Harry RAVEC decision appeal

[smilesy]

I thought I would start a separate thread to discuss the court case which started today. I for one am still baffled as to why Harry thinks that his treatment has been unreasonable, given that he no longer lives in the UK, but is still given security on a case by case basis when he visits. This seems perfectly reasonable to me 🤷‍♀️

Ah the old resentments about him daring to leave the country are still bubbling below the surface I see!

Seriously though, I don’t think it is a question of importance. Importance and high profile are two very different things.

Nowadays, I think it is about how “current” your profile is at any one time and how much “noise” exists about you on-line, in news stories and on social media sites, and on viewer platforms like Instagram and You Tube.

And as I have been saying consistently, if you take Mumsnet as a pretty moderate platform overall, in order to ascertain how high profile someone is currently, then there are endless threads about H & M on here.

As we all know, random deranged people, out to do no good, usually target high profile people, in order to gain notoriety for themselves.

So some people think it’s a good thing that Harry who represents no one or no country visits a war torn country for self grandiosity!
are you forgetting that the military of that country are currently fighting a war where hundreds have lost their lives?
do you think they can spare the troops from protecting their own citizens to shield Harry?
do you think they can afford the money this costs to massage his ego?
this was a badly done pr exercise!
no thought of the stress put upon a country to keep him safe at a time when resources are low , because no country wants the optics of Harry being killed on their turf.
disgusting!

Do you really think that the threats to Harry and Meghan have diminished in the last few years? I believe the opposite to be true.

It doesn't matter what you or I 'believe' because we are not informed.

However, the experts who have an excellent record in keeping people safe have Harry's needs under constant review and will act on any threats.

Why do I have to keep repeating this?

I think the fact that he has to give advance warning is problematic. His plans get leaked to the tabloids. The security risks are greatly diminished by being able to visit somewhere at the last minute, as demonstrated by his Ukraine trip. If noone knows where you are going, they can’t plan any mischief, it’s as simple as that.

Harry has made several visits to Britain over the past few years, with no issues. As I said above, you don't need on call armed police protection to deal with 'paps'. That's not what they are for. Not to mention that he and his wife happily announce their 'tours' to dangerous countries well in advance. Meghan cheerily publicised the fact that her children were at home without their parents at the IG a few months ago.

Also, he can’t help the fact that he is the King’s son, and the brother to the heir, he is not an ordinary member of the public by any stretch of the imagination. So why should he have to wait ten days?

He's a private citizen. He offers nothing to the nation and his presence or absence is entirely irrelevant to national security. That's the reality of it.

You can't seriously be suggesting that high level armed protection officers be on standby just in case a bloke who shills for a lifestyle coaching app in California chances to pop over for a few days? At taxpayer expense?

Can you?

If RAVEC were not capable to keeping details of a trip secret for ten days then I would rather think Harry is wasting his time trying to get security from them

My point is that the 'British media' do not publish photos of the royals 'off duty'.

The idea that Harry is going to be chased by 'paparazzi' in London is a weird fantasy, up there with that poor pizza delivery guy 'harassing' him and his wife in their silly mockumentary.

Give me a break. Many of the US photos were from Backgrid. Also, everyone in the US knew about his awards trips, the trip to NYC for the conference with Bezos, etc. He got booed at the Tillman Awards but nothing worse.

In fact, unless I've gotten the dates scrambled, he was in NYC on the same day that the Heathcare CEO was killed. They were both in midtown but no one even thought about Harry. He's not the CEO of an enormous company.

I'm more concerned about the many victims of the Sussex Squad. I just wish Tom Bower had been in that courtroom. It would have been interesting if he had recognized the woman.

Seriously though, I don’t think it is a question of importance. Importance and high profile are two very different things.

When it comes to the allocation of a scarce resource like armed police protection, then your importance to national security is very much the question. This is explained in the court documents pertaining to Harry's judicial review.

Harry and his wife are just not that important. If he were never to return to Britain, it would make no difference at all to the life of the nation.

Do you really think that the threats to Harry and Meghan have diminished in the last few years? I believe the opposite to be true.

@Snippetsorwhippetsaway Obviously, none of us actually know the level of threats to them nowadays, but I’m curious to know why you think that threats may have increased. Why would they?

No. I don’t give a flying fuck that they left, but they can’t expect to come back and have all the perks of their old job. Because it is as job. Just being a member of the family doesn’t qualify you for all the perks if you remove yourself. Being “high profile” has fuck all to do with it. And for the zillionth time. Harry does get security when he comes here

If he didn’t give notice, how can RAVEC guarantee his safety? It takes resources and planning to protect a VIP and as an infrequent visitor to the UK, it’s perfectly reasonable to require notice- even Donald Trump would have to notify the authorities.

The current arrangement where he can make a random or last minute visit with his own security makes sense.

He’s only really visited when expected eg the Coronation and there’s been no leaks in the media about his visit from say people who work at the airports or airfields. The only leaks have been allegations of bullying from people who worked directly for him.

Give me a break. Many of the US photos were from Backgrid. Also, everyone in the US knew about his awards trips, the trip to NYC for the conference with Bezos, etc. He got booed at the Tillman Awards but nothing worse.

It would seem @BemusedAmerican that some seem to think that the Sussexes should have security “cuz hurt feelz”😆

The second link didn't work but I did follow the first.

Robert Jobson saying that Kensington Palace did a lot of leaking, without specifying the information leaked and the resultant story that was written by the press, is not evidence of leaking. It's exactly the same as Harry in his book claiming that leaks happened without evidence of what was linked and when. By evidence i mean, for example, a story claiming that the King sleeps with a teddy bear. That's a specific evidence of something personal being leaked to the press (by Harry). The evidence for leaking goes one way at the moment.

