If Harry still lived in the UK , do you think the feud would have been sorted by now?

[ThisPlumShark]

I do feel the biggest hurdle between Harry and his family is that he lives in another country, I think if he lived in the UK there would be more opportunity for them to sort it out

🤣

@BasiliskStare , that's good knowledge. I have it on good authority that Andrew Lownie, in his forthcoming unauthorised biography of Harry, "The Life and Times of a Number Two", has covered this matter, carrying out extensive research within the corridors of Balmoral. Literally, he walked down the corridors, tapping the walls.

The book contains Lownie's exclusive interview with JK Rowling, where she confesses that the characters of Harry Potter and Dudley Dursley - a sausage hogging miscreant if ever there was one - were supplied to her via her publishers, who had been in receipt of an anonymous manuscript written in crayon and postmarked Aberdeen. This manuscript told tales of a truly magical lad called "Harry", misunderstood and mistreated, roaming the corridors of a castle full of odd, old, scary grown ups who can turn themselves into insects. In the manuscript, "Harry" ingests some magical sweeties that allow him to talk to inanimate objects, and he pretends he can fly. Though JKR falls short of confessing to plagiarism, Lownie opines that her fantasy world of Hogwarts may have been based on an early draft of Spare.

@PigeonDress Fantastic. 😂

This all has the ring of truth. I believe, however from an intellectual property lawyer , that being a Bear of Bigger Brain than Harry , JKR has stayed just the right side of plagiarism and unlikely to fall foul of his litigious nature. An example he cited was - JKR realised that Polo wasn't enough to sustain people's interest even for a short series on a huge streaming channel , let alone 7 globally best selling books and accompanying films. She therefore (literally ) elevated the game to Quidditch which having no horses nor Argentinian playboys would be seen as an idea along the same lines but acceptable in fiction. There is little new in plots or ideas in fiction said he so JKR's work of fiction is not so close to Harry's work of fiction that he could reasonably claim it to be "his" And JKR might call it an Homage. Eagle eyed readers and viewers have posited on SM that the "Golden Snitch" is a sweet nod to Harry , the "Ginger Snitch".

Obviously I cannot reveal my sources.

@Tomatotater "the ludicrous privilege that allows them to avoid tax,"

I would like to see the Monarch being able to hand down personal wealth to the heir without IHT scrutinised.

This thread has taken a very funny turn!

Bravo @PigeonDress and @BasiliskStare!

I have it on good authority that Andrew Lownie, in his forthcoming unauthorised biography of Harry, "The Life and Times of a Number Two"

“The Life and Times of a Number Two”? I bet that will be a shit book 🤪

His privacy? He was falling down drunk punching the press strip poker in Vegas anyone? Just call harry! He cannot expect a private life when he is making a spectacle of himself in public and yes his phone was hacked so were many others was that his family's fault too?

This thread proves once again, the humour and creativity and intellect of one side.
sadly demonstrates the opposite too!

😂😂

Cheers to @PigeonDress , @BasiliskStare and @smilesy for livening up Friday!

@BasiliskStare with great respect to your learned friend, the IP lawyer, I have it on very good authority that counsel has been consulted on the matter of plagiarism. Yes indeed, David Sherborne QC has once again been engaged and has advised on the deployment of a little known common law action, precedent for which was set in the case of Dusty Bin v Ted Rogers [1978]. Let me explain (with apologies to anyone under 45 who will have no idea).

The judgement in that case resulted in what is called a 321 Order. A 321 Order is named after the format of the eponymous gameshow, and allows a claimant to make great - if not giant - leaps in logic, drawing conclusions which bear little or no resemblance to the base information or clue. It is a legal process that baffles most minds that function on simple logic and reason. It is a particularly useful order for those who are desperate to win a caravan whose brains work in the manner of entitled, delusional princes. Thus, for example, one's gurning, princely chops once again appearing in the Sun is not a result of one spilling out of The Cuckoo Club at 3am, several sheets to the wind, in front of assembled press. No, to deploy 321 logic, it is a result of one's step mother being a frightful old hag and teller of tales to tabloid journos.

And thus we make our first Prince-Potter logical leap: The Leaky Cauldron. Described by the defendant, JK Rowling thus:

Harry ate breakfast each morning in the Leaky Cauldron, where he liked watching the other guests: funny little witches from the country, up for a day’s shopping; venerable-looking wizards arguing over the latest article in Transfiguration Today; wild-looking warlocks; raucous dwarfs; and once, what looked suspiciously like a hag, who ordered a plate of raw liver from behind a thick woollen balaclava."

