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

@Puzzledandpissedoff It's this fellow.

https://nypost.com/2024/04/04/us-news/meghan-markle-stan-spreads-conspiracy-that-kate-middletons-cancer-is-fake/

I’m taking from his tweet he’s thinking of taking action against the Daily Mail for collating and publishing … his own tweets? Hmmmm.

Ah, many thanks for the link, @Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar ... I'd heard of this guy at least, but thought the "Jay" was the actual forename of someone else rather than a play on his initial

Edited to add these people really don't do themselves any favours, but toddler-like I guess even negative attention's better than none at all

If I remember correctly, Harry’s flight was delayed . Charles was keen to travel to Sandringham and the helicopter was on standby so outriders etc were arranged to whisk Harry to Clarence House for his brief visit .

Crikey I’m as republican as they come but I’m feeling very sorry for W&K with all this.

I’ve also noticed a proliferation of stories on Twitter over the past three days about the Party Pieces failure which took place a year ago. So …a rehash of an old story about a business owned by a couple whose child is dealing with cancer/chemo right now. This isn’t ok.

🤔🤔🤔

Yeah, the Sussex Squad keep bringing it up as a way to criticise W&C.

The Middleton's sold the business as a going concern, it was the new owner who shut it down due to the debts AFAIK.

That's a pretty nasty set of tweets. I can't see Harry or Meghan agreeing with the sentiments expressed.

Hoooo, this will be interesting, when Montecito ask "who are you, again?"

H & M (anti-bullying champions) never speak out against the SS idiots though. Says it all really.

Not keen on either of these 2 but could be interesting.

The "Whistleblowers" episode on Vintage Read explained the history behind the comments on the DW page. She also attended a Sussex Squad online !meeting and describes the dynamics. She ties it into the deliberate erosion of freedom of speech.

https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHtjd5sKD71jysa85vHkiMmE4Udwmsb-h

That's quite a set of accusations! I look forward to further evidence emerging to get a better understanding.

Her claims do fit with my experience, but I am aware that makes me biased.

The way accusations of racism were used to silence genuine commentary certainly rings true.

I have been.listening to History's Secret Heros. They featured the pioneering doctor (Charles Drew) in blood bank technology, who was African American, who died after a car crash. It became 'known' that he died because he was denied a blood transfusion because of his race.

In fact, his received medical help, but his injuries were so great nothing could have saved him given the medical technology of the day.

His family, in trying to counter the rumours, found people getting angry with them.

The rumours were 'true' for the overall experience of black people in the USA in medical care.

But it wasn't true for Charles Drew.

I don't think it helps the cause of those pointing out the very real disadvantages caused by racism to lie about individual cases.

I hope MNHQ revises their approach to moderation given what is emerging, and considers whether they are being used.

If, as stated on a recent thread, some pro- H&M posters have 'chosen' to leave permanently despite being regulars for several years, maybe look at their posting and who they targetted

What’s the potted version of all this? Is it that evidence has emerged that fans of the Sussexes, in collusion with Harry and/or Meghan, have been manipulating social media to push lies and speculation about Kate, Charles etc?

Amen!

I feel rather betrayed than I engaged with posters here in good faith and spent time attempting to debate with them, when it looks like they were on script and weren't good-faith actors.

Anyone who has recognised the pattern of tag-team attempts to shut down debate will be wondering now if we were being bouzied.

Having lurked for a while i get the impression a number of posters realised they were being played. But MNHQ supported the players

I remember once pointing out on a thread that it was not great when Meghan (a woman of colour) described her experience of racism to Oprah, and then Harry (a white man who has had to apologise for using racist slurs in the past) went on tv and not only denied / minimised it but also defended Lady Hussey. For making that point I was labelled... guess what... a racist 🤦‍♀️

Yep, I too remember a time, where a perceived negative comment about MM was met with rounds of accusations of dog whistling and racism, and lets not forget the ridicule when posters fell into the trap of responding and trying to explain that their comment was being purposely taken out of context and twisted to fit a narrative that didn't exist at all..

I guess it is becoming clearer now where all that was coming from and the Sussex Squad were more than likely behind it.

Exactly that has happened to me too, @Hughs and I am a POC. Apparently, proven racist Harry is a better authority than any of us on what is or isn't racist. I'm pretty sure that, but for marrying Meghan, none of his protectors would touch him with a bargepole.

After Endgame there was a spirited defence of Omid Scobie by regular posters. I thought how upset they got about criticism of him was a bit odd.

The reporting! Gosh, some people must have got repetitive strain injury what with all the pressing of “Report”. I even got deleted ages ago for suggesting Harry had had a hair transplant.

And then we all got slapped on the wrist* for not playing nice.

*Not literally, obv 😊