Sentebale #5

[glitterturd]

As I finished the last one.

God could you imagine him showing you around an Airbn! Probably would prattle on about how his wife provided the flower sprinkles and ceramic vases and would expect guests to call her and say thank you, then put out a statement saying what an amazing woman Meghan is.

I really do get the point about Harry and William being Princes and the expectations, but I don't think they should have been even given the option of walking in that procession. They were 12 and 15, children, and I think the eye of history as well as everyone at the time would have understood why they didn't.

Thought it was horrendous at the time, still do.

And I think that’s when the Queen knighted him?

Oh no - he doesn't look clean 🤮

His level of nose wiping with his fingers makes me sick. Especially when he wipes it on his top after

I think her granddaughter Princess Olga Andreevna Romanoff was on that TV programme "Meet the Aristocrats" a few years ago - IIRC she was as mad as a box of frogs

Are inheritances automatically shared property?

Harry is much more exposed as a trustee of African Parks. If the CC won’t touch that there’s little hope of him getting his comeuppance for his actions relating to Sentebale.

I can't see that the CC, or any UK official body, has any authority to investigate African Parks. It's not a UK registered charity - or a charity at all, as far as I can see. Its HQ is not in the UK and it doesn't receive any funding from any official UK body.

Outside of Africa, the principal funding seems to come from USAID and the EU (chiefly Dutch, it appears).

Would Harry have paid tax on these inheritances or are royals treated differently?

As far as a know it is only the monarch who can pass on private wealth to the new next monarch without income tax. Other inheritances I am sure will have been in trusts but as far as I know there are no special royal trusts so he will have had to pay tax on them. I'm not sure what his tax liability for any money he holds in the UK if he does now US is residence.
I'd love it if someone knowledgeable could give the right answer.

That story in Spare about the opportunity of shooting at Charles is really, really odd.

Personally I'd have found Spare a lot more compelling if as I hoped he'd have addressed his alleged history of shooting at endangered bird species and his documented history of big game killing.

I think it shows a lot of subconscious anger myself.

I don’t think so.

Prince Philip 'told Tony Blair’s team to f* off’ over Diana’s funeral

IMHO, very few people acquitted themselves well at all around Diana's death and funeral.

The media's goal was to sell papers. One minute Diana was being torn to shreds and the next moment dead Diana was a veritable Saint.

Sadly, for team Republican, the elected lot did let the side down. Tony Blair certainly loved optics and having sad children trailing behind the coffin was an indelible moment. Various aides have spoken about their experiences around this time and several have stated that there was a general disregard of the family aspect of the bereavement.

The Queen was correct to try and shield W & H and if she had been an absolute monarch I expect she would have kept them away. As for PP, having had the sad experience of participating in his sister's public funeral, I think he did not want his grandchildren to endure a lifetime regret of not walking. As tough as it was, it seems both men appreciate the fact that they paid their mother their last respects. H's vitriol is reserved for the wailing strangers who were performatively mourning, and I can sympathize with his point of view which is essentially "It was my mom, so why are you expecting me to comfort you."

I think he took a lot of it out on defenceless animals. See rumoured favourite moorhen shooting and polo pony injuries.

Doesn't exonerate the rest of 'em though. I'm appalled Willy is happy to involve his child in blood sports.

No, it wasn't me. It would be interesting to ask both of them now what they think 28 years on, although Harry has told us he can still hear the sounds of the horses' reins behind him as he walked. It's all about him. William, on the other hand, talks about his mother with respect, giving the impression that he has a compassionate acceptance of her shortcomings. He's a grown up. Very different reactions to the difficult childhoods they both had.

I do agree with you on a lot of what you say @IdaGlossop but IMHO, a competent defense attorney can find lots of wiggle room.

For example, in her interview Sophie Chandauka says that there was a gap between what the Board said to her and what was written in the Board minutes.

As the writers of Yes Prime Minister have brilliantly summarized, the minutes carry the greater legal weight when there is a dispute, and it seems that the minutes are not unfavorable to the Patron.

