Harry’s security case

[smilesy]

The judgment is in Harry loses High Court challenge over UK security protection www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68421992 See here

A tiny bit of me felt a bit sorry for him as I think once the enormity of having to pay for his own security forever hit him he tried to resurrect the half in / half out - “I’m coming to help”

I think he never thought the door would be slammed shut on the pampered prince

He had his year to think and thought things were going his way so continued to sling the mud - he’s gone too far and didn’t realise it

He’s probably livid and I wouldn’t be surprised if another “poor me “ interview pops up soon - we all know who the finger will be pointed at

Maybe a good compromise would be to ensure the children should be guaranteed security- those poor mites didn’t ask for a dope for a dad

Where did the information about Meghan hassling Gavin Newsom for Diane Feinsteins senate seat come from?
Thats mad!

But he thought they were holding him back, having to work to a framework and protocol was clearly an affront to him. We don’t owe him
a celebrity lifestyle. He doesn’t seem to have realised that his father has realised it’s a bone of contention hence the push to strip back certain aspects of the monarchy. Harry wants to bring back the days of old. He’s doing a bit of a Charles the first, he also thought his royal title meant the government was answerable to him, not the other way round.

Maybe a good compromise would be to ensure the children should be guaranteed security- those poor mites didn’t ask for a dope for a dad

absolutely not, they chose to give their children ridiculous titles they can pay for their security, I’m sure “Lilibet’s Closet’ will cover the costs.

I think it could well be William, despite the fact that their circumstances are not comparable. Harry wants to be treated in the same way as his brother. It doesn’t occur to him that he is not comparing apples
with apples. It also hasn’t occurred to
him that in removing himself
from the UK and as a working Royal, he necessarily will forgo security being provided, despite this being told to his private secretary in January 2020

You could well be right @smilesy, but I would have thought his legal team would have had enough nous not to use William as an example as the circumstances are so clearly worlds apart.

I think Harry does know the rest of what you have said but refuses to accept it. I know he's not the brightest but he can't surely be that dense to not understand that changing his status and circumstances would er change his status and circumstances.

"Maybe a good compromise would be to ensure the children should be guaranteed security- those poor mites didn’t ask for a dope for a dad"

The judgment confirmed that Harry, Meghan and their children are all in the "bespoke" RAVEC category.

Provided Harry gives the required 28 days' notice of his intention to visit the UK, the process will be followed/current threat-level assessed and they all will be provided with the level of state-funded police security that has been deemed appropriate.

It's Harry himself who is arguing that these bespoke, case-by-case assessments and arrangements are not good enough.

Not forgetting of course that if Harry, Meghan and their children were to stay with King Charles or Prince William in the UK, or attend events where they are present, they would benefit from the security arrangements put in place for the more senior Principals (to use RAVEC’s terminology).

I don’t think that Harry being invited to stay overnight in the same residence as his father or brother is very likely for the foreseeable. I think that’s on Harry himself.

Maybe a good compromise would be to ensure the children should be guaranteed security- those poor mites didn’t ask for a dope for a dad

The children are American citizens living in California.

Their safety is the responsibility of their parents, or failing that, the State of California. Not British taxpayers.

The judgment confirmed that Harry, Meghan and their children are all in the "bespoke" RAVEC category.

Interesting. I thought the court filings only referred to 'security arrangements for the Duke of Sussex'? I didn't think his family were included?

I meant to add - with regards to who Harry used as comparators, there are at least two.

I've read the judgment a few times now and (stressing this is just my opinion), I strongly suspect one of them is Andrew. It's the way the non-redacted parts of the next couple of paragraphs are worded.

The second person might be Prince William, but I don't think so. Again just my opinion, but I think it's Camilla.

His legal team probably do have enough nous, but unfortunately, they can only advise Harry what should or should not be
included in their case. If he insisted on using William as the comparison, his legal team would be obliged to do so 🤷‍♀️

This. The safety of their children is not the responsibility of the British taxpayers. He has not helped matters by insisting that the children should be titled. If he were serious about their safety he would have refused titles for them and made clear they are absolutely private citizens. Those poor children didn't ask to be born to the appalling dimwit arsehole Harry or his grasping wife but it doesn't mean the UK taxpayers are responsible for paying for them or their security.

@Turtlerussell It was reported here in the US. When it became obvious the Dianne Feinstein couldn't continue, apparently Megan, who to my knowledge has never lifted a finger for the California Democratic party, started pestering the governor so much about it that he eventually blocked her.

Before that, Meghan thought she should be appointed to Kamala Harris' seat when Harris was picked to be veep: https://nbcmontana.com/news/connect-to-congress/meghan-markle-considering-run-for-sen-dianne-feinsteins-senate-seat-sources-say-duke-and-duchess-of-sussex-house-of-windsor-royal-family-prince-harry-gavin-newsom-california-los-angeles-family-leave-gun-safety-politics

Also:

They seem addicted to the limelight rather than sincere about anything. A bit like Trump, the king of the narcs.

