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

(And obviously all of this is hypothetical on my part, because the intelligence used by Ravec to make its decisions, is, for good reason, highly classified. I’m just reasoning through what we do know about how the committee makes decisions, which was set out in Harry’s judicial review proceedings)

@Serenster
A visitor is rather different to round the clock year on year protection Andrew gets
And the unsavoury characters you reference are no doubt under witness protection - again very different!

So it is utterly disingenuous to compare those situations to Andrew
He was best mates with a pedophile, the FBI want to speak to him, the ‘royals ‘ protected him and continue to

Wait a minute .
We have been told that no one can ‘pay for security ‘
So what exactly is the mechanism by which Charles pays for Andrew’s ?

Oh wait I know this one !
Its secret right ?

I think an added complication is that he moved out of U.K. and not just to a commonwealth country ( as was originally mooted although the Canadians did not want to pay for security but at least queen was head of state) but to the US and worse than that the pap capital of the world! That Harry thought the British tax payer should be on the hook for that expense with a growing family ( so 24 hour police officers for all 4 of them all eventually doing different things as the children grow up so what 6 each?) is mind boggling but I genuinely think that is what he expected as he was an IPP ( or thought he was)

I believe the answer to your question is that it must be private security, not Metropolitan Police security, since as we know that is not and never has been made available for payment.

Private security is plentiful. They can’t carry firearms though, in the UK. I think Charles also used to pay for private security for Camilla before they were married?

I thought Kate Moss hired Police when she got married?

a freedom of information request lodged by the Mirror found that 35 officers had been employed at the 2011 wedding of the model Kate Moss.

So it is possible. I fear we are going down a rabbit hole on this thread, but I do remember someone linking something from the Police that showed you can hire them. Football clubs do.
However, I appreciate this is different to armed PPOs.

That’s not for personal protection though. It’s more crowd control so a public benefit and it’s not because they want to pay , it’s because the police make them!

That was argued in Harry’s judicial review application and dismissed by the Court as being not the same thing:

“Those services [i.e. Met Security] are different in kind from the police services provided at (for example) sporting or entertainment events, because they involve the deployment of highly trained specialist officers, of whom there are a limited number, and who are required to put themselves in harm’s way to protect their principals. Ravec’s reasoning was that there are policy reasons why those services should not be made available for payment, even though others are. I can detect nothing that is arguably irrational in that reasoning.”

Yes. That's why I said it is different to PPOs

So now we know Andrew doesn’t have armed protection?
We were told that the ‘royals ‘ were sensitive to public opinion re Andrew so his tax payer funded protection was removed . So he has the same security allowed to billionaires- ie no arms .
Hmm
But yes , this issue is for another thread

So now we know Andrew doesn’t have armed protection?

I would assume so.

Although, as I said upthread, there are presumably armed police protection officers around Royal Lodge, as it’s on the Windsor estate, and that is protected (reasonably, as while the Queen lived there she used to go walking and riding in the grounds and also visited her son’s house - that’s where she and Meghan first met. The same is presumably true of the Prince and Princess of Wales). So if Andrew never leaves Windsor, he’s in effect protected by armed security.

Yes as we thought
Andrew has the same armed protection as the rest of them .
The talk of ‘cutting Andrew’s security ‘ and ‘taking away his peppercorn rent house’ - all lies to fool the gullible .

Sorry OP- I’ve gone completely off topic

I too am looking forward to part 2 and 3 of the report into the ’royals ‘ and Dan Wooton
What more could there possible be ?!

Agree. I do not believe Andrew does not have armed protection wherever he goes. Now... how that is funded, god knows. So say, Charles pays for it out of his pocket, but his pocket is probably our pocket isn't it...

You seem so desperate to see them in a bad light that you've confused yourself. They didn't say these quotes.

I don’t think Andrew has security other than on the Windsor estate which H and M would have had if they had remained in Frogmore . Any photos I have seen of Andrew driving his car , he has either been alone or with Sarah .
The only place I have seen it said that Charles pays for Andrew’s security is on MN but if anyone wants to post a link I will stand corrected .

We weren't being thrown to the wolves, we were being fed to them

"A second source with links to the royal households told Byline Times that the “Christian Jones problem promised to drag the hidden dealings between the palaces and the press into the public domain”."

"Another source explained the mechanics of the royal institution’s competing media strategies.

They told Byline Times: “You need to understand the competition that is constantly in play between the offices of the senior members of the Royal Family. Each has their own staff and their own agendas. The primary objective is to protect the institution of the monarchy. Charles and Camilla are obviously at the top of the tree, and were even when the Queen was alive; William and Kate next. Anything that threatens the hierarchy, or the public perception of it, is a problem to be dealt with.

“Quite often these problems are tackled through the tactical use of the press. The offices of each family member have their own relationships with the very top people at the newspapers. If there are specific messages they wish to express, then it will usually be through the Mail, Mail on Sunday, and The Sun, or less frequently through The Times and Sunday Times. These papers continually report briefings spoon-fed from the palace without questioning them.

“This is why it was such a problem when Christian Jones was named in those legal letters. Whether it was true or not true that information Jones collected in the course of his work was ending up in The Sun, was not really the point."

I think what is done in the dark will always come to light.

There is a big problem here with this operation

@potatoheads where did I say those quotes came directly from them? I think you have misunderstood my post but we have moved on now. I don't want to bore anyone by going over it again or anyone to think I was trying to derail the thread.

I don't believe that to be correct. Just because you see him in a car with his ex wife, doesn't mean there isn't a car following on behind and in front.

When he was dodging being served papers by the US Justice Dept, there were always three Range Rovers.

Please google about Charles paying for Andrew's security. I have no idea which links would suit you and there are literally pages of them.

Ok I googled and there are numerous headlines all containing “ likely “ or “ expected “ to pay .
So we don’t know .

For me , none of that re. Each house having its own contacts is a surprise. It’s exactly what I would expect like any “business “ and yes the ultimate goal is to protect the monarchy as that is bigger and more important than any individual in it ( with king and queen top of tree but even they are less important than the crown itself)
I don’t know why anyone is surprised by this?
i think Harry views these different houses as in competition with each other rather than collaborating and supporbut if I was him I would happily view myself as the support to the monarch, not trying to beat them on some foolish competition that I can’t win.
He would have had a much happier life if he’d just taken that attitude and realised how lucky he was to be a lower ranked royal. Again it’s his arrogance and sense of entitlement mindset being determined to see things and interpret events as negatively as possible.
ironically he said he wanted to “collaborate “with the queen in his manifesto. That I think was a Meghan way of looking at it. He should have chosen the word support instead!

OK. Let's explore that. You are suggesting Andrew is paying for himself? Given he got Priti Patel on board to lobby Government to re-instal his taxpayer funded security, I very much doubt it! That was an embarrassment and she had to apologise.

Very many of the links say Charles is paying for it, by the way.
But if you'd prefer to think that Andrew doles out £3M a year for this, that's fine by me. It'll be the first time Andrew hasn't freeloaded, yay!

StormzyinaTCup · Today 08:45
Is this thread going to turn into the Serenster Fan Club like the deleted one?

I certainly hope so. Very refreshing to have a clear, legal mind cutting through the wealth of opinion presented as fact.