Sentebale #2

[Words]

Second thread .

Exactly, they are allegations that need investigating in a proper manner - it seems both sides are at fault here. As I said at the end of the day the charity will suffer the most from this being played out in the media.

It needs to be investigated in proper manner

This is what the chair tried to do by reporting themselves to the charity commission, I think she did that at the beginning of the year. No one knew about that either until Harry announced it.

In my opinion she should have just waited for the investigation to conclude.

Given sir Trevor Phillips stand on defending the Sussex’s, I’d say that it’s too late to try the U.K. media are out to get Harry and Meghan narrative!

@privatenonamegiven you seem to have missed the point that the charity has already suffered by the Sussexes negative image affecting sponsorship and recruitment.

She couldn’t, because the trustees tried to frustrate the investigation by sacking her, and then resigning en masse when that didn’t work….

What are you on about? It was him issuing his standing down statement the other day that prompted all this going public.

I'm guessing Harry got wind of this matter becoming public and tried to get in there first.

if you can't see the trial by media ship sunk with the leaking from Harry's PR then I don't know what to tell you. Should a woman just take the insinuations of her character lying down for the good of the charity. Maybe the same advice to the women of the African Parks scandal as well.

Harry could have won and side stepped this had he not saw fit to leak his “ unofficial statement “ , playing his usual games has unfortunately backfired in this case!

Also, just pointing out that if she is considered to be a whistleblower in reporting concerns about the governance of a charity to the charity commissioner in good faith, then any act or attempted act of personal retaliation against her (like trying to sack her…) is illegal under the Public Interest Disclosures Act 1998.

If it gets shut down due to whistleblowing it had got to be better than continuing a problematic charity. It's not ethical to run a charity the way this one is claimed to have been. The end never justifies the means. A corrupt charity with bullying and harassment at board level will never be able to get the right donors and support, nor deliver services in an ethical and sustainable way.

It is too funny that Harry and Meghan do not understand what philanthropy is when Meghan had so very much wanted to portray herself as a saintly sophisticated philanthropist. The allegation that Sussex changed the charity polo event's goal post by inviting Netflix for their own gain without consensus or communication with the charity is deeply concerning and profoundly undermined the charity.

If the charity has to go, there will be a new one. Probably founded by a more credible member of the royal family, or perhaps a real life, up to date, ethical philanthropist.

A spread has no legally required amount of fruit or sugar unlike jam. It could contain very minimal fruit. Apple, or grape, juice is still sugar (fructose) but would mean it couldn’t be called jam as in America jams apparently have to be single fruit. But in that case ‘compote’ would sound better. If very high fruit content then that would be a fruit cheese or butter. But then again, I am not American and perhaps ‘spread’ reads better there.

All the spread talk doesn't hide the Sentebale news 😂

They didn't want an investigation, they tried to block it by demanding she resign and when she refused to resign, they tried to fire her, they then resigned en masse to scupper any investigation or court case. Makes you wonder what they have to hide.

Obviously they were trying to hide exactly what the good dr is now making public!

I found the part of the interview about Harry putting pressure on the board to just accept his suggestion of a new member with no forewarning interesting. Until she said ‘Brian’ I must admit I was thinking, surely not Meghan???!!!

Would this interference or pressure somehow hold Harry accountable to the CC? There’s something very manipulative about a lack of information sharing in advance and presumably Brian is another mate? Anyone know who Brian is?

I wouldn't be surprised if there is more that she has not disclosed yet.

Probably not the messiah. Quite possibly a very naughty boy.

In which case she has been very clever in referring to herself as a whistleblower.

Only Trustees have accountability to the CC. Harry as Patron has none.

Anyone know who Brian is?

Brian Robbins ??

their Montecito friend who was about to lose his job /has lost his job as head of Paramount or one of those. The one who invited them to Jamaica.

Yes this is just the tip of the iceberg! , despite the posters best efforts at rug sweeping and let’s not talk about it, for many here this comes as no surprise, there has been rumours about exactly this type of behaviour from Harry and Meghan for years!
this is just the first time someone has the bravery to stand up and comment without using the usual “ sources “ !

You might be on to something there. I did wonder about the rationale about specifically sharing his name.

She must have had an NDA, wonder if Harry thought that was going to continue to silence her like it has all the rest of their ex employees