Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Palace appoints external lawyers to probe MM bullying...

663 replies

Sprining · 14/03/2021 11:17

Last week, in the lead up to Meghan and Harry’s eagerly anticipated Oprah interview, Palace sources were quoted as saying that the Palace was “prepared to retaliate with fresh disclosures about the couple’s behaviour if the monarchy is attacked”.

Great, so what next

External lawyers to probe bullying by other royals?
External lawyers to probe racism within RF?
External lawyers to probe whether there was disability discrimination in denying support for mental health?
External lawyers to problem Andrews behaviour and whether it broke public code of conduct (not criminal investigation, but did he bring us into disrepute type of stuff)?

Is this a vendetta or is RF finally going to be be subject to public accountability?

OP posts:
Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum · 17/03/2021 21:38

@TatianaBis

Blueberries is right. You want to be a bully fine, at least own it.

And to be fair even high school kids know this stuff.

They do know what bullying and racism is all about. Teenagers are much more smart and sensible than a lot of adults

It seems to be so posters on mumsnet that don't know 🤷‍♀️

Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum · 17/03/2021 21:40

*some

TatianaBis · 17/03/2021 21:40

They do know, and they know this kind of stuff isn’t ok.

Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum · 17/03/2021 21:40

@TatianaBis

Did you read my post?

People aware of online bullying even if they’re not reading every comment.

You still seem to be saying they are reading some 🤔
Roussette · 17/03/2021 21:42

Why do you keep saying that?

You're obviously not getting it at all.

I presume you think you can say whatever you like about anybody as long as they don't read it.
If that was the case there wouldn't be Talk Guidelines on here or anywhere.

And doing your laughing faces all the time, even when I posted about Caroline Flack, really does you no favours.

TatianaBis · 17/03/2021 21:46

Not cool.

Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum · 17/03/2021 21:48

@TatianaBis

They do know, and they know this kind of stuff isn’t ok.
If you believe they have people combing mumsnet for any comment about them. Then passing it on. I think I will leave you with that idea and say night night

(If you are worried feel free to report any of my posts. It may take you a while to read them all though and on other threads. I talk a lotGrin)

Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum · 17/03/2021 21:49

@Roussette

Why do you keep saying that?

You're obviously not getting it at all.

I presume you think you can say whatever you like about anybody as long as they don't read it.
If that was the case there wouldn't be Talk Guidelines on here or anywhere.

And doing your laughing faces all the time, even when I posted about Caroline Flack, really does you no favours.

Night night
Palace appoints external lawyers to probe MM bullying...
CathyorClaire · 17/03/2021 21:50

Well one of them has done but we don't know what the rest knew

Charles had well documented links with the vile yet subsequently knighted Jimmy Savile whose activities were a very open secret at the time of occurrence. . He also actively supported Peter Ball after a caution for sex offences in 1992.

HMQ had her portrait painted by Rolf Harris and while there's never been a suspicion about the association it's not a good look in the context of subsequent events.

Roussette · 17/03/2021 21:51

No idea what that is. You've done it before. This time without the grinning face. Good move.

I agree though, it is probably best if you stop now.

TatianaBis · 17/03/2021 21:52

I think we can all agree stopping now would be advisable.

Roussette · 17/03/2021 21:54

Cathy

The Peter Ball friendship was awful particularly because it carried on with a lot of support from Charles, after his abuses were uncovered.

Two brothers connected with people like this is extraordinary.

DeRigueurMortis · 17/03/2021 22:10

Goodness me - what the hell is it about these threads that brings out the worst in people?

In the same way I think the OP quoting ridiculous tabloid stories and linking to gossip sites to "support" H&M is utterly counter productive and inappropriate, I feel the same way about using derogatory names for H&M.

If you don't want to use their names fine - just use their initials maybe?

Thins latest GK revelation is just awful. What the hell are they thinking?

I can't help feeling they are getting way out of their depth from a PR perspective.

I can help feel they are going to drain sympathy from a lot of people (well apart from ardent fans for whom they can do no wrong) if they keep playing this game.

It's not rocket science for most people to question the motives of a couple complaining PC wouldn't take calls and within days spilling the beans about a post interview call with GK. Does anyone actually think if you were C or W you'd keep putting by your hand in the fire?

It's a really bad look and no, it's not the same as leaks from Palace "sources". It's straight from them. GK isn't going the kill her ratings golden goose by saying anything other than what they wanted her to say.