@IcedPurple California protects certain state officials and foreign dignitaries ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS in the state. Random princes who happen to be living there do not get protected by the state, nor does the Secret Service protect those without Internationally Protected Person status.https://www.chp.ca.gov/find-an-office/headquarters/assistant-commissioner-field/protective-services-division/dignitary-protection-section#:~:text=Dignitary%20Protection%20Section%20(DPS)%20operates,of%20Public%20Instruction%2C%20and%20the

Harry can call the Montecito PD if he feels threatened like anyone else, but he is not entitled to any US taxpayer-funded protection, nor should he be.

Not 'appalling dimwit arsehole Harry' but handsome Prince I'll have you know!😂

Can’t believe he threw his own secretary under the bus.

And saying she was adequately briefed to represent him, that’s on him even if it did hold water!

I’d love for some of the staff to leak their versions, how unfair they can have their reps trashed, be bullied in the workplace, names dragged through court and not able to have a right of reply.

Extract from paragraph 6 of the judgment:

(with regards to the 28th February 2020 letter) ".......RAVEC had “commissioned up-to-date threat assessments” in respect of the claimant and his wife. RAVEC would continue to monitor the security of the claimant’s family, including through periodic threat assessments. If anything should change “in terms of specific threat this would be communicated to the Home Office through established channels with the police and [redacted text] and actioned as necessary”.

Extract from paragraph 172:
"....RAVEC applies the bespoke decision-making model devised in the decision of 28 February 2020."

It's in writing (within witness statements) that the "bespoke process" for Harry includes Meghan and their family.

Harry made the claim in his name only, hence his name alone is referenced in the legal arguments.

Nah..appalling dimwit arsehole describes him perfectly...

As a California voter and a Democrat I am so glad this didn’t happen.
The idea that someone using a title and referring to her children as Prince and Princess be my senator!!
I was just looking at the primary ballot today. The thought that I would potentially have to vote for Meghan Markle in November to keep the senate under Democratic control is jaw dropping.
Bloody glad it didn’t happen. It is such a mad idea.

The way I understand it is that the security services are monitoring threats all the time. If they get wind of a specific threat to Harry whenever that may be ( using a risk assessment of intent, opportunity etc not just some one saying horrible stuff on line) then that will be passed to the Hone office and presumably passed on to Homeland security in the US like it would for anybody and if this threat co incides with a U.K. visit then Harry will get high level security for the duration of the threat but if there is no current threat then he won’t.
In addition to this there are periodic risk assessments carried out ( seem to be annually).
Harry thought case by case basis meant the security services would carry out a risk assessment each time he said he was coming to the U.K. and he didn’t understand that actually that is not the case ( threats to all VIP’s are monitored continuously)
hence his desire for the risk assessment rational about the decisions and who makes them etc.
it’s his misunderstanding of the threat assessments and when / why they are done.
The expert Shane ( can’t recall last name) explained they are not a right that can be demanded whenever Harry wants rather they are a tool that RAVEC can use to inform their judgement for a particular individual at a particular time.
The judgement makes v interesting reading if anyone has an hour or two spare!

Harry I think imagines he is under threat all the time but security services don’t see it that way and don’t include pap’s as part of their remit. For paps etc Harry must employ private security.
i think honestly this is the fundamental misunderstanding between the two sides. The judge agreed with the experts.

Considering it's now clear that it was fully explained his security may change that seems a foolish thing to have done, and it's hard not to wonder what else he assured her about that might not have been based in fact

On another note and about the fees, it's being said that Harry will be on the hook for both sides' costs because it was in the high court.
Can anyone - perhaps @Serenster or @goldierocks - say if this is correct please, because I thought it had been explained before that someone who lost a case wouldn't necessarily have to pay the whole lot?

If he’s so frightened of the paparazzi then why does he seek a celebrity lifestyle? Doesn’t add up.

I think he wants to save money on his bills, and have that sense of being super important. Maybe he’s started watching horrible histories recently but hasn’t caught up to when the monarchy was modernised. Maybe he thinks it’s still like the olden days and the commoners should be obeying him instead of questioning him.

Also, 'paps' are pretty tame these days, at least in Britain and certainly for members of the royal family. There's a kind of unwritten agreement that royals don't get 'papped' when not on official business. For the most part it's adhered to.

He's much more likely to get hassled by 'paps' in his new country of residence. But people far more famous than him get the same and worse, and somehow manage without taxpayer funded security.

Also if they want privacy why do they keep oversharing information about their lives.

There’s lots online about Catherine getting privacy but Meghan wouldn’t. Except that seems to be the last thing she wants most of the time anyway. I actually don’t think I know much about Catherine she’s so closeted about her life.