The royals and Dan Wootton: Byline Times part 1 of 3-year investigation into how Wootton got information about the royal family

[queentim]

Following their series about the Crisis in British Journalism and MediaToo movement, Byline Times reporters have recently released the first report of the 3 year investigation into the link between the royals and (disgraced) TV presenter Dan Wootton.

The first report reveals how Charles and William were angered that Harry refused to remove the name of an aide (William's aide in Kensington) who was paid cash to leak stories about his wife Meghan, and son Archie. This included investigations by the Met.

As a result, Charles removed the $700,000 granted to support them, which would have seen Harry and Meghan living in Canada and representing the Queen, in an effort to bring them back to the UK by exposing their location in Canada and removing their security. This was the collapse of the 'Sandringham Agreement', which resulted in the signing of the Sussexes media deals.

Some highlights, but can be bought for £3.6:

▪ It followed news that a partner of a key aide to Prince William received £4,000 from The Sun allegedly for stories about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex when Wootton was executive editor.

▪ The Metropolitan Police looked into the alleged leaking but could not go to a judge for a warrant to search royal staff property without knowing the identity of the whistle-blowers.

▪ Two internal royal investigations followed – one involving Simon Case, who is today the embattled head of the civil service facing questions over the Government’s response to the pandemic.

▪ Byline Times has uncovered new photographic evidence of Wootton, the aide and the aide’s partner at a lavish private birthday party Wootton threw for his close friends in a £1,675-a-night hotel suite.

▪ Prince Harry sent formal ‘letters before action’ detailing the claims about Wootton and the palace to News UK.

▪ When the aide’s name was not removed from the legal letters, the Sussexes were cut adrift financially and left unable to protect themselves despite having a security threat level equal to the monarch.

▪ The royal household had thought the threat of exposure would force Harry and Meghan to return to the UK, where their profile could be controlled preventing them from eclipsing the future King

Exploding ‘Megxit’: How Dan Wootton and a Cash-for-Leaks Scandal Split the Monarchy

He does seem to be defending William in his post. It all this is true, I hope it doesn't get hushed up. I also think thatvifvit is true, an Invictus visit is a bad idea.

Sorry about typos. Wet screen.

This squad stuff is so childish

I’m not surprised. He seems obsessed with online criticism and comments

It wouldn’t surprise me at all if they were both deep into commenting about themselves under anonymous accounts. None of this is healthy.

I’m willing to believe some of what Wootton is saying, I’ve definitely seen the Sussex squad, Bouzy, the obvious Bots and Sarah Data behaviour but I’m not going with the direct contact of Harry. They may have hired PR or even Bouzy who has orchestrated parts on their behalf, how much of that they know about would only be rumours, but they seem to have lost control of the squad, definitely Bouzy as they need to dial down the temperature and they are unable to.

It wasn’t that long ago Bouzy and Wootton were on the same side, both campaigning for Amber all the same accusations of bots, sock accounts. Dan Wootton is still tabloid gutter style reporting. Sequence of events have placed them on the sides they are, had Harry and Meghan choosen a Dan instead of an Omid, Dan and Bouzy would be singing off the same hymn sheet.

Indeed @pilates . I have just reread the OP . It hasn’t stood the test of time !

I was not familiar with Dan Wooton before all this.

However, those complaining he was “on the other side” - well, doesn’t that add more credibility to his claims? Takes one to know one, and all that.

I can’t understand how Harry would be involved with the squad knowingly. I’m sure security services will be alert and possibly another reason why his visit to the king was so short. What a mess.

I was very interested in Byeline Times when Julie Bindel was among the first writers to be signed up for it in or around 2015, I think. By 2023 she was calling it a 'bloody disgrace' (on TwiX) for having jumped on the gender identity wagon and dumped feminists like her [paraphrasing].

I also picked up from TwiX that it became unclear to a number of writers (and others) where Byeline's funding was going to be coming from going forward.

I wonder if this was yet another thing started in the fires of their fury after Megxit that got out of their control. DW has pointed out the link to Sunshine Sachs. I do wonder if this started as nudge PR and just got completely out of control.

If someone could prove that money changed hands between Sussex PR people and the high level Sussex Squad trolls then I think that would be curtains on either of them ever having a career on the world stage or returning to royal life.

Oh sorry it's 'Byline Times' and I am too late to edit. Missed the 5 minute window!

I wonder if this was yet another thing started in the fires of their fury after Megxit that got out of their control. DW has pointed out the link to Sunshine Sachs. I do wonder if this started as nudge PR and just got completely out of control

Good point. Before they left M&H did seem to have issues over trying to control what was said about them on the internet (which anyone could have told them was impossible) and conceivably thought that they could, actually, control, direct and use this. It would fit with the way they seem to have no concept of planning, actions having consequences and things not always going the way you originally intended.

I think it was Low who said they did - I mean, how does anyone think you can control that? being uncontrollable is the whole premise on which the internet was created.

Do you think there will be a proper investigation into DW’s allegations and, if so, by whom? I presume he has evidence to support his claims otherwise he is in dangerous territory. Perhaps someone with legal knowledge would be kind enough to advise.

I’d assume legally Dan is in the same territory as Bowers was. You don’t need to prove everything is true just have enough that the other side would not want to enter disclosure/discovery. If you wrap lies/rumours in truth you cannot get to the lies without confirming the truth. It the clever part of defamation