Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

When the stakes are this high doesn't it make more sense to hear our story from us?

436 replies

Believeinyou · 04/12/2022 00:06

what stakes? what are they on about?

OP posts:
Sparklypant · 04/12/2022 13:37

WeWereInParis · 04/12/2022 13:29

clearly whatever is coming next is going to be bad , I think all titles will be removed from them, he and his kids will not be princes/princess and the palace will put out a statement saying they love them, wish them well but they will now live their live as private citizens.

I could be wrong, but I think stopping Harry and his children being prince/princess would require an act of parliament and since it doesn't actually make a difference, I doubt anyone wants to spend parliamentary time on it even if they really want the titles removed.
Archie and Lily's children won't be prince/princess so it's not like it will go on endlessly.

Yes it takes an act of Parliament but that’s hardly a complexity , and can be done quickly if Charles wants it. It’s just admin. Harry’s children are already prince and princess, the palace have confirmed it, they just aren’t hrh as they are not envisaged to be working royals .

so I think they will loose the prince and princess titles if this is bad. The palace sources are already saying Charles won’t hesitate to do it if they attack camilla.

my opinion is they aren’t leaving them any other option. Charles will have to remove the titles and force them to be the private citizens they declare they wish to be.

AutumnCrow · 04/12/2022 13:41

ZforZebra · 04/12/2022 10:37

How will a tell-all documentary on Netflix address/deal with threats to their security? I am confused…might make more sense if we watch the whole thing. One thing I have wondered is who was filming Meghan while she was crying.

One thing I have wondered is who was filming Meghan while she was crying.

Perhaps it could have been a re-enactment scene? I've seen them in documentaries in the True Crime genre and in historical documentaries too.

Perhaps the H&M documentary will have elements of 'docu-drama' within it, interspersed with real photographs and possibly re-enacted photographs.

I staged a re-enactment photograph once for a freelance piece I was writing, and it's a very straightforward process. There is, however, a professional expectation that they are clearly captioned as such.

Bluekerfuffle · 04/12/2022 13:42

Who knows, they seem paranoid. Also have a warped sense of their importance and interest to other people.

IcedPurple · 04/12/2022 13:43

Yes it takes an act of Parliament but that’s hardly a complexity , and can be done quickly if Charles wants it. It’s just admin.

It doesn't take an Act of Parliament to change prince or princess titles. Charles could do it tomorrow simply by issuing Letters Patent if he wanted. It would take an Act of Parliament to revoke a peerage.

Harry’s children are already prince and princess, the palace have confirmed it, they just aren’t hrh as they are not envisaged to be working royals .

When did 'the palace' confirm this?

Mywardrobd · 04/12/2022 13:49

IcedPurple · 04/12/2022 13:43

Yes it takes an act of Parliament but that’s hardly a complexity , and can be done quickly if Charles wants it. It’s just admin.

It doesn't take an Act of Parliament to change prince or princess titles. Charles could do it tomorrow simply by issuing Letters Patent if he wanted. It would take an Act of Parliament to revoke a peerage.

Harry’s children are already prince and princess, the palace have confirmed it, they just aren’t hrh as they are not envisaged to be working royals .

When did 'the palace' confirm this?

It’s on the website, they are titled

google is a thing.

shockthemonkey · 04/12/2022 13:51

"When someone says the stakes are high they mean they are at risk of losing a lot, for her it is income and fame."

That may be what she meant, but that can't be put forward as a reason to make any of us want to watch the show. We have literally no skin in that game.

shockthemonkey · 04/12/2022 13:52

That was in response to @BessieSurtees

IcedPurple · 04/12/2022 13:54

Mywardrobd · 04/12/2022 13:49

It’s on the website, they are titled

google is a thing.

5 seconds on the thing which is the google took me to the official royal family website, which refers to Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor and Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor.

Which website were you referring to, exactly?

www.royal.uk/succession

Pondlifer · 04/12/2022 13:59

Someone mentioned these comments early on. They are unanimous and hilarious. Seems the whole world is pretty fed up with these two.... What a PR disaster (or not??).

BellePeppa · 04/12/2022 13:59

AutumnCrow · 04/12/2022 13:41

One thing I have wondered is who was filming Meghan while she was crying.

Perhaps it could have been a re-enactment scene? I've seen them in documentaries in the True Crime genre and in historical documentaries too.