As to fundraising, SC admits that H found the new polo venue through his contacts. H can point to his blue-chip network (Pa is King) and his rarefied links to the UHNW world and point out that M brought an A list sports star in Serena Williams and is connected to Oprah, Gwyneth Paltrow, Tyler Perry and other high net worth potential donors, so should have been accommodated and protected, for the betterment of the charity especially with a view to shifting funding to the US.

Please note, I am NOT agreeing with any of this.

I am just pointing out that IMHO, the case has a way to go to pull down the Trustees, who will be pulling all the levers they can to get off the hook, before the CC gets to H. Moreover, I suspect that despite glibly sharing his fantasies of killing "Pa" in his memoir, H will lose no time in calling King "Pa"' and loudly shrieking "HELP!"

Depends on the jurisdiction in which the couple are living, and where any divorce takes place. In the UK if you have been married for more than two years they would be presumed as matrimonial assets, but that presumption is I think rebuttable.

Only a transfer of assets from monarch to monarch (eg QEII to Charles) are exempt from inheritance tax. Otherwise inheritance tax is applied in accordance with the usual rules to any other bequests the monarch makes. Everyone else in the Royal family is liable to ay inheritance tax in the usual way.

Harry will also be taxed on the money he inherited from Diana and or the Queen Mother even if that was put into a trust to avoid inheritance tax. He still has to pay tax on any income he received from a trust, and the trust assets are liable for capital gains tax.

William appeared to be her emotional crutch and I imagine that has an impact on how he sees her vs Harry.

Harry I personally believe got away with so much in his early adulthood because the world still saw that poor little boy and gave him an extended free pass on bad behaviour. Had she not died I don’t think his popularity would have remained high. But he can’t peddle the “dead mummy” narrative forever.

Harry has the affliction that he thinks he’s the only one affected by Bad Things.

The way he goes on about his mum’s death and does odd things like trying to sue the press for their treatment of her over 25 years after her death, you’d think William hadn’t suffered a loss too.

The whole “The press will stop at anything to get a picture/story. They tapped my phone!”. Yes and others Harry who don’t have the immense wealth protection and privilege. Like Molly Dowler’s parents.

“I didn’t ask for this life, which is why I should have security”. Yeah so what - other kids don’t ask for a life born into poverty or foster care but they bear the burden of that way of living and they don’t have millions of pounds behind them to ease the blow.

You are quite right about the authority of minutes. If they were not deemed authoritative from a legal perspective, what would be the point of them? Not in Sophie's favour is that she has been Chair for a year and nine months so it would be hard for her to argue the minutes were not a fair representation of what happened at Board meetings when they were approved on her watch, even if she has kept contemporaneous notes that reveal a different pictures.

If my new understanding of the CC's remit is correct, I don't see how H can hide behind the former trustees. On a different point, it's all very well H pointing to his extensive network of HNW individuals. Funding levels have been pretty much static for nella two decades so they're not coughing up for Sentebale.

My concern is that the CC will do all it can to find reasons not to implicate H because he's Royal. I really want SC to be vindicated, more because I want her courage to be rewarded and probity to triumph than because I wish H ill - but a finding against him may lead to a bit less noise from him than we've had since 2021. See, I do have an optimistic streak somewhere 😃

The funniest part about where they were sitting was that they were boxed into the pew by ?the York sisters and their spouses (why isn't the plural spice?) so they couldn't pull a stunt like flitting mid-service, which I wouldn't put past them. There's some footage of them looking perplexed in the aisle when their carefully chosen escort stood by as the ?Yorks moved to let them in. There are times when you have to admire the cunning of the courtiers.

I think it was Prince Philip who made the point to them? He had experience of losing his sister and her family when he was quite young too.

Not of its all wrapped up in trusts which undoubtably it would have been before PH inherited.

And even if it wasnt any inheritance goes directly to the ricipient in a marriage and is ring-fenced unless and untill the recipient puts it to family finances - then it cant be reclaimed on divorce if it was used to pay of a mortgage etc.