They had everything. A beautiful new house, win against the Daily Mail, deals with Spotify/Netflix, a new baby and they are just wasting goodwill and energy on what?

I hope to god they can both get a grip and stop airing family grievances in public and start moving forward to build a new life rather than slinging more mud at everything they've chosen to leave behind.

Roussette · 17/03/2021 22:13

DeRigeur I appreciate your posts, you are very rational in what you say.

DeRigueurMortis · 17/03/2021 22:31

Thank you and apologies for all the typos Blush.

I should learn that multi tasking and posting isn't a great idea Grin.

TatianaBis · 17/03/2021 22:35

I’m not sure that it is that rational - it sounds highly emotional to me.

Objectively, there’s mud slinging from both sides. The palace has unwisely, imo, with its rather narrow preoccupation with itself, chosen to pick another fight with another royal wife.

Last time, no matter how many stones they threw nothing could dim the popularity of Diana, indeed the more they threw, the more popular she became.

This time, they may have thought Meghan would be easier to subdue - she doesn’t have that kind of popularity or much support here. I doubt it occurred to the palace that Harry might actually leave the country and the monarchy over this. And now the isolated Duchess has found support in powerful black American women - Oprah, Gayle King and even Michelle Obama. No-one could have predicted that.

There really is no difference between the leaks on either side imo.

This is not a fight the palace can win. If they had more enlightened PR they would be well advised to retreat from a squabble they should never have indulged in from the start.

MrsTabithaTwitchit · 17/03/2021 22:42

If you read / watch the full transcript of the Michelle Obama interview it’s not entirely favourable to M . She talks about how most people don’t understand public service and that it’s about other people and not yourself . I thought it was a bit of a slap in the face to MM actually . I agree about the others though.

The thing is the Palace’s hands are tied here because there are staff threatening legal action. They have to be act because it relates to employees not just family members . Many law firms have specialist teams who deal with these types of investigations.

TatianaBis · 17/03/2021 22:57

I’ve read her words and I didn’t interpret them in that way. I think she was taking about everyone involved and public service generally.

Either way, to hear discussion of racism within the royal family as ‘not a complete surprise’ is far from ideal from their perspective.

The mess the palace has now got itself into is entirely self-inflected.

Lauren15 · 17/03/2021 22:59

@DeRigueurMortis

Goodness me - what the hell is it about these threads that brings out the worst in people?

In the same way I think the OP quoting ridiculous tabloid stories and linking to gossip sites to "support" H&M is utterly counter productive and inappropriate, I feel the same way about using derogatory names for H&M.

If you don't want to use their names fine - just use their initials maybe?

Thins latest GK revelation is just awful. What the hell are they thinking?

I can't help feeling they are getting way out of their depth from a PR perspective.

I can help feel they are going to drain sympathy from a lot of people (well apart from ardent fans for whom they can do no wrong) if they keep playing this game.

It's not rocket science for most people to question the motives of a couple complaining PC wouldn't take calls and within days spilling the beans about a post interview call with GK. Does anyone actually think if you were C or W you'd keep putting by your hand in the fire?

It's a really bad look and no, it's not the same as leaks from Palace "sources". It's straight from them. GK isn't going the kill her ratings golden goose by saying anything other than what they wanted her to say.

They had everything. A beautiful new house, win against the Daily Mail, deals with Spotify/Netflix, a new baby and they are just wasting goodwill and energy on what?

I hope to god they can both get a grip and stop airing family grievances in public and start moving forward to build a new life rather than slinging more mud at everything they've chosen to leave behind.

Great post.
LadyWithLapdog · 18/03/2021 00:29

@Mummyozzi well said.

@Blueberries0112 How awful that people behaved in such an appalling, criminal way against those poor children and, effectively, got away with it.

DeRigueurMortis · 18/03/2021 00:37

*Objectively, there’s mud slinging from both sides. The palace has unwisely, imo, with its rather narrow preoccupation with itself, chosen to pick another fight with another royal wife.

Last time, no matter how many stones they threw nothing could dim the popularity of Diana, indeed the more they threw, the more popular she became.*

Ok let's break that down.

What evidence do you have that the Palace has chosen to "pick a fight" with M (and H) because all the evidence (not gossip) suggests the reverse.

H&M took the "gloves off" in boxing terminology when they made their exit statement public and have been throwing punches ever since.

Every statement from the Palace has tried to cool the temperature.

The only "barely" contentious statement has been about public service and frankly I think the Palace and Michelle Obama got that right.

