What next for the Sussexes?

[Casuaala]

I thought yesterday couldn't have gone better, all things considered; there was the least amount of drama or negative coverage possible regarding the Sussexes.

I'd like to hope that this marks a fresh start. Harry's got all the recriminations off his chest. The Royal Family have maintained a dignified silence and hopefully the future is rosy. The Sussexes can have the life they want in the US, with a small presence in family events back here when appropriate. (I wouldn't be surprised however if Megan never makes it back on UK soil).

Yes there are definitely only 2 scenarios as previously stated, either Meghan told a lot of lies to OW in order to punish the royal family and propel herself to worldwide fame for being so brave for speaking out or Harry a white, prince of untold privilege with a dodgy past on matters of racism, is minimising his own bi-racial wife’s experience of racism.

Just wait for the accusations of racism @StickyWickets !

I don't doubt the comment was said in some context. Was it racist? That depends on exactly what was said, and to whom. I suspect we'll never know. We do know some of her husband's clearly racist comments though.

I still can't countenance airing it in a big splashy US interview. That's just trouble making and publicity seeking. Raising it internally with the RF and leaving it as a private matter was the right thing to do.

Just my view, but Meghan was welcomed with open arms. She didn't like being subject to the machinations of the institution and Harry being second to William. She saw the big expose as her golden meal ticket and Harry was petulant and selfish enough to jump on the bandwagon with her.

You want an exit from the RF but still talk about them endlessly and use the titles for your kids? Hmm. They know that that's the only reason they get publicity and they're struck trying to keep up with the Hollywood glitterati without the financial means.

Whatever the outcome of this courtcase I just like how everything is coming out in the open. Everything is being pulled out. That in itself is a justice of sorts. The underhand corrupt way papers operate to do a story AND the role of palace press office AND actual royal family leaking stories. Not very nice or very kind. All out there to see.

"Raising it internally with the RF and leaving it as a private matter was the right thing to do." They did this, but their issues were ignored and / or minimised.

"Just my view, but Meghan was welcomed with open arms." This is Harry's view also, he clearly stated this in their Oprah interview.

With regards to the comment by one of his family members about their future childrens skin colour, maybe Harry never told her that comment at the time, it may not have registered with him how it could be perceived. She clearly states that Harry told her during her pregnancy, so either she was blatantly lying about it or he really is a bigger dickhead than anyone could even imagine by further piling it on his already suicidal wife.

Who he didn't manage to get any help for, @themessygarden . Instead, that very evening, she had to get dressed up and go to a do at the Albert Hall.

The underhand corrupt way papers operate to do a story AND the role of palace press office AND actual royal family leaking stories. Not very nice or very kind. All out there to see.

Including RF family members leaking information to biographers and then lying about it under oath of course.

"Raising it internally with the RF and leaving it as a private matter was the right thing to do." They did this, but their issues were ignored and / or minimised.

Indeed, this is what they say. But as we know, they're prone to half-truths and deception at times.

Irrespective of whether the response was adequate, they want it all played out in public so they can squeeze and monetise every drop of PR. Yet they're being cagey about the details to make it worse as there's no context, just innuendo.

i am confused. so a member of the RF makes a racist comment. yet H &M are to blame for how they perceived it.
what ever the story, it seems odd that somehow its their fault. yes they should have named the person, if they had the story would have lost traction.

Exactly, if we are to believe all these incidents are true and exactly as they recount them, without any embellishment or exaggeration, then Harry is really lacking in the supportive husband department.

Yes that’s exactly what people actually think. Never mind about the racism… they didn’t deal with it properly.

... either Meghan told a lot of lies to OW in order to punish the royal family and propel herself to worldwide fame for being so brave for speaking out or Harry a white, prince of untold privilege with a dodgy past on matters of racism, is minimising his own bi-racial wife’s experience of racism

Sounds realistic to me, though I'm not sure how naming the person would have lost the story traction, Samcro? Granted it would have stopped all being tarred with the same brush, but isn't that the decent thing to do when it concerns serious allegations?

And yes, mixedrecycling, your take on the IICSA report seems reasonable, except that Charles went much further in promising to "see (the accuser) off" - whatever that means - providing the convicted paedophile with a house and more
So either he's an utter fool lacking judgement or a paedophile enabler. Take your pick, but neither sound appealing to me and certainly not something I'd want in a Head of State

This is the thing, no one really knows what went down, and Harry has since said it wasn't a racist comment after all.

So if you look at it objectively, he really threw his wife under the bus, initially in the interview by contradicting her and undermining her account and timing of what happened and then 2 years later totally dismissing all the racist commentary around what his wife said to Oprah (clearly Oprah believed whatever was said was racist).

I guess you gotta ask what Harry may be on when he is doing these interviews to be so flaky when it comes to something as important as racism.

Have you not seen the posts stating Mountbatten's supposed paedophilia as fact? Pointing out Charles 'friendships' with Saville, van der Post, how close he was to Mountbatten, and saying it 'can't be a coincidence'? Calling Andrew a paedophile, and questioning why his siblings have been seen socialising with him?

