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).

I definitely wouldn’t be associating with pedophiles after several people had accused them and they’d had a police warning nor would I let them live in my home. I also wouldn’t stay in the house of one after they’d been in prison for child abuse crimes. That’s not a lack of judgement, it’s a poor moral compass to say the least.
I have a relative who has been to prison for sex crimes. I haven’t spoken to them since.

funny how people make excuses for andrew, yet not Harry!!

sadly I think A will be back in the fold soon. he was allowed to play dress up after all.

Yes, possibly same judgement as most, yes most likely targeted far more. But, and it's a big BUT... we Joe Public don't have a team of people behind us that we can run something past. Asking.. 'do you think this is legit?' Can you investigate further this email address and/or source. Can you look into this person and let me know what comes up. Can you get the IT people onto this and check it out.
There should be no excuse. As I say, they are not lone operators.

I did get that 'Hello Mum, I've lost my phone' followed by a heartfelt plea, scam. Unfortunately, I was on the other side of the world and very disorientated and missing my kids like I do. And one of them is in the Guinness book of records for losing phones. I replied to it. I then thought about it for 10 minutes and block block block everywhere!

sadly I think A will be back in the fold soon

The royals have been conniving in his longstanding bid for public rehab for many months.

Allowing him to take centre stage in front of cameras (PP funeral) and walking Mummy to her seat at a high profile service don't happen by accident.

In my mind it's absence of moral code. Image matters in that family but not necessarily with moral foundation. Look good - give a good impression and feel important. Nothing to aspire to there.

Since nobody has a crystal ball the posts about people falling victim seem fair, Serenster, but the difference with Peter Ball is that the support continued after his conviction

Granted the church have their own issues over covering up for abusers, but for me the suggestion that Charles - having approached Lambeth Palace to put his oar in on Ball's behalf - still didn't know what he'd actually done scampers along the margins of the surreal

The same applies to "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", coming from someone who then claimed not to know - as does the so-convenient comment that he "wasn't sure" when he was told about the conviction

As said, IMO he's either an utter fool or something much, much worse, and neither appeal to me in a Head of State

In my mind it's absence of moral code. Image matters in that family but not necessarily with moral foundation. Look good - give a good impression and feel important. Nothing to aspire to there

Exactly, Inkanta - which is why I agreed that the more comes out the better

All of this!! Thank you for the reminders of what he actually said and did.

Charles clearly believed his friend. He was wrong as it turned out but he is part of a family who are or have been repeatedly set up by the press or a journalist or whatever.

If someone told ME they were being set up I would be cautious and assume they were paranoid. I might also be a tad Daily Mail reader about it and think “no smoke without fire”.

But no one I know has ever ACTUALLY been “set up” to the best of my knowledge anyway. He has had 2 sister in laws led well up the garden path by the press for exposure, a wife who was told that he had knocked up the nanny and she believed it, plus probably a few more. So for him, prominent people in his life have been duped, combined with thinking he has good judgement (we often think we have good judgement) AND the man’s a bishop.

And Prince Andrew is an arrogant and disgusting individual but being Prince Andrew has made him the best target. I should think there are many more equally revolting men that VG was abused by, more frequently over the years she was working for Epstein, one’s who weren’t travelling for work on behalf of the FO but they can’t give her a reputed £12m. So he was the Chosen One. It was a very sensible tactic from her financial point of view.

I’m sure QE2 thought he was being set up - he stepped back but if she had removed him from the Order of the Garter, it would have been tantamount to saying she thought he was guilty of trafficking. The new king the same. They won’t do it as they probably believe him.

Charles clearly believed his friend. He was wrong as it turned out but he is part of a family who are or have been repeatedly set up by the press or a journalist or whatever.
After several boys made complaints and be received a police caution.

And Prince Andrew is an arrogant and disgusting individual but being Prince Andrew has made him the best target. I should think there are many more equally revolting men that VG was abused by, more frequently over the years she was working for Epstein, one’s who weren’t travelling for work on behalf of the FO but they can’t give her a reputed £12m. So he was the Chosen One. It was a very sensible tactic from her financial point of view.

Hmmm. Are you suggesting that he was the one who was targeted by VG? Or Epstein? Who he visited and stayed with after he got out from prison for child sex crimes. Would you do that? Go and stay at someone’s house when they get out of prison on crimes like that? Other repulsive men don’t excuse Andrew. Being a target doesn’t have anything to do with choosing to be friends with a child sex abuser.

And here we go again with the derailing Sussex fans. You're on the wrong thread. Keep to the subject matter or go elsewhere as I have been told previously.

This is about the behaviour of the Sussex pair, the clue is in the title!

And the tactics of the 'pile on' are obvious for all to see

You're very welcome, Whaeanui, and there's a further link for you below which contains the full text of Charles's submission to the official inquiry

Note in particular the frequent use of unsure/can't remember, and then bear in mind that much will almost certainly be in the archives - except that whatever he'd rather we don't see will be inaccessible because he's exempt from the Freedom of Information Act (and also, in his new position, from the law)

https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/gloucester-news/prince-charless-letter-child-sex-1833911

Gosh DuchessofPort I am not sure where to begin with your post.