Clearly this description is based on breakfast at Balmoral. For witches, substitute Harry's aunts and sister in law, Stepford Wives all who think about nothing humanitarian or elevating, they just want to shop on the taxpayer's credit card; for wizards, substitute his uncles, poring over the morning's tabloids trying to find stories about themselves and brag who has the most column inches; the warlocks are clearly Charles and William, both of them violent thugs; and the dwarfs the badly behaved Wessex and Cambridge children. The balaclava'd hag is Camilla, just in from feeding someone to the wolves seeing to the horses. All of them are waiting for Harry to finish his measly portion of sausages and leave the table, so they can start plotting about what stories about him they will leak to the press. Thus, Balmoral at breakfast is The Leaky Cauldron.

Other giant leaps of logic connecting Prince and Potter can be made. Voldemort from the Potter books was once known as Tom Riddle. As the original defendant in the precedent case, Ted Rogers, would have said, Riddle rhymes with diddle. To diddle means to cheat, swindle and deprive. Who deprived Harry of the sausages? The answer is William! Sorry, you didn't get the answer from the clue, and you don't go home with the caravan, have this Dusty Bin toy instead.

Harry's Quidditch and life nemesis is Draco Malfoy, who is blond and horrid and an accomplished pilot. "Mal" means wrongful and "foy" is Scottish for "feast". Clearly this name refers to a wrongful feast of sausages. Draco is an anagram for "A dorc", which sounds like the pejorative noun "dork" meaning a contemptible person. Draco is undoubtedly meant to be William. In fact, many of the baddies in Harry Potter are based on the original depiction of William in Spare, the Crayon Years.

@BasiliskStare you have already pointed out that Quidditch is an aerial facsimile of polo, and that the ginger golden snitch (the embodiment of Harry's character) is to be prized and to be admired. You are thinking the right - indeed, the 321 - way to be included on Harry's legal team. Brava!

Does this make Meghan really Hagrid? "You're a wizard, Harry Potter"!

I think Meghan is a bit 'Fame is a fickle friend, Harry'. 'Celebrity is as celebrity does'.

@PigeonDress Ah , thank you for drawing that to my attention. Every day a school day. In my defence, I was chatting to the IP lawyer at a drinks party and my attention was divided between what he was saying and trying to fish out what I thought was a fly from my G&T ( it actually turned out to be a bit of soggy marigold which had escaped from its distilled water icy prison). He may have mentioned the 321 Order whilst I was thus distracted. I wonder if H&M accepting the RFK Ripple of hope award being lauded for standing up against structural racism in the RF , when H vehemently denied the RF were racist to Tom Brady comes under the 321 order. Another even less well known legal point is the "Would I Lie to You? Defence" which became precedent after a class action "Audience vs Rob Brydon , David Mitchell and Lee Mack 2008" The audience lost when the defending barrister (Shyster Flywheel QC )put forward the case that "It is perfectly acceptable to lie if you are being paid for it" . Harry's legal team researched this in the event of someone challenging his claim that he loved taking Archie for bicycle rides because he never got to do it with his father (despite there being photographic evidence to the contrary.) Luckily no-one could be arsed to argue so a lengthy trial was avoided.
Coincidentally I was also talking to an "industry insider" at the same drinks party. Again I was distracted, this time because I had bitten into a ladybug canapé which was too big for one mouthful and managed to get tomato juice all over my pristine white shirt and cream trousers - but I digress. Apparently when the producers were looking for stock paparazzi camera photos to insert into the H&M docuseries, Harry wrote to Liz Garbus and said - I know you will have many stock photos to choose from but I especially want you to use one from the "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 2 premiere" . I may not be able to get her on plagiarism owing to various legal niceties which don't suit me - but I want her to know I have my eye on her.
Liz Garbus was unavailable for comment.

@BasiliskStare

That's too good for just a "Funny" reaction.
My compliments👏 🥂

Hagrid rhymes with Backgrid. So this is possible in Ted Rogers logic. But I can't see any other resemblances. Hagrid's goodness is, after all, genuine, as is his hair. Possibly surrounding himself with terrible creatures and counting them as friends is a clue?

G
R
E
ROYAL
T O
CHILD
K

The above (if it comes out in the correct format when I press post) is the phrase GREY ROCK ROYAL CHILD TO (2) - formed from a crossword of the name "Gilderoy Lockhart". JKR could have been sending a message to the royal family here.