Yes I've seen those posts. Joined in the discussions too but three don't constitute 'the entire lot' even in the vaunted slimmed down era.

Interesting Puzzled.

I just think certain members of the RF have appalling judgement. Charles seeing off the accuser of a convicted sex offender priest and giving that priest a home. Asking marriage advice from Jimmy Saville (OK OK most of us were taken in by him... but seriously?!) Andrew and Epstein. Different royals getting caught up in scams for selling access to Royals (Sophie, Sarah, etc)

I can only assume they are far more cosseted than we could ever imagine. Their aides and courtiers don't tell them the truth but just arse lick. They live in a total bubble so are therefore unable to make measured decisions about who to fraternise with.

Also worth remembering Charles made enquiries at Lambeth Palace on Ball's behalf after Ball had been cautioned.

I just think certain members of the RF have appalling judgement

Ain't that the truth - and it's made worse because they do after all have access to the sort of advice most of us can only dream of (or would have if they listened to it)

The simple truth Roussette is that all human being are immensely persuadable and able to be manipulated by people and situations. There is a whole science around this (Behavioural Science, indeed!) that looks at this, and how this knowledge can be used ethically. But the same techniques that are used by advertisers and salespeople to persuade us to align with their messages (do this! Buy this! Believe this!) are also techniques that mean we can all be manipulated by other people too. This can range from the mundane - responding positively to an up selling request, or buying more than you strictly need at a supermarket shop because of the sales techniques used to losing your life savings because you trusted the person who said they were your friend, and desperately needed help/ you bank and you were being defrauded etc etc.

Allied to this is the slightly unfortunate bias that humans also have, that they would not fall for anything. That they have excellent judgment and would not make the same mistakes others do. Statistics show us however that this is also true - all people can be scammed, can fall prey to hard sale techniques, can end up being deceived in a relationship, or by a friend etc etc. Some of the smartest people you can think of can be deceived because they placed trust in someone else.

What most of us have going for us is that our human frailties are not highly scrutinised for the whole world to see. And most of us are not in the situation where people perceive we have power and status that they could use to their advantage, thus making us a positive target. Interviews with normal people who have won large amounts of money, and how it changes the way they are treated are interesting here!).

(And if anyone wants to say “I have never, ever had that happen to me” then the answer is either, it has but you haven’t realised it, or you have been exceptionally lucky. Because otherwise you are not human).

(And none of that means that people also don’t have terrible judgment - Andrew, for example, continuing to associate with Epstein after he had been jailed! But I don’t blame Andrew for falling into Epstein’s circle in the first place. It can be very hard to resist an arch-manipulator who wants to court you, and Epstein clearly succeeded in doing that to a huge number of wealthy and powerful people who you would think should know better. But like all of us, they are susceptible to a skilled manipulator).

Some people are more gullible than others. William is not gullible. He's extremely cynical. That's why he's hated on here by many

I know all that Serenster. It's just by the law of averages, the RF seem prone to appalling judgement. And with their advisers and Courtiers I just do not know how that can happen. Each one is not a lone person acting. They have teams of supposedly qualified people behind them, so say, advising. And still they fall for it.

Now in the case of Andrew.. apparently his Advisers for instance told him towards the end of the relationship that he should not be staying with Epstein but be staying at the Consulate. He (supposedly) told them to fuck off and the only person I answer to is the Queen. Well... it comes from the top, doesn't it? No one, including the Queen, stood up to him.

Yes, their position makes them a target. But knowing that, surely they should be even more suspicious than anyone else.

As far as scams. Never say never with me. But I probably am the most cynical and suspicious person in the UK! I scam watch a lot, I know all about lots of them. My Bank find it very hard to get hold of me on the rare occasions they have needed to. I have even been known to go to a neighbours and make a phone call rather than use my mobile or my landline! Basically, I don't believe anyone.
Even on MN, I don't. I take everything anyone says about their experiences or qualifications with a pinch of salt.

That has backfired on me once, when I related something quite personal and painful, and someone said I could or was, making it up.

I don't know that people actually hate him. I certainly don't.

But I don’t blame Andrew for falling into Epstein’s circle in the first place. It can be very hard to resist an arch-manipulator who wants to court you

As Libby Purves said about Andrew in the Times in 2015...

"Prince Andrew dazzles easily when confronted with immense wealth and apparent power. He has fallen for 'friendships' with bad, corrupt and clever men, not only in the US but in Libya, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tunisia, wherever."

Sums it up really, doesn't it?

Yes I agree. Andrew is totally motivated by money. He should never have been given that trade envoy post

It's just by the law of averages, the RF seem prone to appalling judgement.

See, I think they probably have the same judgement as most people, but they are targeted more than most of us, and then we also know more about when they screw up! The only person who knows that I fell for a taxi scam in Rome once, for example, (late at night, a taxi to my hotel from the train station, I gave the driver a 100 Euro note and he gave me change as if I’d only given him a 20 and then brushed off my bemused query and drove off) is me - until just now!🤣

I completely agree about Andrew - bad judgment, arrogant, and thinks he knows best. Well - hopefully his pariah status has given him the chance to reflect on the errors of his ways!