We've discussed the bullying investigation to death on here and again that's not picking a fight. It's the Palace who come out worse than anyone on this. Yes there's "stories" about M but there's evidence about the Palace categorically failing in their duty of care as an employer.

Ok - Diana.

Can we all just cut through the myth here. She wasn't a saint nor a sinner.

She was adept at manipulating the press when it suited her and playing victim when it didn't.

The Palace didn't have to throw stories "at her". She managed to supply the media with a lot of stories herself - anyone still remember how bloody dignified Julia Carling was? The Hasnat Khan affair?

It absolutely wasn't the case at the time of her becoming more popular whatever the press "threw" at her.

A lot of people seem to have total amnesia about her in the sense the tragedy of her death has only left the legacy of the (what I found as a late teen at the time) bizarre public outpouring of grief about a woman who wasn't actually universally "loved" and "Queen of Hearts" until she'd died.

If the Diana "loved/victim" trope is something H&M are buying into then that's very worrying because it's a viewpoint that's insured by the heavily rose tinted glasses of the past than the reality at the time.

And now the isolated Duchess has found support in powerful black American women - Oprah, Gayle King and even Michelle Obama. No-one could have predicted that.

Has she found support though? Sure in terms of the former she's been provided a huge platform but that comes at the price that it's a relationship that's to the benefit of two extremely savvy businesswomen - both who unlike M have known real suffering and hardship.

As for MO I think her comments were pretty neutral. She's a class act and it's not surprising she's not weighing in on this - rather she's cleverly using it to articulate her core values about service and family without condoning or condemning anyone.

This is not a fight the palace can win. If they had more enlightened PR they would be well advised to retreat from a squabble they should never have indulged in from the start.

You're assuming the Palace even want a fight. They don't - it's not in their interests.

They didn't "start" this fight in the public eye. H&M did. The Palace seem to be doing everything from a PR perspective to get out of the boxing ring while H&M keep pulling punch after punch.

Either way, to hear discussion of racism within the royal family as ‘not a complete surprise’ is far from ideal from their perspective.

Referring to MO again. I think you've misunderstood what she said.

Quote: "Race isn't a new construct in this world for people of colour, and so it wasn’t a complete surprise to hear her feelings and to hear them articulated.”

Of course that's not ideal. As I posted earlier perhaps the only "good" thing about this situation is that it's raised awareness and brought home some very uncomfortable truths about racism (as well as other issues such a dynastic wealth, privilege, the media, bullying etc).

The mess the palace has now got itself into is entirely self-inflected.

Perhaps but I think you underestimate the self inflicted "mess" and its consequences for H&M. I'd put the scales being pretty balanced at this point.

didofido · 18/03/2021 07:07

@CreosoteQueen

Of course they’re not reasonable. They didn’t raise a hair at a literal pedophile under their protection but have brought in lawyers to investigate allegations of bullying that mysteriously arise a year after the couple leaves the U.K., just as a tell all interview airs. I can’t see how any reasonable person could side with the RF on this.
Whilst I agree that Andrew is a nasty piece of sh++t, stop using him as a "what about...". And even he is innocent until proven guilty.

The bullying rumours about MM were rife before they left for Canada. It's possible the RF ignored the claims of staff to protect MM. A mistake in the light of later events

Roussette · 18/03/2021 07:53

Interesting on Diana... and those names you mention Carling and Hasnat, it's all coming back to me now. Diana was a flawed character, wonderful in parts, and not in others.

As for MichelleO, she always strikes the right note AFAIC. I have a lot of time for her.

Whilst I agree that Andrew is a nasty piece of sh++t, stop using him as a "what about..."

Sorry but I won't stop. I just feel you can't have all these brickbats thrown at H&M continually (some deserved, but a lot... really really not) whilst the RF are effectively shielding a man with the most appalling record. How he treats staff, how he has fleeced the country and traded on the RF name for decades whilst pocketing backhanders (look at his Wiki page), how he is allowed to keep his military patronages and still have his £3M a year security paid for. Let alone the friend of a paedophile stuff ... there is so much more than just that.

So when comments pop up about H&M that compare directly to PA and how he got away with it, I will bring them up. Call it 'what about' all you like, but I will mention it because there are direct comparisons continually.

Authenticchicken · 18/03/2021 08:55

@DeRiguerMortis great post. My memory of Diana in the 90s is exactly as yours is. I was also a (slightly baffled) teenager when she died.

derxa · 18/03/2021 09:02

The Hasnat Khan affair? What do you mean?

Swipe left for the next trending thread