Page 8 | PH lost bid to challenge for right to pay Home Office for his security

Mumsnut · 2023-05-23T09:34:06+00:00

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

WheelsUp · 23/05/2023 19:19

OhcantthInkofaname · 23/05/2023 19:07

Pure stupidity for the monarch not to provide security for his own child.

Did you feel like that when only Charles out of Queen Elizabeth's children had 24/7 security ? The others had security when they were working.

I know that Andrew seemed to have security despite not working so I haven't a clue what the terms were there but I would assume it's not like Charles' security.

polkadotdalmation · 23/05/2023 19:20

OhcantthInkofaname · 23/05/2023 19:07

Pure stupidity for the monarch not to provide security for his own child.

He's an adult, not a child. He can work, has his own money, has millions in inheritances. At what age is he expected to stand on his own feet?

PicturesOfDogs · 23/05/2023 19:21

TrashyPanda · 23/05/2023 17:48

he wasn’t shouting
no evidence
only Harry’s word - and we know he lies
ditto

there is actual evidence of Harry’s bad temper. And numerous photos of him looking murderous.

Show quote history

Tbf, even Harry didn’t say William punched him.
He said he grabbed him and broke his necklace.

Where has this ‘punch’ come from?

Source please

8roses · 23/05/2023 19:25

😂😂broke his necklace - boo hoo hoo - a new knot and it was all fixed

TrashyPanda · 23/05/2023 19:31

Won’t somebody think of the poor dog? It’s bowl got broken, after all.

I wonder if Harry rubbed 8 Hr Creme on his bruised ego?

FloofCloud · 23/05/2023 19:33

8roses · 23/05/2023 19:25

😂😂broke his necklace - boo hoo hoo - a new knot and it was all fixed

Lol 😆
It's also amazingly similar to all their other stories where they don't ever set the scene ... I'd imagine because if you saw what had happened in and around it, the narrative would change significantly foe those understanding what was actually going on 😉 ... but like the plane to the queens bedside, the tiara, the bridesmaid dresses, the money apparently no one afforded them when they've found freedom over the pond .. yet turns out they forgot Charlie paid a fortune to them during the months they were there ... you get the picture

polkadotdalmation · 23/05/2023 19:36

Very tiny item on sky news, so Harry is not very important unless a spokesperson can broadcast an exaggerated, sensationalist statement.

Dealswithpetty · 23/05/2023 19:37

LadyVictoriaSponge · 23/05/2023 19:10

What had Meghan actually done to warrant these awards? Meanwhile Sophie is in Iraq.

The Duchess of Edinburgh has made a surprise visit to Iraq as part of her work championing the survivors of conflict-related sexual violence.Sophie has spent two days in the capital Baghdad, where she heard about the challenges facing Iraqi women and girls, and the ongoing work to protect and promote their rights, Buckingham Palace announced.
The previously unannounced trip, which was kept secret for security reasons, was made at the request of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, in support of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda (WPS), the Palace said.

A government-led PR mission – you must wonder how it’s possible that she is not yet a Nobel laureate 😮

Flopsythebunny · 23/05/2023 19:45

CathyorClaire · 23/05/2023 11:03

All these lawsuits must be tearing through the cash.

He may have legal cover on his house insurance 😁

skullbabe · 23/05/2023 19:48

Serenster · 23/05/2023 17:41

I’m genuinely interested in what your thoughts are then @skullbabe , because even looking at this with natural sympathy for someone who clearly has deeply ingrained issues around personal security and risk in this case Harry:

Filed this claim after he’d already filed his first claim challenging the decision not to provide him with permanent security in the UK as of right
Filed it with the benefit of legal advice, from a competent team of lawyers
Filed it against the Home Office, knowing full well that taxpayers money would be spent defending his application
Filed it either not knowing or not caring that it was setting a harmful precedent for future cases
Filed it either not knowing or not caring that it was wasting the courts’ resources and time (they exist to perform a public service, they are not there to further personal vendettas)
Filed it knowing that even in the worst case scenario, and he loses both his judicial review claims, he will still receive personal protection if RAVEC determines the threat to him or his family warrants it.

Given the above, I find it hard to see how even a supporter of Harry would consider this a lawsuit that he was right to undertake. You clearly don’t agree so it would be interesting to understand why.

Show quote history

I'm not a lawyer Serenster, so my understanding of the legal aspects might be limited. It's unfortunate that Harry felt the need for something that he believed would ensure his safety. However, I can certainly empathise with the situation which is what I believe I did when I said "what shame for him". Nonetheless, I trust the judgment of those involved in the legal process and feel that the decision was the right one.

The comment you based your questions around was regards to the joy expressed by other posters in response to the judgment. I found this to be distasteful. I still do - hence my comment.

