Harry and RAVEC - claims he was trapped by RF

[smilesy]

Okay. So first of all thanks to everyone on the last thread for a really civilised discussion about Harry and his security. The Telegraph has an exclusive article where Harry claims that his security was removed to “trap” him in the RF. I’m really sorry but for some reason I am unable to archive Telegraph articles at the moment. Could anyone help?

How can he abdicate? He has nothing to abdicate from!

William needs to accept the fact that his family should fly separately. The recent helicopter crash in NYC should be a wakeup call for him.

No one wants H & M to divorce. They just want them to stop wasting taxpayer money

Yes, it was about his (& others) civil cases and about tabloid intrusion in general.

Can't remember the name.

Right. But his situation is kind of unique.

RAVEC have no authority outside of Britain, but Harry chose to live outside of Britain. Obviously they cannot have highly trained specialist officers on standby on the off chance the 5th in line deigns to pop over for a weekend.

So realistically what were they supposed to offer him? Nobody can tell me what exactly is wrong with the current arrangements.

This is the most informative and helpful H&M thread I’ve read. H is consumed with his perception of his positions unfairness. KC has got on with his life with Camilla and PW continues his conventional road to the throne. Harry is blinded with traumatic confusion partly due to his mother’s death which he obsessively puts at the the British media’s door. Meghan doesn’t understand how the monarchy works. It all very sad.

It came in for all the Wales children

The Perth Agreement was approved in 2015 - but it was backdated to the date when the proposals were first discussed 28 October 2011 - so covered all of the Wales children and the children of other aristocratic families.

Luckily none of the Wales children had to be stripped of being "heir" as happened in Sweden when Prince Carl Philip was born heir but his older sister was named heir 7 months later

I suspect that even if RAVEC end up having to consult the RMP and they come to the same conclusion, Harry will look to be moving the goalposts as to why this still isn’t fair

Without a doubt, @smilesy, but while Harry's jaunts to very risky places don't come into the court case they could easily form part of the RMB's discussions, so if they have to become involved he'd best hope he doesn't end up with even less

In other news I don't know if he could be sanctioned for running to the media about in camera proceedings during an ongoing case - again we need @Serenster on here - but does anyone suppose it would make the least difference? Try, and even the courts could be bracketed with those who've "got it in for him", doubtless with a claim tacked on that they were instructed by his family

I agree. I was thinking that when I saw the pictures of him and George in Paris. Perhaps they took the Eurostar?

Isn't it only the monarch and heir that fly separately? As far as I see Charles and William do not travel together

The Act was passed in 2013 while Kate was pregnant with George (he was born in July 2013). As they didn’t know whether he would be a boy or girl, it was brought in to modernise.

https://www.royal.uk/encyclopedia/succession#:~:text=The%20changes%20came%20into%20force%20in%20all%20sixteen%20Realms%20in%20March%202015.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_to_the_Crown_Act_2013

Thank you for the clarification

Now @Mistyglade I need another bit of clarification as I thought the Paps involved in the car chase with Diana were French? And yes I agree it is the most informative thread on H&M

If going on a family holiday, William usually travels with his family who are:
1st in line (heir) - William
2nd in line - George
3rd in line - Charlotte
4th in line - Louis

Behind them is:
5th in line - Harry

With Charles being in his late 70’s and having cancer, the reality is that William should really travel separately from his family when flying abroad, with perhaps he and Louis going together and the other two travelling with Mum.

From what I have read the late Queen was an absolute stickler for abiding by this rule.

When Charles and Diana travelled to Australia in the early 1980s , they had to get permission from the Queen to travel together
I read that the late Queen also asked William to travel separately from George and I THINK the agreement reached was for this to happen when George turns 12.

This article has a source claiming that H & M's security deliberately provoked the paps at the time of the alleged chase, which would tie into them moving into a taxi which the average person thought was a stupid move.

Someone on reddit claimed ( no source - just undocumented gossip) last year that the NYPD is giving them an escort to protect New Yorkers. Their last few visits to NYC were completely uneventful.

Tbf, air travel ( in fact travel generally) is much safer than when this rule was first implemented. The late Queen probably didn’t appreciate this as she was around when travel was much more precarious. I appreciate what Bemused said about helicopters, so maybe this is one area they should think about 🤷‍♀️

I now firmly believe he is wheedling for IPP status so he won't have to pay out anything

There's no need to "believe" it, @Uricon2, since Harry stated himself that they'd have IPP status. The claim was very quickly deleted but that may not change him still believing it should be granted, and if he'd assured Meghan it would be so tthere's some domestic face saving involved too

I am completely convinced that the whole “near catastrophe” was staged in some way. The not wearing seat belts, the paps and the car chase were all to Dianaesque to be a coincidence

Of course, and their ludicrous, over dramatic statement. He even used it as evidence for his legal team this week! Utter nonsense.

The more I read of the article, the more gobsmacked I am.

Comparing himself to former PM's?

Basically threatening to 'reveal all' if he doesn't get his way?

Failing to understand that he is indeed a private citizen, by his own choice?

Grandstanding about 'helping others in the same situation' just as he did with the NGN case, before choosing to settle?

Harry really cannot function in the real world. He is too emotionally and intellectually limited, to put it mildly.

Grandstanding about 'helping others in the same situation' just as he did with the NGN case, before choosing to settle?

Absolutely. Which “others”? Other people with loads of money who are too tight to pay for security? He certainly isn’t championing any underdogs

typo

I laughed at that too. Who of the tiny number of people eligible for state funded security asked for Harry's 'help'?

He really has delusions of his own importance, on several levels.

I agree - right down to a shot of Meghan turning round to look out of the back window.

I can well believe it was staged.
Didn't the 'catastrophic car chase' occur just before the first RAVEC hearing?

@MummyJ12

Me too. The more I read it, the worse it gets.

“Regardless of the outcome, the Duke will hope that by drawing attention to the way the committee operates, the system might change and become more transparent.”

The irony of this when the accounts for his charities and spending have no transparency whatsoever.
Also, what about when attention is drawn to how one of his charities operates?
It’s only ever when he stands to benefit from something. He fights his perceived injustice. Which is vastly different to what is unjust.

FYI it is very unusual for new evidence to be introduced into an appeal hearing. It is not the job of the Court of Appeal to hear evidence, they will rather accept the evidence as found by the court below.

If either party - Harry or the Home Office - had wanted to introduce new evidence before the Court of Appeal they would have made an application to introduce it, and since it would likely have been opposed by the other party, there would have been a hearing to decide whether it was allowed to be introduced. That would have been done some time before this week’s appeal, so, if new evidence is allowed, both parties have time to deal with it in their submissions.

We have heard nothing at all about any new evidence being considered - not pre-appeal or as a housekeeping matter at the start of the appeal hearing.

It’s therefore not very likely that anything new was discussed in the confidential part of the hearing that hadn’t already been raised in the first hearing. I suspect Harry is relying on the secrecy to suggest something sinister is going on. His usual attempt to spin, basically.