in terms of what I knew in 2020 when I moved out of the United Kingdom."

Hmm..funny these "revelations" all popped up after he met and married the wife. He's also accused his grandmother, the late Queen of being part of the Royal Family "withholding conspiracy", (my words), you know the grandmother he loved dearly and respected.....of course, he didn't respect anyone else's privacy in the Netflix film or his book.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1751971/prince-harry-royal-family-high-court-phone-hacking

This message is locked.

Re: Harry Claims "Without Doubt" Withheld Info About Phone Hacking

Posted by Susan T on March 28, 2023, 4:18 pm, in reply to "Harry Claims "Without Doubt" Withheld Info About Phone Hacking"

The Leverson Report was published in November 2012. At that time, Harry was 28 years old.

Why was it up to his family to inform him of the findings? Was he living under a rock and was totally unaware of the inquiry and the report?

This message is locked.

Correction: It Should Be "Leverson Inquiry"

Posted by karenl on March 28, 2023, 3:48 pm, in reply to "Re: Private investigator denies allegations which triggered Harry's action"

My memory is mud now days.

This message is locked.

Harry´s Wife : Is She In The UK? (Meghan Markle)

Posted by Hollie24 on March 28, 2023, 11:29 am, in reply to "March 28 - Sussex Thread"

I'm catching up on Tudorials.

This message is locked.

Harry´s Wife : She is Jacquelynn King (Meghan Markle)

Posted by Hollie24 on March 28, 2023, 7:02 pm, in reply to "March 28 - Sussex Thread"

This is an interesting idea. Susan, Martha, and I have all had experience dealing with sock puppets from way back when. Is it possible Meghan's created a modern-day sock puppet?

This message is locked.

Re: Harry´s Wife : She is Jacquelynn King (Meghan Markle)

Posted by karenl on March 29, 2023, 12:01 am, in reply to "Harry´s Wife : She is Jacquelynn King (Meghan Markle)"

Absolutely. I'll so far as to add that Meghan, more than likely, has created more "sock puppets" for herself. It's been expressed that Harry and Meghan don't do anything at Casa del Sussex, but sit in front of the tv while pouring over social media on their phones. Apparently, they use their staff's log in's to get on the platforms, since they announced they "never use or look at social media". Ahem. Both are obsessed with what's said and written about them..as we know.
So yes, Jaquelynn=Meghan? Yep.

This message is locked.

Duking It Out!

Posted by karenl on March 29, 2023, 12:26 am, in reply to "Re: Harry´s Wife : She is Jacquelynn King (Meghan Markle)"

I forgot that Tom Bower is a barrister and he the points he made about the King and Royal Family staying as far away from Harry in these legal matters is spot on plus all these nonsense legal actions Harry is taking on will, down the line, bite him in the rear end.
I'd like to know where all the money for all the different attorney's/legal teams is coming from? As I've said, I come from a family of lawyers plus my one nephew's wife is now a third yr. law student, "it ain't cheap", to sue. The best is Meghan, with her "legal victory" with the DM, had to fork over at least one third of the money to her lawyers.
The worst for Harry is, if he loses, he has to pay all his legal teams and he may have to pay defendant's court and legal expenses. It's a disgusting that he and Meghan are abusing the judicial system in the UK.

This message is locked.

"I Love My Country"

Posted by karenl on March 29, 2023, 12:48 am, in reply to "Duking It Out!"

"The Telegraph's royal correspondent Victoria Ward took to Twitter to write about Harry's witness statement.

Quoting Harry, she wrote: "If the most influential newspaper company can successfully evade justice, then in my opinion the whole country is doomed."

She added: "[Harry] says he is bringing the claim against ANL because 'I love my country and I remain deeply concerned by the unchecked power, influence and criminality of Associated.

"Harry says lawyers kept info about phone hacking at the NoTW [News of The World] from him and William."
I'm trying to remember..wasn't it Palace staff that alerted William that they heard clicking noises on their phones when they were in use and the staff plus William went from there and discovered the phone hacking or the authorities, I should say? I have to look into it.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1752072/prince-harry-love-country-daily-mail-high-court

This message is locked.

Re: "I Love My Country"

Posted by karenl on March 29, 2023, 1:13 am, in reply to ""I Love My Country""

"On 13 November 2005, an article appeared in the News of the World written by royal editor Clive Goodman, that claimed that Prince William was in the process of borrowing a portable editing suite from ITV royal correspondent Tom Bradby.