Lockhart developed a bath time product (Occamy egg yolk shampoo) that was too dangerous and expensive for the open market. He also claimed he did many heroic acts, none of which he actually did. He ended up not knowing who he was, and penned an autobiography called "Who Am I?".

You may be on to something.

Poo. Formatting failed. Anyway, take it from me, it's a crossword clue!

@BasiliskStare you are lucky only to have been merely irritated by the unwanted floral addition to your drink. Injury Lawyers 4 U are preparing for a class action suit made up of those who need medical attention as a result of choking on an unexpected elevatory foreign bodies in their consumables. The recent photograph of Harry and Meghan "hugging" on the beach (that MM issued for International Women's Day) was actually Harry, taking unusual precautionary measures, demonstrating to their brunch invitees the Heimlich Manoeuvre.

You make a number of excellent points and observations that I cannot argue with. I am particularly impressed with your observation of the application of the "Would I Lie To You" defence strategy. Clearly, whoever works in the legal department of Penguin Random House had this case in mind when persuading Harry to caveat his autobiographical comedy novel with the words, "Whatever the cause, my memory is my memory, it does what it does, gathers and curates as it sees fit, and there's just as much truth in what I remember and how I remember it as there is in so-called objective facts. Now where's my cheque?"

I have noted that both Harry and Meghan and their supporters have also deployed the controversial Power of Love doctrine, as extensively litigated in a series of cases from1984, Frankie Goes to Hollywood v Huey Lewis and the News, Huey Lewis and the News v Jennifer Rush and Jennifer Rush v Alice Cooper*. In each case, Mr Justice Muchport-Lunchtyme judged that a titular event may have 2 or even 3 versions and it is not within the power of love the judiciary or the man on the Clapham Omnibus to decide which version, if any, has the greater merit or validity. And indeed, all three may be heard simultaneously and/or one immediately following the other, and the listener is obliged to give equal credence and merit to all of them, even if one (generally the original) is objectively a far superior and satisfactory experience. This doctrine has recently been seen in action in the discussion surrounding With Love, Meghan and what Ms Sussex Markle professes is her Gastronomic Childhood Journey. In the space of mere minutes, she is both a put upon, microwave meal munching, latchkey kid and the beneficiary of farm fresh to table, Californian-style good living. And - as per the original 2018 version of her Childhood Gastronomic Journey, found on The Tig, the Greatest Hits - a diner with her dad ("the most hardworking father you can imagine") at Hollywood's iconic Museo & Frank Grill, going there "after every tap and ballet class". As per the doctrine, it is not for the viewer to decide which version sounds better. All belief in the validity and superiority of the original must be suspended in favour of giving equal validity to subsequent versions. Dissenting opinion is as unwelcome as an un-elevated G&T.

(*In the third case, the doctrine was extended to the litigants' hairstyles).

@PigeonDress Sterling work.

However I must quickly point out that whilst Penguin Random House lawyers were drafting Harry's caveat they did consult with a chap called Descartes John Locke Kant , Emeritus Professor of the Philosophy of Truth at Hogwarts University to see if said caveat could challenged. Professor Kant, was at the time engaged in a lengthy email discussion with Oprah Winfrey on "The Importance of Truth in Documentary" so had only time to quickly send back a meme (reproduced below with Kind permission of the Hogwarts Archives ) https://imgflip.com/i/78dhz4 He recommended they concentrate on Nietzschean Perspectivism (questioning the existence of an absolute truth, it being rather a product of our interpretations and perspectives) It was at this point the Penguin legal team lost the will to live and put Shyster Flywheel QC on speed dial.

@PigeonDressplease publish an omnibus edition of your insights.

If he was my brother I’d have thrown him under a bus too!

And then reversed over him!!! 🤣

Harry doesn't.believe that he has done anything wrong. Nor does Meghan, the professional victim. Everyone else was up to dirty tricks, but never them.
To accept H back into royal life really isn't possible. How could they live with the suspicion that Meghan and Harry might well be recording their every word for the tabloids or the next book?

Sadly the RF will never be able to trust Harry again.
Any conversation would be in the papers the following day.
Or worse, Harry could twist any conversation to make it seem different.
If I were William or Catherine, I would never want to be in the same room again, so no possibility of reported conversations, or - misreporting of conversations could occur.