'Courtiers' by Valentine Low

[RandomPenguinHouse]

Extracts of this were being discussed on a previous thread ('The Times) which just finished.

I'm interested in buying this book, despite never having ever bought any other book about the Royal Family and never having watched The Crown.

I'm interested however in the archaic rituals of the Royal Court and how it works as an employer, and also how the courtiers advise.

Yes the excerpts were focused on Harry and Meghan but presumably that's just for clicks given the relevant timing, and that the book goes well beyond that.

Poignant that in the synopsis for it on The Foyles website it says:

The Queen, after a remarkable 70 years of service, is entering the final seasons of her reign without her husband Philip to guide her. Meanwhile, Charles seeks to define what his future as King will be, with his court wielding ever greater influence as he plans for his imminent accession.

www.foyles.co.uk/witem/biography/courtiers,valentine-low-9781472290908

Anyone else thinking of buying this?

It's purely my guess but I'd have thought their NDAs would be watertight.
I don't think Harry, Ed or Ann would have had the authority to authorise it.

It’s me who said on an earlier thread that NDAs have been hugely undermined in this area following a series of court cases where people who have been treated unlawfully by someone at their employer were then effectively “gagged” by an NDA. This has been seen as unethical behaviour.

The Solicitors Regulatory (which regulates solicitors) has actually issued guidelines that tells lawyers what they can and can’t use an NDA to cover. This applies to both solicitors and their own firms, but crucially, also to their clients when they are advising them on resolving an employment issue.

This guidelines say it is improper to use an NDA to seek to prevent or deter a person from reporting misconduct to any responsible body, or making a protected disclosure under the Public Interest Disclosure Act (i.e. whistleblowing).

The employees speaking up to a journalist here could easily be considered to be whistleblowers, or simply to be protected if they are disclosing poor conduct on the part of someone senior in a public organisation. Technically, the Palace or Harry and Meghan could try and sue them. But they probably wouldn’t win, and it would be hugely damaging to do so.

(It’s quite likely Valentine Low would have arranged for the employees to seek legal advice about how much of a risk they were running before speaking to him, so they would be aware the risk of legal reprisals are low).

Interesting. Thanks @Serenster 😊

To be hounded relentlessly in one's free time is totally unacceptable.
It is very harrying to behave in this manner.

Lady Colin Campbell advises that the Valentine Low has ''Impeccable sources'' , and recommends it, She has it on order.

That's very true. Plus, the queen had 4 children while Charles only has 2 sons, one of them being Harry. There was always going to be a role for him and his wife, one they would have had a lot more freedom to shape than William would ever have, as his life as Prince of Wales and future king is much more constrained.

I think what Harry really meant is that he wouldn't be the 'star' as he aged and George and his siblings grew into adulthood. I think that suggests he enjoys the limelight rather more than he might care to let on.

They also don’t have any gravitas or traction. Most people in the elite / super league earned their reputations over years of hard graft - these two are consummate grifters. Apart from Trump…….

The real elites are always on guard as to who is in their inner circle as they are always at risk of their association being exploited and they only want to bask with those of a similar status to maintain and engage their hard earned reputations.

These two are no better than tabloid fodder, who have shown that they are bitter, vexatious and indiscreet.

It’s no wonder they have been cold shouldered by US elite society - loose lips sink ships.

Very much so. If you take the age difference out of it. Also John and Yoko.

It would be really, really sad if he and Meghan end up like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, consumed by lasting bitterness and their grievances, him making occasional visits where he is treated with great caution by those previously close.

Do you not think that this is where H&M already are? I was going to say coming up for two years as to when they physically left the country but from those extracts it seems it started immediately in spring 2017 - 6 months before their engagement was even announced…..whilst most of us was believing it was wonderful for years after that.

Was it PW who suggested he take his time with the relationship? And wasn’t KM criticised for not being effusive enough about their engagement - that all seems to make sense now.

Thanks for the share tokens @goldierocks .
Charles does sound rather gullible doesn't he? No wonder PP used to despair of him.