Perhaps the H&M documentary will have elements of 'docu-drama' within it, interspersed with real photographs and possibly re-enacted photographs.

I staged a re-enactment photograph once for a freelance piece I was writing, and it's a very straightforward process. There is, however, a professional expectation that they are clearly captioned as such.

And what’s she crying about? The footage is obviously in their mansion in Montecito so they’ve already left the RF and been to Vancouver so what on earth can she be so emotional about? My bet is she’s laughing or fake crying behind her hand.

Emotionalsupportviper · 04/12/2022 14:02

DutchessOfMuck · 04/12/2022 02:16

I have obviously never met them or seen them but I believe they are a good couple and in love. I do get that they want independent autonomy lifes. Something that the Royal life couldn't give them.

But oh my days! They need really good management and advisers because they are going about this all the wrong way. The are slowly but surely turning themselves into a pantomime.

They have said and done things that I agree and disagree and I am confused about. At the end of the day... I wish them all the best in life.

Ditto

Marchmount · 04/12/2022 14:10

They’ve got nothing else to sell except their connections to the royal family so they’re going to have to keep milking this to fund their expensive lifestyle. I feel sorry for them in a strange way. They genuinely believe that they are victims and that people will feel sorry for them. How long will they find an audience prepared to pay to hear their rehashed tales of woe?

Furries · 04/12/2022 14:23

Happyher · 04/12/2022 12:21

We should never forget that MM is an actress by trade

One tear, left eye, GO!

Georgeskitchen · 04/12/2022 14:47

If they have received credible threats to their safety in the United States then surely the FBI should be investigating/protecting them?
Why would it be the obligation of the British taxpayer to provide security? They don't even live in this country!!

BessieSurtees · 04/12/2022 15:46

shockthemonkey · 04/12/2022 13:51

"When someone says the stakes are high they mean they are at risk of losing a lot, for her it is income and fame."

That may be what she meant, but that can't be put forward as a reason to make any of us want to watch the show. We have literally no skin in that game.

Oh I don’t think they would say that is what is at stake I think she is implying it is their lives. It is only my opinion that fame and money are the real motivation and the real risk if they don’t tell their story. Well, it’s Harry’s story really, he is taking the biggest risk.

I think the reason people will watch it, is because it is Jeremy Kyle with the Royal Family. It’s The Crown with real cast members, an institution with closed doors, secrets, transgressions and injunctions and whether you love, support, hate or disapprove of H&M people will be hoping for bombshell revelations.

And just like a car crash many people can’t help but look.

mpsw · 04/12/2022 16:20

Georgeskitchen · 04/12/2022 14:47

If they have received credible threats to their safety in the United States then surely the FBI should be investigating/protecting them?
Why would it be the obligation of the British taxpayer to provide security? They don't even live in this country!!

I doubt very much that a documentary telling the story of their love is going to make one whit of difference to threat levels.

Or to the UK government's position that security will be provided bit only when the current thread assessment warrants it (threat to be assessed for each visit)

(Harry is trying to have that extended to mean blanket protection for all visits - this is being widely misinterpreted as the government stripping of them of all security, rather than him seeking to secure more)

thesnailandthewhale · 04/12/2022 16:30

Like millions of other Brit's I had a soft spot for Harry - we all witnessed the pain he went through following Diana's death. We loved the close bond between him, William and Kate, and then when he married Meghan we hoped he'd finally have his happily ever after.

He has every right to walk away from royal life but I just feel such disappointment in him for the manner he's treated those around him. He complains frequently about the intrusion and the cameras yet when money is offered he seems happy to have photographers taking pictures of his wife crying etc.

Go and live the private life you wanted, just stop blaming everyone else for your 'misfortune'.

Sparklypant · 04/12/2022 16:37

To be honest I don’t think many of the public have a soft spot for Harry any more. He was one of the most popular royals but now he’s very divisive and widely mocked and disliked.

I think it’s the being disingenuous that’s doing it. Declaring you want privacy, attacking the media, whilst simultaneously hawking their truth to the highest bidder.

plus I think a lot of folks think the behaviour is unacceptable. No one has a perfect family and I’m sure the royals are worse than most, but he’s not telling his truth as in s once and done explanation, they are commercialising it , flogging it, making a media spectacle of it to get as much money and attention as possible and it comes a gross as spiteful, petty and greedy.

Blip · 04/12/2022 16:48

Tom Bowers is saying that King Charles needs to banish them from the UK, remove their titles and repossess Frogmore, tell them they are no longer welcome in the UK until they apologise.

