Charles Spencer revelations are getting a lot of media attention

[Constantrunner]

The wording below the photo is not mine. I was interested though in how much media coverage Charles Spencers revelations are getting. Multiple front pages.

It’s a scandal, and scandals sell.

He's been divorced ?4 times - he must be skint, relatively speaking.

And people saying he's rich look at his house etc - I'm sure it's all tightly bound up in Trusts so he doesn't get hammered for inheritance tax, etc

Her parents were long divorced and her father had custody so it's possible her mother said she could back out but her father and sisters said she shouldn't. Her father was the Spencer, so his family would have benefitted hugely from having a daughter on the Throne.

Yes, that makes sense.

In what way would they benefit? It’s not the Middle Ages.

yep odd that they gave him free advertising .

How have the Middleton's benefitted? Would their other daughter have married an Aristo without it? How about getting away with turning their partnership into a Limited company a couple of years before it went bankrupt, leaving their suppliers out of pocket? Or their multiple expensive holidays despite this, or being invited to Ascot/ Wimbledon etc or their house William paid for? Not to mention the Spencers are aristocracy and at the time it would have meant other marriages, jobs for their relatives, invited to State occasions etc. It's not the Middle ages everywhere in the world, but in the 80's RF. it still was.

This.

She was 19 and he 31 when he asked her to marry him.

A damaged young girl from a very dysfunctional family who was thrust into global fame overnight by marrying a much older man who didn't love her.

I'm not sure there's a human being alive whose mental health would have stayed intact in those circumstances.

Some people say she was "crazy", a "loose cannon", difficult, a problem etc. But I think she did exceptionally well to avoid having a full-on breakdown. It would have been completely understandable if she did.

Anyway - the "royals" are just people - ordinary, unexceptional and moderately dysfunctional, like many folk in the UK. It beggars belief that the monarchy still exists in 2026. Time for the whole thing to be wrapped up. Enough!

Yes William paid for the middletons house. And the middletons are often at fun events in the village or royal section. I don't blame them, but they would not have that without their daughter being royalty.

For someone who can’t see why the royals are in the news all the time etc etc - you know a lot of details.

How do you know all this?

I don't know if I would allow my husband to buy my parents a house, it sets up a weird power dynamic

Yes, also I thought the Middletons had a nice large house?

It's gossip. It's not TV news at ten news.

Ok.

I channel hopped through enough to question if he was talking about her as if she was here still. He sounded deranged.

What does that even mean?

I am vaguely pro royal, and I didn’t know any of the points about the Middletons you mentioned. I assume you have sought the information out if you didn’t see it on the news.

(I would also mention that it’s not uncommon for local businesspeople to “appear” at village fetes in the guise of sponsoring the dog show or whatever, regardless of whether their SIL will be king one day)

Never assume certain posts on here are from ordinary mumsnet posters.

Quite sickening that Spencer and Harry are both seeking to exploit the death of Diana to make money for themselves.

I don’t think they are quite the same. The most newsworthy thing about Charles Spencer is that his sister was once married to the king. Harry is the second son of the king and therefore his life as a whole is newsworthy.

(I use newsworthy in the sense of “being of interest to the news media”)

Piers Morgan was wrongly slandered in the book (he said on Today prog this mornig) - it was said he was editor of the Mail, I think it was, and he wasn't and also Spencer misremembered a conversation he'd had with PM or so PM said. PM demands the books be pulped - maybe that's why they were half price in Waterstones window this morning - seems a bit mercenary of the publishers to put them out at half price the day after they were published - a bit suspect in my view.....

@Smokeywater often books have a launch offer, I doubt it's anything to do with Piers.

ETA for example, I can buy Caroline Hirons' new book - out next month - at 50% off on Amazon at the moment, and Harper Collins had it at 40% off for pre-order in the summer (along with many of their other authors).

CS is a historian so facts are an essential integtral part of his job, it wasn't the mail, he accused PM of being the editor at the mirror which was factually untrue. There have been other inaccuracies so the whole book is just a sham, I don't particularly like PM but he's right and I hope he wins if he pursues his case.

Diana sued the photographer at the gym and the daily mirror at the time when CS incorrectly claims PM was the editor

I abhorr Charles Spencer. I find his cashing in on his sister and the royals distasteful. He’s also tried to make it as salacious as possible. Like Harry did. To get it in the media and boost sales. It’s just grubby shitty behaviour. I understand he likely needs money, but this is low.

personally I don’t give a shit what Charles said when Diana died. She was his ex, it was acrimonious, all that mattered was how he cared for the kids, not what he thought or said about his ex when they weren’t present.

i hope Morgan gets it removed from the shelves and pulped.