Will he or won’t he win the battle against the Home Office?

[Tizzwazz]

https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-given-green-light-to-appeal-high-court-ruling-over-police-protection-13148987

“Granting the appeal, Judge David Bean said he was persuaded "not without hesitation" that Harry's challenge has a real prospect of success.”

I think he will win his appeal.

Glad that these people were sentenced.

https://www.businessinsider.com/neo-nazi-podcasters-sentenced-over-prince-harry-archie-death-threats-2024-1

Even if he wins his appeal, the only thing that has to happen is that RAVEC look at their process again. It doesn’t mean that they will decide to re instate his security

typo

Harry wants to be treated fairly and that is the basis of his appeal. Ludicrous that the security risk analysis was dropped by an individual at RAVEC. How could he not have been fully aware that the online hate started along with death threats soon after Harry began his relationship with a biracial woman.

Well if they come to the same conclusion then he must have been treated fairly in the first place 🤷‍♀️

Agreed.

😫😫😫

We’re America, @BemusedAmerican Give me your tired, your poor, your poor, your … fill in your own blank. We have to keep him, he belongs.

Give me your accused paedophile sex abusers.

One interesting feature of the Harry Visa case is the citation of Muchnik v DHS as a "directly analogous situation". This is the case of a journalist who requested, via FOI, information about how George Gibney was able to enter and stay in the US, seeking evidence whether he had been given special treatment under decisions amounting to government misconduct (decisions that would override privacy in favour of public interest).

Gibney, for the uninitiated, was the former Rep of Ireland Olympic swim team coach - and accused of multiple counts of serious sexual misconduct by a number of his former swimmers (many underage). He was due to stand trial before leaving Ireland and taking up residence in the US. The Irish trial collapsed because the statute of limitations expired, not because he was proven innocent of the claims against him. The allegation was that someone in the US was "greasing the wheels" for Gibney's relocation.

Gibney was found to have lied about his criminal prosecution in his application for naturalisation - which failed, but immigration services won't deport him because he was not convicted. Gibney is still living and working in Florida, I believe. It is under this case's precedent that the judge in Harry's case is reviewing Harry's visa documents.

Am I reading that as PH could, potentially, have a criminal past but someone (or some organisation) wants him to stay in the US so the Gibney case is being used as a precedent?

If so, that sounds remarkably grubby. To put it mildly.

@MrsDanversGlidesAgain I believe the attorney for the government referred to "stigmatising" information potentially coming out if the documents were made public. Whether that refers to the drugs or something else is anyone's guess.

Others in the RF have had serious threats. More serious than this. Same goes for politicians and celebrities.
Harry will get the protection he needs, paid for by the taxpayer. It is a fair and just system.

If he does win the appeal, and if RAVEC reconsiders what might this mean if he purchases a home in the UK to be a base on his occasional trips here. Would it get taxpayer funded security year round despite only being occupied for about two weeks a year?

Fascinating discussion re George Gibney @BlueParrotRedParrot
The name rang a bell with me, presumably because of the swim coach allegations but I knew nothing about his fleeing to the states. Sickening.

Yes, it's good that the threats against all the Royals are taken seriously.

BBC News - Man who urged Prince George attack given life sentence
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-44825047

If he has grounds and its justified then he should win his appeal. All that means is that RAVEC agree to review his case, if that happens it's very likely they would come to the same decision.

Harry gets bespoke security reviews and arrangements just now. If they review it, they may decided to downgrade his status further (he just travelled to Nigeria, a country with travel advisory warnings). Sometimes getting what you want doesn't help you.

Whether Harry wins or not I can't see any circumstances whereby he will be awarded IPP status, which is what he wants. IPP is partly an international arrangement, it isn't simply RAVEC, and there are simply no grounds for a random member of the Royal family, with no diplomatic standing to be given it. Can you imagine the political fall out in the US if taxpayers are suddenly expected to fund his security?

a random member of the Royal family, with no diplomatic standing

Absolutely. He's effectively left the RF and no longer undertakes official duties. He's a multi-millionaire who's chosen to live in the US. Harry just never thinks things through - like a toddler. What did he think the implications would be when he flounced off with Meghan? He just took his privilege for granted and now he's finding out just how cossetted he was.

Who does he think he is? Harry needs to take that question seriously, and decide.

https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/1071582-nyc-governor-starts-receiving-complaints-against-meghan-and-harry

There’s a BBC podcast called “Where Is George Gibney?” if you want to learn more about the case. It’s quite distressing, and the state complicity in protecting this POS is maddening to hear about. Irvin Muchnick’s website, Concussion Inc is a really good resource too for this and other cases (his writing focuses on abuse in sport).

I’ll be astonished if the State of California isn’t covering some of their security costs too.

He thought they were going to be very important royals. Only richer. Plus no pesky organisation to answer to.

@BlueParrotRedParrot

I'm in shock that they're using the piece of crap the is George Gibney to help their case.

Surely he is someone you would not want your name associated with. Makes me feel sick

It's a bit like saying 'Well, if it's OK for Gary Glitter...' isn't it? not exactly a precedent you want to appeal to when you want your case decided.

Like I said. Grubby.

I'd be astonished if they were.

Either they qualify for state funded security or they don't. In their case, it appears that they don't.

Do you remember that passage in Spare where Harry compared himself to Andrew to try to get lots of small violins playing?

"Despite being involved in an embarrassing scandal, accused of having sexually abused a young woman, nobody had suggested removing his security.

"Whatever grievances people had against us, sex crimes weren't on the list."

https://www.newsweek.com/prince-harry-finally-breaks-silence-uncle-andrew-scandal-memoir-spare-1771872

Nobody ever suggested removing his security.
What's he on about?
I do wonder about that man and whether he ever pays attention.

Do you remember that passage in Spare where Harry compared himself to Andrew to try to get lots of small violins playing?

Tell people you think you're being treated worse than an alleged sexual abuser but at least you haven't behaved that badly to get sympathy isn't exactly the gotcha he thinks it is. (And I notice he admits people had grievances against them - do you think he realises?)

I mean 'other people in the family have behaved worse and not been treated like this!' would have done. It still makes him sound like an entitled brat however he phrases it but the message would have been clear.

I hope the ghost writer's fee was substantial. How on earth he stood having his name on that is a mystery.