Following the publication, the Prince and Bradby met to try to figure out how the details of their arrangement had been leaked, as only two other people were aware of it. Prince William noted that another equally improbable leak had recently taken place regarding an appointment he had made with a knee surgeon. After some discussion, the Prince and Bradby concluded it was likely that their voicemails were being accessed.[3]

Their concerns were passed to the Metropolitan Police, who set up an investigation under Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, who managed the Counter Terrorism Command.[4] Clarke reported to Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman, commander of the Specialist Operations directorate.[5] The reason the investigation was passed to Hayman and Clarke, was that Hayman's command included the Protection Command, under whom SO14 provide all Royalty Protection.

Clarke's investigation began as a localised incident involving staff at Clarence House, but the compiled list of possible victims broadened to include: Government ministers; a Member of Parliament; military chiefs; a leading media figure; Premiership footballers; and celebrities. Clarke's investigation team searched the London office of the News of the World, eventually concluding that the compromised voice mail accounts belonged to Prince William's aides, including Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton,[2] and not the Prince himself.[6] "

Wiki, I know..it does have a long and interesting article concerning the entire NOW scandal and consequences, which I will go back to tomorrow..too long for tonight. It's interesting, in the lists of all the people filing lawsuits/complaints against NOW and it's agents Harry is not among them, as we know. It's only "recently" he's decided to go to court. Another interesting thing..what I've gone through so far, NOW and the Mirror came under investigation for phone hacking and unscrupulous practices...the DM was not part of the scandal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_of_the_World_royal_phone_hacking_scandal

This message is locked.

Harry´s Wife : 6 Ways To Overshadow the Coronation

Posted by Hollie24 on March 29, 2023, 12:52 pm, in reply to "March 28 - Sussex Thread"

Reconciling with her dad?

This message is locked.

Re: Harry´s Wife : 6 Ways To Overshadow the Coronation

Posted by karenl on March 29, 2023, 7:13 pm, in reply to "Harry´s Wife : 6 Ways To Overshadow the Coronation"

No, I don't see reconciliation with her father as any option for overshadowing the King.

This message is locked.

Re: Harry´s Wife : 6 Ways To Overshadow the Coronation

Posted by Susan T on March 29, 2023, 7:39 pm, in reply to "Re: Harry´s Wife : 6 Ways To Overshadow the Coronation"

If she reconciles with her father shortly before the coronation, the media will not only drown us in articles about it, but we'll also be treated to articles about how sad it is that Harry is still estranged from his family.

She'll suck a heck of a lot of oxygen out of the room, and that's before she plays the Archie's birthday card.

This message is locked.

Archewell Releases 2021 Tax Filing

Posted by karenl on March 29, 2023, 7:41 pm, in reply to "Re: Harry´s Wife : 6 Ways To Overshadow the Coronation"

"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Foundation in 2021 gave out $3million in grants and raised $13 million from wealthy benefactors and $4,500 in public donations, tax records reveal.

The humanitarian charity has released its latest tax return, which shows it was mostly propped up by two wealthy philanthropists who contributed a combined $13million, while taking in a meager $4,470 from the public.

In total, Archewell received a total $13,005,660 – with $10million coming from an individual donor as DailyMail.com first reported, $3million from another, and $4,470 from other 'contributions and grants. The remaining $1,190 came from 'investment income', documents obtained by DailyMail.com reveal. "

"This has led to speculation that the larger donation was made by Oprah Winfrey in return for the interview the Duke and Duchess of Sussex gave in March 2021, which rocked Buckingham Palace, and the other $3million came from Harry himself, as part of the $20million advance he received for his controversial autobiography Spare.
Archewell dished out $3,096,319 in grants ¿ or 24 per cent of its income ¿ for 2021, tax filings show

Archewell dished out $3,096,319 in grants – or 24 per cent of its income – for 2021, tax filings show

The charity dished out $3,096,319 in grants, which amounts to 24 per cent of its income, and at the end of 2021 had $9,018,590 in reserves.

The document also reveals that Harry and Meghan worked one hour each a week at the foundation, thus, 52 hours a year.

This is similar to one week's full-time work, which begs the question how the couple have been spending their time when Archewell was said to have been their main focus."

I tend to agree that the 10 million came from Oprah and 3 million was put in by Harry. Public donations were only a little over $4400, guess the Lumps are devoted to the pair, but not so devoted as to donate tons of money. One hour a week devoted to the Foundation? Right.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11916253/Archewell-tax-filings-Harry-Meghan-worked-one-hour-week-2021.html

This message is locked.

