Did William really cheat on Kate?

[ttcstop]

I keep hearing this rumour and I'm just curious to know where it comes from? Where is the evidence?

@Onthenextcourt67. On the other hand and another factor which makes me think it's not true is Kate family. They have welcomed him in like a son and given him the proper family his own couldn't give. It would be hugely disrespectful to them.

Your instinct says not, but you have evidence it's true? That doesn't make sense, @Makesense12 if you'll pardon the pun....

@Maireas

None of us have any solid evidence.
So inspite of my instinct saying no, it can't be, it's quite convincing that the two people I know both seperatly know people who move in different royal sets say it is.

However, it's people "saying" it's not evidence so I'm not convinced but also not surprised.

Right. I personally have seen no evidence and I think it was made up to smear William and hurt Kate, for whatever reason. These things are cruel. Interesting that Rose Hanbury's son is a page boy at the Coronation.

@Maireas..

I have no idea but two people who I know who only know each other as acquaintance have very different sets of friends in different parts of the UK.
Both royal sets.

It would be disrespectful to any spouse yet people cheat. You think that disrespecting a spouses family would stop someone?

Apparently the Marquess of Cholmondeley, Rose's husband has just been appointed Lord in Waiting to the King

So they will still be very close to the family

Exactly, @Nanny0gg , plus see my post upthread about their son.

@Nanny0gg that doesn’t surprise me as apparently they’re good friends, W & MofC.

Obviously, no one knows the truth. Some people seem to think that William, having been in the middle of his parents' divorce (he was his mum's closest confidant) and seeing his mum suffer, he would not put his wife through the same yet we often see children repeating their parents' mistakes.

If he actually cheated, I don't think it was with Rose though. The Middleton clan is very tight so I don't see Pippa naming her child after the woman that is sleeping with my sister's husband plus, Rose still hangs around the family at times.

Obviously, I'm don't know how they are privately but loooking at their body language publicly, William and Kate actually reminds me a lot of my parents. They were in love at the beginning but after several years, they became most like roommates/besties than spouses. They got along great. They have an incredible friendship but they seemed more like best friends than a couple. I never saw
However, they took a LONG time to officially separate. My mum's father died was she was really young and my dad's parents, although they are still married today, my grandfather has been unfaithful the entire marriage. I guess they wanted to give me the stable, proper family that they never had so they waited until I was 18. 5 years later, they're divorced, still call each other everyday.

I keep seeing the theory that Kate tolerates the cheating because she's desperate to be Queen but I actually think Kate is a stay-at-home mum at heart and would rather be at home all day, taking care of her children. She moved her family out of the palace to a smaller 4 bedroom home, not that far from her parents. She doesn't want to miss the drop-offs and pick-ups which is why she does less engagements. She never works during the school breaks and you can tell she doesn't like public speaking very much.
It took her 6-7 years into married life to start an actual project (early years). I think she loves William because to me, royal life is not what she wants. Her passion is clearly being a stay-at-home mum yet she married a prince and not just any prince, the heir to the throne.

Anyway, I wish them both and the children happiness and if that means eventually divorcing then so be it. We're in 2023. A divorce will not end the royal family. If they could survive all of scandals of the 90s and the death of Diana, a divorce between these two is not going to end the monarchy. Plus, close to 50% of marriages in the UK end in divorce, most people wouldn't care and would just feel sorry for the children.

Also also know two separate people who know people so to speak. They also say it happened.

Me too, FWIW, but you’re looking in wrong place quite possibly, the true situation just might make it easier for Kate to look past & understand.

Until evidence comes out of prince William cheating I will consider this as nothing more than a rumour without any basis in truth. The story that leaked in the Sun mentioned nothing about any affair between Rose and William. Nicole Cliffe, an American (?) writer then came out with her own theory that this was meant to imply that William was cheating on kate with rose. She later clarified that this was all just her opinion and that she didn't have any evidence of any affair that happened between William and Rose. And of course there was Giles Coren who further fuelled the rumours who then ended up retracting his claim by saying it was a joke and he was drunk when he wrote it. So again, two sources who helped fuel this gossip have denied any knowledge of an affair that supposedly occurred. Furthermore, if there really was such a thing to this rumour, why would kate invite rose to her birthday or some other special event? Why would her sister name her baby Rose if there was truth to the rumour? And knowing how vicious the British press can get, why wouldn't they pursue this story and expose this affair? They know sex sells, this would be one of the biggest stories out there and no matter how they feel about William, they wouldn't hide this affair out of respect for him if they know they can generate sales and money from the story. They did it to his dad, why wouldn't they do it to him? This story has been so widespread, that surely there would be something to show for it by now instead of this unsubstantiated gossip. It reminds me of the pegging story, where people actually believed that prince William was into pegging, which was all based on blind gossip submitted to deuxmoi! This is the extent of the cheating evidence, relying on people who have since retracted their stories or admitted to making things up, or from people who know people whose cousin’s hairdresser’s friend’s son works for the royal family or hangs around people who are close to the royal family.

In a nutshell, @MamoruHisaishi .
It would be amusing were it not so hurtful and damaging to those involved.

Yes and this accusation was used against Diana by one of Charles's powerful friends, when she was literally in the middle of minefield in Angola drawing attention to the Red Cross campaign against land mines.

It's a misogynistic tactic powerful men have been using against their ex wives for years - to call them "hysterical" or "unstable" in order to damage their credibility.

