Harry to sue UK governmdnt

[Viviennemary]

This is according to the DM. Over the withdrawal of his security funding.

@Roussette

Its so odd. I do not want to pay for any of them.
I also do not appreciate the disingenuous bleating in the press from RF sources about Harry not visiting when they knew why. The RF chose this. They are playing games and they were exposed this time.

They look ridiculous. I hope the sussexes never ever come back. The RF are petty and embarrassing. All this energy, conniving and manipulation for Andrew.
The gall and the audacity to do this to defend Andrew

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Are you saying Harry must take a member of the rf every time he goes out to see other relatives, friends, old colleagues etc. when he is in the UK?

Not at all, though you'll probably try to turn it into one those "she might have meant - so she must have done - so she did" things
There's nothing to stop him buying private security in the UK, but overall I'm just genuinely surprised if he's planning to be here at all and wondered what it's for, especially as there's now nothing to stop folk visiting him in beautiful SoCal

Or maybe he's not planning to come at all and this is just another claim to victimhood, as in he'd love to visit but those nasty Brits have baulked him again

Moving on from Harry though, I wonder if allowing folk to buy police protection would be such a bad idea - after all Special Forces do consultancy for the very powerful worldwide and no doubt make a packet out of it
I appreciate the issues around taking police off other things, but surely they could recruit even more with the money that could easily be made?

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Special Forces don't "do consultancy" at all. Those you see working in private security do so after they've left.

You cannot use s25 of the Police Act 2996 to pay for private protection. The Act says 'The Chief of Police May provide' it is not a must.

Each force decides whether they will agree to provide services under s25 - they don't have to and on occasions (including football) they say no.

The MPS is responsible for the VIP protection and they do not accept requests from private individuals for this service.

It is entirely doable, they just don't want to.

They want to, they’ve been told they can’t.

I’m sure there are a lot of rich private citizens in the UK that would like to be able to pay for intelligence for their own security and do not have the right.

Laughable that you think they can’t.

S25 of the Police Act 1996.

@Nesbo

So people are angry because Harry, who is and always will be a high profile target due to his birth and is also a target to racist nutters because of his wife, wants to pay for police protection out of his own pocket to ensure he and his family are as safe as possible when he comes back here.

I swear some people on here would love it if they were attacked. It’s a bit sick really.

It's already been explained to you. People who unfortunately live in high crime areas, or where there were/are grooming gangs, or where knife crime is endemic, or who for example have stalkers, don't have the option to pay for a bespoke 24 hour police service for themselves or their families.

We don't have a two-tier policing system in this country where the wealthy can co-opt resources and get a superior level of service. Nor should we.

I'd be against any private individuals or families being able to rent the police. And that's entirely different to approved organisations paying for extra police for large-scale public events such as football matches with tens of thousands present.

@LondonWolf

Are you saying Harry must take a member of the rf every time he goes out to see other relatives, friends, old colleagues etc. when he is in the UK?

How odd

Well I suppose it's like choosing to leave an exclusive club or job. You don't get any of the perks of belonging afterwards but you could always get invited in to take advantage for a day here or there by those who still belong.

Except it is not the same, not even similar.

Special Forces don't "do consultancy" at all. Those you see working in private security do so after they've left

Are you sure, dontsaythj? I'm aware plenty go into consultancy when they leave, but thought they got involved in advising foreign security services when visiting to see what their own arrangements are?

But we do have a 2 tier police service

The RF has special protection that is not linked to being an active royal. They are choosing to provide this protection to Andy and we are paying for it.

Andrew stepped back in November 2019 and still has protection. This is the definition of two tier.

I think Harry is preoccupied with security.

The post @rubicscubicle posted at 12.54 was posted on sussexroyal before the Sandringham summit, it was then mentioned in the infamous Oprah interview, In the me you can’t see he comments incorrectly that Diana was left without protection. This wasn’t actually the case as Diana refused police protection. The latest is he is instructing lawyers for a judicial review.

I don’t think this is about getting it for free or entitlement I suspect he is genuinely fearful for his and his families lives.

As Harry has had security since birth it has probably been ingrained how important security is and how you must follow what they say in order to keep you safe etc. His misconceptions that his mothers death was caused by lack of police protection, sadly not understanding it was her choice not to have it. Her former protection officer believes that if she still had it she would be alive today.

All of this however is his perception, as a private citizen I don’t think he should be able to pay for police protection as it does in effect create a 2 tier policing.

It's so embarrassing to see people attack this man from a position of blinding ignorance.