On the Andrew thing... you do know don't you, that he was guest of honour for 4 or maybe 5 days at JE's NY house when Andrew went there to break up with him?

When his Aides had told him he should stay at the Consulate and he told them to fuck off, I only answer to the Queen?

But the victim of sex trafficking targeted him...

No. I’m not.

Are you suggesting that he was the one who was targeted by VG?

Quite likely, yes. VG is represented by lawyer David Boies, who is very close to the Democratic leadership, has defended several of the great and the good in court (and defended Harvey Weinstein in fact) but then switched sides to represent VG - for free, too.

I’m sure the fact that the cases VG has subsequently been advised to bring bring against men who allegedly abused her - that would be Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz - are outsiders to Washington and New York political and power circles is a complete coincidence…

Good for VG then. She has opened some people's eyes to what PA was like (including possibly his Mother) and the fact he is now not operating with impunity and fleecing anyone he can, taking backhanders is a good thing.

Those instances were while the Queen was alive. I don't think King Charles is in any hurry to rehabilitate his brother. He wants Royal Lodge back and has made that public, and he sat Andrew alone by a pillar last Saturday, well out of the sight line of the cameras. It's well known that the Queen spoilt Andrew, was very indulgent with him and that he was her favourite, but I doubt Charles is willing to squander any public goodwill on his brother, who has shown nothing but appalling judgement for years and is known for being boorish, arrogant and unpleasant in both private and public.

I think the working royals wish Andrew would disappear into oblivion and stop riding out for photographers of a morning. The only unmarried son escorting his widowed mother is not a sign of anything!

can’t say I wouldn’t enjoy another absolute car crash of an interview though. But perhaps he’s learned to keep his trap shut.

Anyway. A derail I am heartily contributing to. Let’s get Harry and HIS wonderfully accurate memory into court!

Back to the subject matter again -

Let’s get Harry and HIS wonderfully accurate memory into court!

To be fair, it is something that may prove interesting duchess

I've spent the afternoon reading through this thread and I'm genuinely baffled by those posters who seem to sincerely believe that the RF are just stiff-upper-lip-getting-on-with-their-lives whilst H&M are scheming PR players, intent on getting a message out there with their every move... the RF are seasoned PR players! Anything H&M are doing PR wise is only what Harry long ago learnt from his family and their image-building.

I can't remember where I read this, but it was a couple of years ago at the height of the Oprah madness and it is the absolute truth of this situation: anyone who thinks that the Queen was just a cuddly old granny is deluded. She had been at the head of the monarchy for nearly a tenth of its whole existence and fought- hard- to keep it going when it had become an anachronistic institution beset by scandal. She and PP actively worked to make them a "modern" institution through PR spin, long before Harry, long before Meghan, long before Diana, even.

The RF are determined to carry on and come out as the winners. Harry- love him or loathe him- is pushing back at the narrative they're spinning and attempting to expose it for the bullshit it is. Good for him.

@IJustHadToLookHavingReadTheBook

I find it strange that you feel that Harry and Meghan were innocent babes in the woods. Meghan retained her US representation during her time in the UK which included PR

i think it’s a battle of U.K. / Royal PR versus US/Hollywood PR

i think they are more finely matched than your post implies ?

@IJustHadToLookHavingReadTheBook

Well said! Totally agree with every single word.

Do you remember the tupperware full of cornflakes on the table with the Queen having breakfast. It was all designed for us to think how frugal the Queen was. That idea then stuck for the rest of her life. She was hardly some little old Granny sat in front of a 2 bar electric fire! Of course she wasn't frugal! It is all PR manipulation.

We are spoonfed a diet of Royalty. The image of each member is carefully crafted for our consumption. Anne the hard working one, Camilla keeps her head down, W&K young modern family Boden style (just look at the nauseating Norfolk beach advert for them) . The image control is totally off the scale.
However, it's all falling by the wayside now, what story can they tell to younger generations who view the whole set up with total scepticism.

They have been too long courting positive coverage whilst desperately trying to cover up misbehaviour. Times have changed.

Harry isn't really exposing it though, he using whatever he has at his fingertips as a weapon against his father and brother for not giving him what he wanted with his half in half out.

Supporters claim he wanted out of the family firm for years before he married MM, but in that case, why even ask for half in half out of a job you hated and caused your wife to be suicidal?

He believes in the monarchy, and they both still wanted to be part of it on their own terms. Unfortunately cherry picking the best bits isn't an option. Can you imagine the outrage from the anti monarchy brigade if their Hollywood lifestyle had been funded by UK taxpayer!

He had an over-inflated opinion of his own self importance and thought his leaving would be the downfall of the monarchy. He was wrong.