I thought your thread showed fewer signs of being derailed . You what I mean ! So asked for it to be deleted.

Yes I read this too. Harry was flouncing because C had told him it was inappropriate for Meghan to go. So childish.

@Serenster are you thinking the courtiers have done the book off their own backs?

Do any of them still work for the Palace?

Regarding the plane to Aberdeen. BBC seemed to think they'd be 7 Royals on it.

In the event only 4 got off it. I do think there has been a debate about Meghan and Harry spat the dummy out. Who would have been the 7th?

I think that with the Heather Mills-McCartney situation - Paul although vulnerable and easily led at that time - had a patient and loyal family ready to support him when he finally saw the light that they had already seen.

Not sure Harry has this. He has burnt bridges - I don’t think KC has the emotional capacity work on building bridges - KM might be the ultimate peace-maker?

I don’t know enough about John and Yoko - apart from they stayed together.

Kate - she took one for the team

I wonder if the 7th was an assumption that the Duchess of Cambridge would go plus both Sussexes, then she stayed home to look after the children and let William have undiluted time with his grieving father and that’s when it unravelled a bit so no Sussexes either.

I can only assume that, like the majority of the public, Charles was completely unaware of these individuals being paedophiles and worse.

I cannot imagine that, unlike Andrew, he would have continued an acquaintance with them knowing how appallingly hideous they were.

And probably those individuals revelled in their ‘friendship’ with Charles because that provided a veil of respectability?

Gotcha re thread @SilverLiningPlaybook !

I just think that Meghan has no idea how families generally work. It's hard enough having a parent dying without having to emotionally accommodate someone who has caused tension in the family before. Harry wasn't the principle mourner anyway.. They were Charles, Anne, Andrew and Edward.

I’m actually staggered that either of them thought it appropriate for Meghan to go to Balmoral. She had refused all other invitations there when the Queen was alive , just to compound matters. How on earth did she think it would be received for her to rock up amongst the Queens children on the day the Queen died? It’s staggeringly lacking in empathy/

I think Kate was going for go , maybe with George, and then was forced to pull out to mollify Meghan. Much like what happened at he Commonwealth service when H and M threw a tantrum.

I don’t think M has a clue how families work, no. This probably means she doesn’t empathise with Harrys conflicted emotions.

Yes, if it's true that Harry kicked off when Charles said that Meghan wouldn't be welcome at Balmoral the day the queen was dying then again that shows a spectacular lack of awareness from Harry. How would you NOT know this wasn't appropriate?!!

JS deliberately targeted and groomed elites including Margaret Thatcher so that he could hide in plain sight.

These predators are v manipulative and cunning. Even Louis Theroux spending 3 months on a doc with him couldn’t smoke him out.

@YanTanTetheraPetheraPimp, in the case of Peter Ball:

"Prince Charles told Ball in a letter in February 1995, two years after the bishop had accepted a police caution, which was read to the inquiry: “I wish I could do more. I feel so desperately strongly about the monstrous wrongs that have been done to you and the way you have been treated.”

Charles later arranged for the Duchy of Cornwall to buy a house to be rented by Ball and his identical twin, Michael, also a bishop.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/14/friendship-with-prince-charles-made-paedophile-bishop-peter-ball-impregnablee*

If there's any truth in that Heat article then I feel for Harry - he's torn in two and he's never going to be able to keep both his family and Meghan happy. She quite clearly doesn't give a shiny shite whether she upsets the RF or not, but if it's true that he's feeling conflicted and miserable that's going to be a major bone of contention between them, because their entire livelihood is built on slagging them off and spilling their secrets and Meghan isn't going to stop because of Harry's feelings. There are seven more Archetypes podcasts to come out, after all and a $40 million, three-book deal for Harry, half of which has apparently already been paid to him. I see trouble in paradise ...

It really does seem like his head and all he has learned has been taken over. This would have been a basic understanding in any family - why does he always think Meghan comes before everyone else.