If, as Jobson claims, Kensington Palace leaks i would expect him to go on the record with evidence. He hasn't done that.

IcedPurple your arguments don’t come across as unbiased and objective as you try and frame them to be when you use phrases like “a bloke who shills for a lifestyle coaching app in California chances to pop over for a few days?”

I repeat, Harry is the son of the king and the brother of the heir. He can’t avoid that whether he is working for them officially or not. He isn’t an ordinary private citizen and that’s not his fault.

He's a private citizen. He offers nothing to the nation and his presence or absence is entirely irrelevant to national security. That's the reality of it.

He’s a central royal figure by birth and there would be much public debate if something untoward happened to him, particularly on British soil.

Harry has made several visits to Britain over the past few years, with no issues. As I said above, you don't need on call armed police protection to deal with 'paps'. That's not what they are for. Not to mention that he and his wife happily announce their 'tours' to dangerous countries well in advance. Meghan cheerily publicised the fact that her children were at home without their parents at the IG a few months ago.

The trouble is that the paps alert the random unhinged people to his presence. As for tours in dangerous countries, I believe H&M are allowed to hire their own security on those occasions, or they liaise with the security of the country they are visiting.

And that’s a pretty low comment about the dc. I am sure their dc’s security is very much a priority for them.

What is actually wrong with this 10 days?

posters on the RF threads argue on the one hand that they don’t need special security measures, while contributing on the other hand, to many negative threads about them.

Posters don't like the packaging of her jam
Posters giggle that Harry's hairline now is worse than his brothers
Posters think Meghan doesn't look as good since she lost weight
Posters think her Netflix show was shite
Posters think her and Harry were not nice for being terribly nasty about his family
Posters think the reported bully claims about both Meghan and Harry are most certainly true
Posters think Harry can't let go of his royal association.
Posters think Meghan loves her royal association.
Posters think Meghans' podcast is another shite project
Posters think Harry is a twat for wanting the british taxpayers to fund his security, although he doesn't even live in the country.

Yes, yes, special security measures are definitely needed because of threads on the RF forum, such dark and sinister discussions go on in the depths of the RF forum.

😏😏🙄🙄

IcedPurple your arguments don’t come across as unbiased and objective as you try and frame them to be when you use phrases like “a bloke who shills for a lifestyle coaching app in California chances to pop over for a few days?”

That's what he is though. And there's no requirement to be 'unbiased and objective', or else you wouldn't be here.

I repeat, Harry is the son of the king and the brother of the heir. He can’t avoid that whether he is working for them officially or not. He isn’t an ordinary private citizen and that’s not his fault.

Which is why he has bespoke security arrangements.

He’s a central royal figure by birth and there would be much public debate if something untoward happened to him, particularly on British soil.

As above, although I wouldn't say he is 'central'. He's a private citizen and constitutionally irrelevant.

Seriously, why are ignoring the fact that you've been told multiple times that Harry does get high level protection when in Britain?

The trouble is that the paps alert the random unhinged people to his presence. As for tours in dangerous countries, I believe H&M are allowed to hire their own security on those occasions, or they liaise with the security of the country they are visiting.

The same is true in Britain. His private security can liase with the authorities, who, unlike in Nigeria or Colombia, have his needs under constant review.

And that’s a pretty low comment about the dc. I am sure their dc’s security is very much a priority for them.

I didn't say it wasn't.

I said that his wife was happy to publicise their whereabouts, which is not a clever move for anyone supposedly 'paranoid' about security.

I notice that you did not respond to my question about taxpayer funded specialist officers being on indefinite standby in case the 5th in line deigns to pop over.

Think this case is only now being heard from 5 years ago. He offered to pay for police protection when in the country ‘they wouldn’t allow him to’ so they wouldn’t give him protection & wouldn’t allow him to pay for it you feel this is ok?

He isn't a central royal figure anymore, and as the years go by his status will only diminish. He has no constitutional relevance at all.

But having said that, I agree it would be tragic if anything happened to him, just as it would be tragic if any public figure, royalty, celebrity or politician etc was killed by an unhinged person. There would be debate about security in all these cases and rightly so. Harry isn't a special case.

Nothing will happen to him on British soil because he will have security if he gives notice. If he decides to appear unannounced in order to play chicken with not having security and comes a cropper, that is his own decision. There won’t be any security actually available to him without any notice anyway. Strangely, security allocation has to be done in advance. Special Protection is allocated to both the RF and politicians and they work full time. Do you think police bikes and armed vehicles are sitting idle waiting in case an ex working Royal decides to pop over for a spot of lunch?

Please read the thread.

It's been said at least a thousand times that Harry does in fact get protection.

All your points about him are correct, @Snippetsorwhippetsaway .
Harry is a very high profile celebrity through choice and a very controversial figure, through choice.
However, he's the son of the King, and does require proper security. Which is what he gets. Most of us on here agree with that.
What we also agree is that it's not up to us and it's not up to Harry about the kind of protection he gets.
Let's leave that up to the experienced professionals.

How many times 🙄

Ever get the feeling you are talking to walls? 😆

I repeat, Andrew was the son of the queen and the brother of the king. He can’t avoid that whether he is working for them officially or not. He isn’t an ordinary private citizen and that’s not his fault.

He’s a central royal figure by birth and there would be much public debate if something untoward happened to him, particularly on British soil.

The trouble is that the paps alert the random unhinged people to his presence.