PH lost bid to challenge for right to pay Home Office for his security

[Mumsnut]

I've probably garbled that, but that's the gist of it.

He's still the son of the king. And the other royals aren't getting death threats from the far right etc. Why did irrelevant sophie gets a police motorcade, paid for by the taxpayer (which killed an 81 year old)? I highly doubt she's in any danger.

How would you know what danger and threats they face? Unless you're working for national security etc I'm not sure you'd ever be privy to that information?

the other royals aren't getting death threats from the far right etc. Why did irrelevant sophie gets a police motorcade, paid for by the taxpayer (which killed an 81 year old)? I highly doubt she's in any danger

What an ignorant comment.

There was information from a Freedom of Information Act request made to the Met released in April this year. Although, for obvious reasons it didn’t go into specifics, clearly there are credible threats against royal family members:

Police have seen the number of fanatics posing a risk to the royals and other VIPs double since 2014, with officers keeping tabs on more than 200 people.
^^
The number of stalkers posing the highest risk has almost tripled in the last two years from five in 2020 to 13 in 2022.Scotland Yard’s Royalty and Specialist Protection Command refers individuals of concern to the Fixated Threat Assessment Centre which monitors risks to royals, politicians and other prominent figures.
^^
Experts also look at their motivation, whether they intend to cause fear and distress or, in more serious cases, have delusions about being in a relationship with members of the Royal Family and intend to sexually assault or physically harm their victim.

Sophie has a police escort when on official visits. Not the rest of the time.

And, sadly, they were involved in an accident at a well-known blind spot where other pedestrians have been injured and killed.

Sophie had the motorcade because she was working in London. She doesn't get that kind of protection normally.

If Harry had stayed in the UK then he would only get protection like Anne, Andrew and Edward who were the children of a monarch too. There was a kidnap attempt on Princess Anne where her bodyguard was shot but she still doesn't get 24/7 security.

Harry gets protection on a case by case basis. It is fair enough to get it on occasions where people know he'll be visiting the UK for RF business like funerals.

Because he’s largely irrelevant.

practically and constitionally.

Why did irrelevant sophie

'Irrelevant' Sophie just spent two days in Iraq (a place a damned sight more risky than the streets of NY) as part of her work championing the survivors of conflict-related sexual violence. I'd argue that's rather more 'relevant' than accepting one more meaningless 'award.'

Not sure you could describe the Duchess of Edinburgh as irrelevant…

the work that she does is fantastic. I actually really like her and Edward. They just get on with things and now the family has been forced to slim down they will become increasingly more high profile I think as they take over the work that Harry and Andrew left in their wake

How ridiculous for posters to assert there are no risks to members of the RF They literally haven't a clue of the risks. RAVEC are constantly monitoring risk and providing security based on that risk. Years ago princess Anne had a man enter her car with the intent of murdering her. Threats are real.

One of the most irritating things Harry said was how he was saving his mother’s inheritance for his children. Wth? Can you imagine Joe Bloggs saying, “Taxpayer, please support me and pay all my expenses because I’m saving the £30 million I have in the bank.”

Perhaps lawyers did tie up that inheritance in case of divorce, but I don’t think Harry sees it that way. Frankly it seems he understands nothing at all and is still strutting round with a regal cape of entitlement round his shoulders.

I've seen quite a few posters on this site being very pleased with themselves that they have handed over their house to their DC so they can avoid paying for care fees and will land the taxpayer with it, so entitlement to taxpayers money isn't confined to PH, to be fair.

I think the difference is Sophie (and others) just get on with their jobs. The likes of MeGain and Hazza don't like anything unless they can garner awards, financial advantage and prestige - they do things for the wrong reasons - their own greed and gain, not for the good of others - ever - they're solipsistic, they chase woke subject to and current affaires they feel they can gain from, thrown in a few £$€ and steal the thunder - it's disgusting

A lawyer has recently recommended my friends mother should do this - without any prompting from her.obviously I’ve advised her this can be regarded as deprivation of assets.

however - why doesn’t the state provide care for the elderly? My father needed medical care until his death. He also had paranoid delusions and dementia. We paid for his care. There would be an outcry if younger people had to pay for their care. The Welfare State is supposed to provide care from cradle to grave.

Washington Post Ms Awards

After reading the things Meghan (it is spelled ‘Meghan’), and the other women honoured at the Ms Awards have done - I’d have to disagree with you FloofCloud.

(I posted this link to and the thread but it’s relevant here too:)

The King thinks Sophie is very relevant to the Royal Family and clearly values her contribution. That’s why she is in the official pictures - and why Harry isn’t.

That article makes it clear they are honouring joint financial contributions from Meghan and Harry. Seems strange he was ignored and only she got the award.

Read through the rhetoric ... all those things but only spending a few million dollars from their charity ... because they cosy up to people / businesses who do the hard work for their own gain ... hence MeGain ... 😉🤡

obviously I’ve advised her this can be regarded as deprivation of assets

A lawyer recommended that? blimey. Tell your DM that councils can go back years if they suspect deprivation of assets.

I definitely told my friend all that,@MrsDanversGlidesAgain

i was really shocked a lawyer would suggest such a thing, especially as her mum was pretty vulnerable right after her DH had died.

@FloofCloud - totally agree.

its hardly comparable to the likes of JKR, who actually speaks up for women, despite the risks to herself; funds a women’s refuge; funds a research chair at Edinburgh University - and all from her own pocket. now that is actually inspiring! She has never forgotten she was a struggling single mum and actively seeks ways to help women. And she’s had to put up with huge amounts of abuse since she stood proud and said the a woman is an adult human female.

Trashy - ask your friend if she is happy to share a bedroom and a communal bathroom, or if she’d rather have her own room and en-suite? That’s what the proceeds of her home would give her. Fair enough if she can trust her kids to top up state payments from ‘their’ money to cover the better place , but inheritance does strange things to people with

It’s got nothing to do with my friend - it is her mother who is dealing with her lawyer

as the LR is public it is easy for councils to find out

What a load of rubbish. Sophie and the fake sheikh scandal - no greed and gain there eh? Nobody is more solipsistic than the royal family.

And Woke? I don't take anyone seriously who uses the word woke, 😂the only people who use that word any more are right-wingers and idiots like piers - it's the new "politically correct gawn maaaadd..."