Then for KC to issue a statement saying exactly why he has had to do this ie replying to their 6 hour propaganda series.

M&H undermining the soft power of the RF in the USA is not good news for the UK.

poefaced · 04/12/2022 16:49

@Blip Tom Bowers is a nobody, KC doesn’t ‘need’ to do anything.

It’s none of anybody’s business,

Gilmorehill · 04/12/2022 16:52

BlackFriday · 04/12/2022 12:58

I read that too, but what on earth could they gain from that? I presume it could only mean that their intended audience is Americans/the wider world and they are cutting loose Britain and everything it stands for. And presumably they want the world to agree that the UK - ALL of us, by the way, including their fans and defenders here - are racist, toxic bullies.
That makes me very angry.

Yes I agree. I can’t really see that happening.

limitedperiodonly · 04/12/2022 16:52

Georgeskitchen · 04/12/2022 14:47

If they have received credible threats to their safety in the United States then surely the FBI should be investigating/protecting them?
Why would it be the obligation of the British taxpayer to provide security? They don't even live in this country!!

Perhaps they are but I wouldn't expect the FBI to share those details with the world because it tends to fuck up investigations when you tip people off.

The argument about security for Harry and his family on British soil is a different matter. The High Court gave him leave to challenge the Home Office's refusal to fund police protection for him and Meghan while in the UK. That is trundling on and has cost £200,000 in legal fees so far and will cost more but is completely in order,

The High Court ruled there should be a review because the decision might have been unlawful. The Home Office and other government departments have made mistakes over the years. Usually they involve ordinary British citizens but this time celebrities are involved. But the issue is the same - the High Court says the Home Office has questions to answer.

Harry is paying his own bill but the Home Office are using taxpayers' money. That's also completely in order though if the Home Office's decision is ruled to be unlawful, questions might be asked about the wisdom of the original decision and their decision to defend it.

Before this legal challenge there were stories that Harry wanted to pay for his own security and/or use his own protection officers while here. That was refused. Rightly, in my opinion because no one is supposed to be able to hire any of the police forces in the UK like they are private security firms. There would also be a major problem with government or private citizens of any nationality carrying guns on British streets, let alone using them. Though it would be foolish to believe that President Biden didn't bring his own armed security team with him when he went to Queen Elizabeth's funeral and that all other US presidents who have visited Britain didn't too.

Harry might pay for private security in the US where it would also be legal for him and his protection officers to carry guns. I don't think Britain makes any contribution to that because if we were there would be no cause for the argument with the Home Office about protection on British soil.

In the US the FBI would only get involved if there was evidence of an interstate crime or conspiracy. Again, who knows? There might be but they don't confide in me.

If not I would expect it to be a job for the state police in Harry and Meghan's home California or other states they visit such as New York if it happened there and there alone. Rest assured that wherever that happens in America only the American taxpayer is going to have to pay for it.

The FBI and other US police forces or US government agencies have no jurisdiction in the UK or any other foreign country unless it is granted which it sometimes is. Sometimes that's understandable but sometimes it is granted even though it is not because the US are powerful.

I would prefer the intervention of foreign security services in the UK to be on an extremely exceptional basis. Wouldn't you? I doubt Harry and Meghan''s security counts as one of those exceptions but it might and if it does and extends to this country then I expect the FBI and the UK to divvy up the bill.

I'm not their biggest fan but it's hard to deny that Harry, as a member of the Royal Family and a former serving member of the British Army of high profile, does face a credible risk and by extension so does his family. How high that risk is I don't know because I am not a member of the security services. But it's also hard to deny that as such the British taxpayer might have to fork out for him when he's in Britain if the Home Office is in the wrong. We'll have to wait and see.

.

SherbetDips · 04/12/2022 16:54

They are so boring, which they would just go live the private life they wanted to live, and stop attacking the royal family.

poefaced · 04/12/2022 16:56

SherbetDips · 04/12/2022 16:54

They are so boring, which they would just go live the private life they wanted to live, and stop attacking the royal family.

So boring yet you can’t resist commenting…

limitedperiodonly · 04/12/2022 17:00

@Blip Charles cannot banish anyone. Neither can he chop their heads off. We stopped that when we chopped off the head of a king also called Charles a while ago.

He can give them a very disapproving stare. He may have learned it from that little bear who visited him mum in the summer.