According to the Irish Times,

"The finger of suspicion pointed briefly at the Armed Forces Minister Sir Nicholas Soames. He quickly denied involvement and suspicion eventually alighted on Junior Defence Minister, Earl Howe.

He [Soames] admitted to lunching with two journalists at the Simply Nico restaurant, near parliament, but insisted he did not recognise the comments which appeared later in the Times and Daily Telegraph."

Apparently Howes later distanced himself from the comments.

In other words Howe "probably" took the fall for Soames, the Armed Forces Minister at the time - we don't know for sure - but Soames was a courtier at Buckingham Palace (an equerry to Charles) and had been a friend of Charles's since their teenage years. Charles was best man at Soames's first wedding.

Even John Major, the Prime Minister at the time, had to get involved to warn Nicolas Soames against bad-mouthing Diana in the Commons https://www.independent.co.uk/news/pm-ticks-off-soames-for-jibe-at-diana-1583354.html

And a threatening phone call from Soames to Diana was spoken about at the UK inquest in to her death.

Soames also spoke publicly about Diana's "mental instability and paranoia" which he later apologised for "because he wasn't a psychiatrist" and "he should not have got involved".

Remember that Diana, post divorce, had recovered from bulimia and was much happier away from the R. Any paranoia she may have felt was exacerbated by the activities of Martin Bashir who organised the faking of 72 documents to win over her trust. Her private secretary, who worked with her for eight years on her charity work, found her "good humoured, professional, and down to earth".

I think all of this is important because it speaks to the fact that Charles has allegedly used tactics such as allegedly using friends to brief against ex-members of the Royal Family with whom he is no longer on good terms. So the issue is still live! Of course Soames, if he was the culprit, could have acted independently but as it involved such a high profile individual, and he was a government Minister at the time, I think it's unlikely.

Anyway, I wish them both and the children happiness and if that means eventually divorcing then so be it. We're in 2023. A divorce will not end the royal family. If they could survive all of scandals of the 90s and the death of Diana, a divorce between these two is not going to end the monarchy. Plus, close to 50% of marriages in the UK end in divorce, most people wouldn't care and would just feel sorry for the children.

I find this very interesting ^^. Genuinely - not being sarcastic. I don't think anyone objects to divorce per se nowadays, it's more the covering up and negative briefing that goes along with it. Just as no one minded Charles and Diana splitting although it was a sad event, it was more that BP had pretended everything was fine, and denied all rumours of affairs, and the public disliked being lied to I think. So if Kate and Wills ever split because of an affair, I think it would be the cover up that would be damaging. Also the fact that it would follow all the scandals of the 90s, because a monarchy needs to be stable in order to survive.

This 👆

It’s the other way around though - the husband was already Lord Great Chamberlain to QEII when he and his wife met and married. This was an office he held because of his title as the Marquis of Cholmondeley, which he inherited when his father died in 1990. Previously, his father had been the Lord Great Chamberlain.

The office of Lord Great Chamberlain rotates between three families, changing each time there is a new monarch. Given the way the rotation scheme works, the Marquis of Cholmondeley will be back in the role again when William becomes King.

I have no idea, but given that King Charles’ reign is likely to be shorter than his mothers’, maybe he felt it would be sensible to keep the the Marquis still in the institution so there can be an easy transfer to the new reign. Or maybe Charles just likes him and wanted to keep him around, so found a new role for him? Who would know.

Next door neighbours milkman’s dog said it was true so it must be 🙄

been raised since birth not to do dumb shit that could embarrass the family.

Yes, this strategy has worked out so well for many of them 😆

Big leap from William having potentially cheated to them getting divorced - they look really happy. Kate is not a good actress - or not a fake depending how you want to look at it. It’s obvious when she’s not close to or not happy with someone. If he did cheat, I think they have moved on. And I don’t think he will cheat in the future.

Yes there’s that but equally I think people are incredibly naive about the RF in general and how different rules apply to most of them v us!

Their lives are about as far removed from ours as it is possible to be, but of course most of the time it serves them well to come across as “ordinary” and “relatable”.

They are unknowable figures on whom most of us tend to project an image with which we feel most comfortable. The steadfast loving husband is much more wholesome to contemplate than a more nuanced situation for example.

People say that the age of deference is gone but it really isn’t for those at the very top of the tree. One only had to read the reporting of the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral to realise that. I am not saying that’s all bad either. But I suspect there is a massive amount of image management going on that we are unaware of; I honestly think we are being played, and played again!

And this is pure speculation on my part but I suspect this has something to do with what lies at the heart of Harry’s resentment; that rather than betraying his family, he’s probably hidden much worse things than he has laid bare in his book!

I don’t defer to them - but I like them - other than the yorks and Harry.

Heavens! Do we really still want to live in a society where royal favours are granted in rotation to three aristocrat families owing to some accident of birth hundreds of years ago; with privilege embedded in the very heart of our establishment?

Or if we do, why doesn’t the King change the tradition and place a working class family in the line up too? (Yes I am being serious …why not? ) All of these “historical traditions” were made up at some point presumably?

It’s all the attendant unspoken privilege that goes along with these appointments that worries me and how all of that privilege and influence trickles down in to the Lords and other institutions… .

I think at one point it might have served us well but there is so little honesty and integrity left in public life, I no longer trust the system.