Section 25 I1) talks about organisations.

Section 25 (1A) refers to individuals.

Except it is not the same, not even similar.

I disagree

‘ His US team wouldn't be able to use firearms and don't have info that the police would have. He is happy to pay for UK protection like Blair does’

This.

Harry can hire the services of elite security crew whilst here in the UK, as do many others of high net worth, high profile, high risk etc etc. Said security consultants operate entirely within the UK law about carrying weapons, are often ex UK elite military & said firms have well established operational communications protocols with UK security services. Harry is free as a private citizen to engage such protection at his own expense.

What he cannot do, determined by the UK Home Office, is call upon the protection of the UK specialist services that protect the RF who qualify for specialist &/or armed protection either on his own account as a born royal or as a private citizen for a fee. Said specialists are not available for hire.

The judicial review will look at the processes involved to make the Home Office decision & test if that decision is right &/or robust.

All this a storm in a tea cup of narcissistic rage because Harry cannot get what he wants. He teeters upon becoming a vexatious litigant, using the courts to claw out of the RF what he deems he deserves. I have some warped compassion for the Ginger Winger as he struggles to adapt to a royalty-free, privilege-lite more challenging ordinary life, left to earn a living to support himself & his young family, & to find out that the cheeky chappy persona crafted for him by the Men in Grey cannot be sustained with the support of the royal machine.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Special Forces don't "do consultancy" at all. Those you see working in private security do so after they've left

Are you sure, dontsaythj? I'm aware plenty go into consultancy when they leave, but thought they got involved in advising foreign security services when visiting to see what their own arrangements are?

As far as I'm aware that's connected to their individuals' diplomatic status, and they're doing so on behalf of the British state. It's similar to the police cooperating with foreign counterparts on an investigation, for example. Not exactly consultancy.

@Madasahattersteaparty1749
It’s not ordinary police protection. It’s Royal Protection. That means enhanced and armed. It’s not in the gift of the Queen. The judicial review is seeking a review of the process followed in the Home Office when not awarding it to him.

@nottodaybatman

But we do have a 2 tier police service

The RF has special protection that is not linked to being an active royal. They are choosing to provide this protection to Andy and we are paying for it.

Andrew stepped back in November 2019 and still has protection. This is the definition of two tier.

@nottodaybatman

I suspect you're not aware of the specifics of Andrew's arrangment and status yourself. However, I do believe that he should also have all taxpayer-funded resources stopped, and I hope to see him in court.

As I read it, Harry wants police security as he knows that his own private security will not be given access to relevant security information as he sees it. But even if he can afford to pay this is problematic as several pp have said. Special Protection are detailed with protecting both the RF and Government ministers. They are unlikely to have any spare capacity for swanning around after Harry. Also many posters seem to forget that it is not up to the RF who gets protection. It is decided by the Met. So it’s unlikely that he won’t get it due to some sort of RF vendetta. Again as other posters have said, if he takes part in any official RF events, he will receive the same protection as all others present. I have my suspicions that he is using this “lack of security” as a potential excuse to cover any embarrassment at not being invited to some of the Jubilee celebrations. Just speculation of course.

In the me you can’t see he comments incorrectly that Diana was left without protection. This wasn’t actually the case as Diana refused police protection

Generous of you to call it a "misconception", Madasahatter. If the rest of us have read the many accounts of Diana refusing security you'd have thought Harry would remember, but apparently not

Yet another - errr - inaccuracy

The post @rubicscubicle posted at 12.54 was posted on sussexroyal before the Sandringham summit, it was then mentioned in the infamous Oprah interview, In the me you can’t see he comments incorrectly that Diana was left without protection. This wasn’t actually the case as Diana refused police protection. The latest is he is instructing lawyers for a judicial review.

No, it was AFTER the Sandringham summit. It was a summary of what the agreements were. I think that is why Harry clarified it on Oprah. He had previously told us that security would be provided, but now it was being taken away.

I remember parts of Diana's own words, but at this time I do not recall her addressing the security issue. What we were told was probably royalty spin or it could be that Diana was refused that the security reports directly to her, and only to her. So she feared that they would leak to the rf. Harry was the person within the rf, so he would know better.

As far as I'm aware that's connected to their individuals' diplomatic status, and they're doing so on behalf of the British state. It's similar to the police cooperating with foreign counterparts on an investigation, for example. Not exactly consultancy

Ah, thanks for the explanation, dontsaythj; it's obviously a bit more nuanced than I'd realised so as ever it's good to have the facts