Dolma · 23/05/2023 19:59

skullbabe · 23/05/2023 19:48

I'm not a lawyer Serenster, so my understanding of the legal aspects might be limited. It's unfortunate that Harry felt the need for something that he believed would ensure his safety. However, I can certainly empathise with the situation which is what I believe I did when I said "what shame for him". Nonetheless, I trust the judgment of those involved in the legal process and feel that the decision was the right one.

The comment you based your questions around was regards to the joy expressed by other posters in response to the judgment. I found this to be distasteful. I still do - hence my comment.

Show quote history

The officers who carry out personal protective services are required to put themselves in harm's way in order to protect their principals. This is because, to be blunt, they are seen as expendable cannon fodder when it comes to protecting the interests of the State.

Surely there's quite a lot of joy to be found in the fact that this isn't going to be extended, and these people are not going to be required to put themselves in front of bullets because a wealthy person has decided that their own life matters more?

Harry's fight against the Home Office isn't a zero sum game. Other people matter too.

skullbabe · 23/05/2023 20:02

Dolma · 23/05/2023 19:59

The officers who carry out personal protective services are required to put themselves in harm's way in order to protect their principals. This is because, to be blunt, they are seen as expendable cannon fodder when it comes to protecting the interests of the State.

Surely there's quite a lot of joy to be found in the fact that this isn't going to be extended, and these people are not going to be required to put themselves in front of bullets because a wealthy person has decided that their own life matters more?

Harry's fight against the Home Office isn't a zero sum game. Other people matter too.

Show quote history

Perfectly reasonable - but that is not what I am objecting to. Thanks.

bigbabycooker · 23/05/2023 20:05

It's clearly the right result.

I do sympathise that Harry was born into a family in which his security would be an issue (though if he wasn't he wouldn't have the fortune he has, frankly, so it does cut both ways). Whilst I have sympathy for them as being full time royals wouldn't be for me either, I think it's a shame that he and Meghan have played their cards a bit badly - if they had gone about things differently, they could have been like Eugenie or Beatrice and just had security when they did royal jollies and paid for their security and worked in another country (which is what eugenie is doing in Portugal I think?).

Regardless, it's just not acceptable for the police to be on standby ready for hire for wealthy people. You'd have to have people there on standby "in case" of a visit and monitoring on a permanent basis - has Harry really thought through what paying for police protection to a standard similar to what the royals enjoy when he is in the U.K. would actually cost? It wouldn't just be the odd police motorbike and a bloke standing outside his residence when actually in the U.K.. It's just a massive floodgates issue. Of course, if Harry is going to a public royal event, it seems very likely he will be factored into the costs of protecting everyone under existing discretion. I think if he chooses to fly in for a private event then really that's for him - lots of celebrities move around for private events all the time without attracting much attention.

2bazookas · 23/05/2023 20:09

Harry, you left. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

behaveasbefitsthesituationwillyas · 23/05/2023 20:11

Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious · 23/05/2023 18:40

*He already pays for private security in the US, it's not an issue because they are allowed to carry guns. Private security in the uk aren't allowed to do that.

He's not asking for the public to pay for met police in the UK, he wants to pay for it himself. Personally, they should have let him pay the police, surely that money could do some good, i.e. hire more police officers or something?*

No. He's a public citizen. Then anyone rich enough could do it. Our police are not for hire.

Certainly not anyone rich. But Harry is the son of the King of England. He deserves at least to be able to pay for it himself. But hey, at least he tried.

MamoruHisaishi · 23/05/2023 20:13

PicturesOfDogs · 23/05/2023 19:21

Tbf, even Harry didn’t say William punched him.
He said he grabbed him and broke his necklace.

Where has this ‘punch’ come from?

Source please

Show quote history

Harr’s accusation of William pushing him sounds very similar to what Harry did to a photographer, which was caught on camera. Apparently, Harry was already in the car when he decided to step out and push the photographer unprovoked. That photographer ended up with a bruise or cut, and I think he went to the police about it.

Also, Harry has claimed that he slapped his bodyguard when he was drunk, and has also been accused of slapping one of the foo fighters. Also all unprovoked.

It's clear that Harry has a violent temper, and physically attacks people whenever he feels like it.

Meanwhile, the only time we got to see William lose his temper in public was when the paparazzi was stalking him and his family, and even then he was very restrained.

As for the claim that the press never reports on william’s escapades, that's clearly not the case because he's been caught many times when he was younger, looking drunk and stumbling into cars with a drunk looking kate. He's been caught dancing awkwardly in bars, and his and kate’s phones were hacked more times than harry’s was.

Not to mention that paparazzi took photos of him on his honeymoon with kate. So no, the press haven't always been kind to William or to kate. Theyre just not foolish enough to do things like hurl racial slurs, or wear Nazi costumes, or compare the taliban to chess pieces, nor are they shameless enough to come up with over the top statements that evokes images of Diana’s car crash.

