Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Harry and RAVEC #2

1000 replies

Baital · 18/04/2025 15:37

To continue...

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
Profhilodisaster · 29/04/2025 22:35

BasiliskStare · 29/04/2025 22:32

I've tried find it but I can't - the story about an MNer who accidentally creosoted a pigeon. (Sorry if that is triggering) It ended up with people imagining the pigeon going back to his friends and them saying "Paul is that you? " Does anyone remember that - it made me laugh at the time.

Yes I do ! www.mumsnet.com/talk/mumsnet_classics/1465377-To-throw-water-over-a-pigeon-Ive-just-spray-painted?page=1

IAmATorturedPoet · 29/04/2025 22:47

BasiliskStare · 29/04/2025 22:32

I've tried find it but I can't - the story about an MNer who accidentally creosoted a pigeon. (Sorry if that is triggering) It ended up with people imagining the pigeon going back to his friends and them saying "Paul is that you? " Does anyone remember that - it made me laugh at the time.

Yes!! 🤣🤣

BasiliskStare · 30/04/2025 12:59

Thank you @Profhilodisaster - I've just read the thread again and Oh it is funny. You really are excelling yourself with the links recently 💐🐦

prelovedusername · 30/04/2025 17:43

Is anyone else wondering how much not before Easter “not before Easter” has to be before it’s before Easter again?

Puzzledandpissedoff · 30/04/2025 17:59

I admit I'd wondered, @prelovedusername, but Serenster explained it all and apparently this timescales quite normal

If I've understood correctly it may be that H&M already know the decision but it's just not been publicised yet - which could well explain some of the spiralling

prelovedusername · 30/04/2025 22:21

I do recall the judge telling the KCs to have their legal A team in place because they would be getting no more than 24 hours for accuracy revisions and no attempt to revisit or question the judgment would be countenanced. I inferred from his comments about the sensitivity of the case that he expected the publication of the judgment to follow quickly.

StClabberts · 01/05/2025 08:11

prelovedusername · 30/04/2025 22:21

I do recall the judge telling the KCs to have their legal A team in place because they would be getting no more than 24 hours for accuracy revisions and no attempt to revisit or question the judgment would be countenanced. I inferred from his comments about the sensitivity of the case that he expected the publication of the judgment to follow quickly.

Makes total sense. The judge is likely to want things sorted promptly.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 01/05/2025 10:28

prelovedusername · 30/04/2025 22:21

I do recall the judge telling the KCs to have their legal A team in place because they would be getting no more than 24 hours for accuracy revisions and no attempt to revisit or question the judgment would be countenanced. I inferred from his comments about the sensitivity of the case that he expected the publication of the judgment to follow quickly.

Ah, fair dos - I'd missed that bit, but honestly thought they had a week or more to mull it over, revise it or whatever

Though it's not my world the thing about "no attempt to revisit or question the judgment would be countenanced" does sound a bit stinging, but then judges are human too and while they have to do things by the book I expect they're getting pretty sick of the teenage-like "yes, but ..."

Edited to add that, if it doesn't go exactly Harry's way, it'll all be "unfaaaiiirrr" anyway, with a hefty dose of "they've all got it in for me", but we'll just have to wait for the result

NewAgeNewMe · 01/05/2025 10:36

Not unlike Trump. Did anyone hear him yesterday whinging about the US judges?

Mylovelygreendress · 01/05/2025 10:38

Puzzledandpissedoff · 01/05/2025 10:28

Ah, fair dos - I'd missed that bit, but honestly thought they had a week or more to mull it over, revise it or whatever

Though it's not my world the thing about "no attempt to revisit or question the judgment would be countenanced" does sound a bit stinging, but then judges are human too and while they have to do things by the book I expect they're getting pretty sick of the teenage-like "yes, but ..."

Edited to add that, if it doesn't go exactly Harry's way, it'll all be "unfaaaiiirrr" anyway, with a hefty dose of "they've all got it in for me", but we'll just have to wait for the result

Edited

If it goes against him, he will insist it’s unfair because William has the security Harry wants .

binkie163 · 01/05/2025 11:56

Mylovelygreendress · 01/05/2025 10:38

If it goes against him, he will insist it’s unfair because William has the security Harry wants .

Bound to be William's fault as he obviously influenced the court to do it!.....he is a toddler stamping his feet, very unattractive in a middle aged man! I do not like MM but good god can you imagine living with him! he looks unhygienic half the time, unwashed, sweaty and scruffy.

themightysossidge · 01/05/2025 12:14

@binkie163 just for you

Harry and RAVEC #2
JSMill · 01/05/2025 12:18

binkie163 · 01/05/2025 11:56

Bound to be William's fault as he obviously influenced the court to do it!.....he is a toddler stamping his feet, very unattractive in a middle aged man! I do not like MM but good god can you imagine living with him! he looks unhygienic half the time, unwashed, sweaty and scruffy.

I agree. He’s so unkempt it’s unpleasant to look at. I couldn’t bear to be with someone who clearly doesn’t take much interest in his appearance. In contrast, William is so well groomed and dressed. I didn’t think he was particularly good looking when he was young but I find him quite attractive now.

binkie163 · 01/05/2025 12:45

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

myrtleWilson · 01/05/2025 13:07

Please don't indulge in the slurs about Meghan and yachts - its not nice and no evidence for it at all.

NewAgeNewMe · 01/05/2025 13:25

Agreed @myrtleWilson
its horrid slurs with no basis

HonoriaBulstrode · 01/05/2025 14:24

......with a hefty dose of "they've all got it in for me"

'Infamy, infamy.....'

myrtleWilson · 01/05/2025 15:27

Tomorrow's the day then....

themightysossidge · 01/05/2025 15:40

Is it?

myrtleWilson · 01/05/2025 15:43

2pm apparently...

Puzzledandpissedoff · 01/05/2025 15:56

I'm assuming nothing, but if "tomorrow" is correct those who've said Harry will already know and that it explains his expression might have a point

Anyway we'll soon find out

Profhilodisaster · 01/05/2025 16:00

So if it is tomorrow, and like you say Puzzled , Harry already knows , does that mean that his lawyers have been give the chance to dispute anything?

Puzzledandpissedoff · 01/05/2025 16:08

It's not my world, @Profhilodisaster - we'll need Serenster for guidance when it comes out - but I'm pretty sure it's been said the decision will stand and it's just the "presentation/what gets redacted" they've had to discuss

Profhilodisaster · 01/05/2025 16:24

Puzzledandpissedoff · 01/05/2025 16:08

It's not my world, @Profhilodisaster - we'll need Serenster for guidance when it comes out - but I'm pretty sure it's been said the decision will stand and it's just the "presentation/what gets redacted" they've had to discuss

Ah yes thank you, I knew there would be a discussion of some sort before it was made public, I just couldn't remember what about!

IdaGlossop · 01/05/2025 16:51

The Express says 2pm tomorrow. Source: court listing. As the public announcement is tomorrow, Harry must already know. But all he knows is whether he's going to be able to go through the process again.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.