To think that not speaking to your own son is not a good look for the King ?

Have you read both judgements @Ukisgaslit - they detail why the RMB assessment was no longer useful once Harry moved away and also the approach used on assessment following his leaving. The judges all agreed that they (RAVEC) had good reason (in legal sense) to make this adjustment. Also, the judgements detail the ToR for RAVEC including the constituent bodies.
Were you persuaded by any of the detailed legal referencing in the judgements?

he says what he feels with his full chest

What does ths mean? is it some kind of weird Google translate? Why is it appearing in posts by more than one person?

Did you follow the case ? It revealed that NO risk assessment had been done for Harry for years . Despite Harry’s asking repeatedly.

Because he doesn't live in the UK! RAVEC are experts on/have up to date intelligence information on the security situation in the UK. They are not experts on California.

In order to carry out a meaningful risk assessment, they would also need information about Harry's travel plans - which it seems he doesn't want to give them.

Yes. Have you seen photos of Prince Phillip in his younger years, with a beard, he's his double

Do people believe Harry is the King's son?

@foreverblowingbubbless

It does . Harry does not have security and must apply each time .
Harry can be refused security .

And that’s how the Windsors want it .
Time to have another look at the story that Diana ‘refused’ security - or was it taken ?

Yes his own personal poor me bias.

As I said it was his own account (Harry's) from his autobiography Spare. Of course that's subject to bias.

I think you're more than naive if you think people don't know some of this. You take the greater public for fools.

@Normative

Im sure Harry and family would be reassured since you are ‘quite sure’ that a full risk assessment would be done …

Did you follow the case ? It revealed that NO risk assessment had been done for Harry for years . Despite Harry’s asking repeatedly.

Your first sentence makes no sense.

He has no security - applying each time means he has no security .
Harry had no choice - he was born into that royal life and when he finally exercised agency and left, he was punished relentlessly in the media , and more importantly, regarding his security.

We all know the royals are behind both

And no, before someone starts, having to apply 28 days in advance and have each application considered individually means Harry does NOT have security.
Harry is only given full security if invited by the Windsors. Let’s see how that goes.

It's perfectly clear that no-one in the government or the royal family is going to risk Harry and his family being attacked, not least because they don't want them to become martyrs. If they give notice, I'm quite sure that there will be a full risk assessment and, if there is known to be a particular risk at the relevant time, security will be stepped up. Think about, for instance, Salman Rushdie - he has no particular status in this country, but when he comes here he gets full security because no-one wants the UK to be the country which fails to keep him safe.

@foreverblowingbubbless

Keep blowing those wishful thinking bubbles

The Windsors only survive due to their insistence on secrecy . All their wills are secret - why ? Because if they had to follow the law like the rest of us , we’d have factual information about their immense wealth and affairs etc
There’d be even fewer Union Jack hats in the Mall if the facade came down

Charles and William look cruel and cold - the court case showed when security was pulled - We know the royals have representatives on RAVEC what we don’t know is how much weight they are given - but we can take a bloody good guess .

People understand that families can have conflict - they don’t understand putting family members in harm’s way as punishment for speaking publicly about their own lives .

Having said that I do understand how Charles would be very cautious about talking to Harry with this constant talking to the media but if they did speak and Charles apologised and said nice things then what's to fear.

What's to fear is that, whatever Charles says, it will be twisted beyond recognition and churned out at the next Netflix interview as yet another source of grievance.

Do you really not think Harry has anything to apologise for? He was, after all, caught out in several outright and very offensive lies about his family.

How? Princess Margaret was living in a very different era when unfortunately it was seen as unacceptable for her to marry a divorced man. She then went through a marriage with a bisexual man where the marriage was publicly collapsing from an early stage. In what way are you saying Harry compares more closely to her than to Ann or Edward?

How could Charles protect his family against Diana failing to put a seatbelt on and getting into a car driven by a drunk man?

Poor Harry was treated so badly by his brother? What's your source for this?

They can't "put" either child anywhere. For all you know, Louis will turn out to be the hard worker rather than Charlotte, or they both will be hard workers, or (more likely) they'll both just choose to stay out of the limelight and live their own lives apart from carrying out the occasional royal duty.

Or maybe he knew her better than you do?

Well said.

But what do you expect Charles to do? Is he supposed to say publicly that he doesn't care that Harry has publicly slagged off virtually all his closest relatives and in-laws and has told obvious lies, and that he's happy for Harry to carry on doing that? Harry is certainly not the only person whose parents have been divorced or whose mother has died in distressing circumstances. Indeed, William has been through all of that and a whole lot more, given that he was the one Diana used to cry at, and his own wife has been seriously ill so he was facing the prospect of the same thing happening to his children.

It's increasingly difficult to resist the notion that Harry is now positively enjoying trading off his background, he has certainly been very blatantly trying to monetise his mother.

I think you underestimate the great British public and their views. No one expects the RF to be immune from divorces, illness or other problems like it maybe was back in the 1960s. No one expects them to be perfect. Issues such as mental health, depression in young men , domestic violence etc are all issues addressed by various members of the RF.
I don't think people hearing that " papa doesn't speak to me " necessarily believes it because Harry is a proven liar. I think they probably are more likely to think " if that is the case who can blame him. He's been/ is ill and the last thing he needs is a whingey twat like that" . I think you anti monarchists need to get up to speed with your arguments as opposed to floundering on the old tropes.

I'm reading the dimbleby biography of Charles which is pretty old so it doesn't come past the mid nineties but I was struck by how the older royals, and younger ones to some degree are absolutely moulded by the establishment. Charles was more sensitive and loving by this account than the late Queen, Harry is more sensitive by his account than his brother (who it does sound like spent their childhood being quite horrible to Harry). However the establishment is incredibly powerful and the members of royal family simply must be able to overwrite any feelings they have and are trained out of them as far as possible. So the King I imagine is trying to protect the monarchy before giving out hugs and statements. Remember how the late Queen had to be winkled out of Scotland to acknowledge the death of Diana, and Tony Blair had to practically force her to include the line about being a grandmother. The old school royal establishment is incredibly powerful.

The thing is you have to take the consequences that come with these actions so Harry now has to suck these up. Obviously it is something that people have differing opinions on but for most of the people I know Harry is a joke and causes 🙄 with his name. For younger generations they will have no idea who he even is and as the years pass he really is irrelevant in the overall RF.

I find the contrast between Harry’s interviews where he says what he feels with his full chest and the ‘palace sources’ creeping around leaking to the press, interesting.
Whether you think Harry is right or wrong, the result is the Windsors are associated with secrecy and cruelty . Their ignoring of requests for some transparency ( I’m thinking of their financial dealings / Duchy scandal etc) doesn’t help .

Charles wrote a book about how awful Elizabeth and Philip were . The queen had the sense ( or her advisors did ) not to cut Charles off . Though of course he was the heir and in their medieval system the heir must be protected at all costs .
The spare can be pilloried.
Charlotte or more likely Louis up next for the same treatment .