IcedPurple · 23/05/2023 20:14

behaveasbefitsthesituationwillyas · 23/05/2023 20:11

Certainly not anyone rich. But Harry is the son of the King of England. He deserves at least to be able to pay for it himself. But hey, at least he tried.

Show quote history

Sorry, but why does his parentage mean he can hire armed protection on a private basis? Andrew is the brother of the 'King of England'. Should he be able to purchase police protection too?

If Harry is deemed to be at risk, he will be granted protection. I simply fail to see what the problem is here. Maybe you can explain?

Dolma · 23/05/2023 20:18

behaveasbefitsthesituationwillyas · 23/05/2023 20:11

Certainly not anyone rich. But Harry is the son of the King of England. He deserves at least to be able to pay for it himself. But hey, at least he tried.

Show quote history

Oddly enough, Harry's lawyers didn't try to argue that Harry has royal blood
and is therefore deserves special dispensation under the Police Act.

All of their other points were considered to be unarguable (not just that the judge disagreed with them - Harry lost because his entire case had no points that were even arguable). You'd think they would have thrown this extra one in the mix. You never know. Might have gotten lucky with it.

WheelsUp · 23/05/2023 20:19

@8roses You'll be pleased to know that the necklace is fine- Harry is wearing it on the cover of Spare.

smilesy · 23/05/2023 20:20

behaveasbefitsthesituationwillyas · 23/05/2023 20:11

Certainly not anyone rich. But Harry is the son of the King of England. He deserves at least to be able to pay for it himself. But hey, at least he tried.

Show quote history

Why does being the son of the King ( of the Inited Kingdom, not England btw) entitle him to pay? As has been said ad nauseum he would be protected if he came here on official business. He cannot have access to Special protection if he comes over for a jolly, however. Not least because the officers are not hanging around waiting for something to do. They look after politicians as well as royalty and have a full time job. There are no extras for Harry to make use of when he feels the need. And hasn’t he already manage to attend a couple of court hearings without the use of special
protection?

smilesy · 23/05/2023 20:21

*United Kingdom

behaveasbefitsthesituationwillyas · 23/05/2023 20:21

Andrew is the brother of the 'King of England'. Should he be able to purchase police protection too?

I'm sorry, but isn't the King paying for Andrew's protection? Yet he cut security for his own son. That says it all about this disgusting family to me.

IcedPurple · 23/05/2023 20:24

behaveasbefitsthesituationwillyas · 23/05/2023 20:21

Andrew is the brother of the 'King of England'. Should he be able to purchase police protection too?

I'm sorry, but isn't the King paying for Andrew's protection? Yet he cut security for his own son. That says it all about this disgusting family to me.

Nobody has a clue who if anyone is paying for Andrew's protection.

And to repeat, it's not within the king's power to 'cut off' security. Harry chose to give up his official status and go to find freedom on the other side of the world. He removed himself from his security.

smilesy · 23/05/2023 20:26

IcedPurple · 23/05/2023 20:24

Nobody has a clue who if anyone is paying for Andrew's protection.

And to repeat, it's not within the king's power to 'cut off' security. Harry chose to give up his official status and go to find freedom on the other side of the world. He removed himself from his security.

Show quote history

If Andrew is having his security paid for, it will be private security anyway. Harry wants met special protection and access to any intelligence the met have.

MamoruHisaishi · 23/05/2023 20:31

bigbabycooker · 23/05/2023 20:05

It's clearly the right result.

I do sympathise that Harry was born into a family in which his security would be an issue (though if he wasn't he wouldn't have the fortune he has, frankly, so it does cut both ways). Whilst I have sympathy for them as being full time royals wouldn't be for me either, I think it's a shame that he and Meghan have played their cards a bit badly - if they had gone about things differently, they could have been like Eugenie or Beatrice and just had security when they did royal jollies and paid for their security and worked in another country (which is what eugenie is doing in Portugal I think?).

Regardless, it's just not acceptable for the police to be on standby ready for hire for wealthy people. You'd have to have people there on standby "in case" of a visit and monitoring on a permanent basis - has Harry really thought through what paying for police protection to a standard similar to what the royals enjoy when he is in the U.K. would actually cost? It wouldn't just be the odd police motorbike and a bloke standing outside his residence when actually in the U.K.. It's just a massive floodgates issue. Of course, if Harry is going to a public royal event, it seems very likely he will be factored into the costs of protecting everyone under existing discretion. I think if he chooses to fly in for a private event then really that's for him - lots of celebrities move around for private events all the time without attracting much attention.

That's the problem right there. Harry doesn't think things through. He expects to get his way because he's a spoiled man child who's been coddled pretty much his whole life. Plus he's not known to be very smart. He's his own worst enemy.