Re: Archewell Releases 2021 Tax Filing

Posted by Cynthia on March 29, 2023, 7:53 pm, in reply to "Archewell Releases 2021 Tax Filing"

We know that the $10M came from the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, directed by an anonymous donor. I noticed in the 990 that the $10M and the $3M were listed but with NO NAMES of a person or organization. Nothing. I think that's a violation.

This message is locked.

Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Susan T on March 30, 2023, 5:06 pm, in reply to "March 28 - Sussex Thread"

Final paragraph:

Finally, after three years of speculating, the truth may be appearing as to why Meghan and Harry stepped down as working royals. While they may claim it was down to institutional racism, tabloids, privacy, or big bad men in grey suits, the real answer may be more prosaic: the life of a working royal means work and that’s something they aren’t willing to do.

Link: Spectator

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Hollie24 on March 30, 2023, 6:46 pm, in reply to "Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

This bit stood out to me: "But now Archewell have released tax filings for 2021 and they show what we all knew to be true the whole time. Meghan and Harry have spent the last three years doing very little at all. The documents show that the couple worked a grand total of one hour each a week at the foundation, racking up a time sheet of 52 hours in a year. Those chickens aren’t going to look after themselves."

I have many, many years of working more in one week than they've worked in one year. I'm pretty sure everyone here can say the same. What do they do with the other 167 hours per week? They've killed all their social contacts. They don't get invited anywhere. Harry plays the occasional polo match while Meghan does the odd merch and pap walk (and making hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of jewelry and clothes look like Wal-Mart cheapies). Doria no doubt does the school run. What do they do?

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by karenl on March 30, 2023, 7:36 pm, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

As I stated, I've read that non-staff workers (pool, lawn care) have "mentioned" that Harry and Meghan spend their days with their rear ends planted in front of the tv while surfing social media on their phones.
You could see it when the performed Royal engagements, they didn't want to the duty. As a couple and Meghan doing solo, they would arrive anywhere from 90-120 min. late without any apology. The PR they've done in the US, they breeze in and leave after 10-15 min.
We've all worked more hours than Dimwit and Dumb, whether in careers or raising families or both. Harry whining that he was just the "gooseberry" when he went on engagements with William and Catherine...I've said before, Harry had plenty of opportunity to approach his grandmother, grandfather and father to express his wish to seriously follow his own pursuits/interests and be his own person...well, that never happened did it? Both are lazier than all get out.

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by karenl on March 30, 2023, 7:39 pm, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

I should add that Archewell's "CEO" only works 1 hour/week as well....nice little racket going on.

This message is locked.

Taz: Too Busy?

Posted by karenl on March 30, 2023, 8:22 pm, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

Neil Sean stated in his video that the press notified ahead of time of Harry's "appearance", I believe Neil on that bit.

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Cynthia on March 31, 2023, 11:38 am, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

I was looking at Childhood's 990 (2019 being the most recent on Guidestar), and all of their directors have 1 hour a week as well.

This Archewell's "Executive Director" gets $60 for so little work! And only three people are still on the board! That's *really* concerning.

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Cynthia on March 31, 2023, 4:41 am, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

It's actually pretty normal for non-compensated board members to "work" so little for the organization. One hour a week, four hours a month, comes to one board meeting a month.

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Hollie24 on March 31, 2023, 12:03 pm, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

Yes, but most also have other things going on, like full-time jobs, other charity work, etc. Harry and Meghan don't have anything close to those things.

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Hollie24 on March 30, 2023, 8:33 pm, in reply to "Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

I'd really, really like to hear what Anne has to say about her nephew and his wife's work ethic and their apparent belief they should get all the good stuff without having to earn any of it.

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Kendra on March 31, 2023, 6:45 am, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

A bit of shade? Today the royal family Instagram has a video of the King and Queen on a train reading prep for their engagements.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cqcy6LfuCEW/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Hollie24 on March 31, 2023, 10:57 am, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

Definitely a bit of shade. Two seventy-somethings working harder than a forty-something and a thirty-something--and no whingeing or whining about security or privacy, just getting on with their duty.

I haven't checked, but I'm pretty sure the late Queen Mother did more in her centenary year than these two have done in the past two years.

This message is locked.

Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?

Posted by Susan T on March 31, 2023, 11:21 am, in reply to "Re: Is this the reason Harry and Meghan stepped down as working Royals?"

Could also be a message to those who claimed Charles wasn't really busy on the days that the visit to France was to have taken place. "Just because we're not out and about, don't assume we're not working."

This message is locked.

« Back to index

108

[ Royal News and Views ]