Earl Spencer's book on Diana is stolen

[JustHereForTheShitsAndGiggles]

Warning - DM link ahead...
Copies of Earl Spencer's sensational book about Princess Diana have been stolen from a lorry – just before its exclusive serialisation in the Daily Mail.
The memoir – Swan Song: Diana, My Sister – includes revelations about Diana's deeply unhappy marriage with the then Prince of Wales.
It also describes the crisis that engulfed the Royal Family after her death in a car crash almost 30 years ago.
Last night a publishing insider said: 'Earl Spencer has kept his silence for nearly 30 years and what he has to say about the King's reaction when Diana died is utterly devastating.'
But, in an astonishing development, the Mail can reveal that a truck packed with thousands of copies of the book was broken into after it was parked overnight in a lay-by in the Netherlands earlier this week.
Just four copies, which had been wrapped in black plastic to hide their contents, were stolen in what publishing sources believe could have been an audacious plot to steal the highly anticipated book of the year before it hits the shelves.

Earl Spencer's bombshell new book is stolen: Several copies of Earl's explosive book about his sister Diana - and how King reacted to her death - are taken in raid on a Dutch lorry | Daily Mail Online

Yes Charles is literally above the law. But this case would never come to court.

@TheOvertGardener whether he treated her shabbily is a matter of opinion and not open to libel law.

I can say king Charles is a weak man, which I think he is. But if Charles disagrees it is not libellous as it is my honest considered opinion.

I’ve read plenty of pure nonsense from people who are desperate to cling on to anything even remotely negative about others, too.

The Royal family is your bitch eating crackers.
So you trust Spencer because the enemy of your enemy.

But no, rehabilitating the reputation of Camilla had zero to do with Diana. Nothing about her at all. It was to do with showing the woman in her true light. Prior to that most people would have known anything about her except that she and Charles were a couple prior to his marriage.

I am rather sick also of people acting like they shouldn’t have married because it didn’t work out. Their children exist and that’s not a mistake. Even Diana, at the end, said they did love each other.

I am not allowed to share my true opinion so I won’t.

Again, this is incorrect. It had everything to do with Diana.

It is alleged that an anti-Diana narrative was paid for and carefully constructed by Charles’s PR team through a series of leaked stories and articles in preparation for his marriage to Camilla.

Posters keep asking for proof but do you really think the Palace are going to admit to it?

But Patrick Jephson, Diana’s private secretary, for eight years, spoke publicly in 2017 about an ongoing campaign to boost the then Duchess of Cornwall’s reputation in the public eye ever since her affair with Prince Charles became public knowledge;

“It’s not the palace…but advisors to Prince Charles, who over many years have crafted a systematic, sustained and expensive campaign to rehabilitate Camilla’s reputation and make her suitable to be the next Queen,” he said.

Jephson want on to say,

“This is linked, of course, to a pretty vile campaign to publicise a bogus psychiatric diagnosis that Princess Diana had a personality disorder.”

“This may have cost the Prince a lot of money, paying for PR spin doctors”

“I think it also raises ethical question marks over the methods they (Prince Charles’ PR representatives) have used.”

It’s the same PR rehabilitation campaign that Harry complains about in Spare in which he claims he and other members of the RF became “collateral damage” in the bid for Camilla to gain public acceptance in order to be able to marry Charles and become Queen. Prince Edward was affected too I believe.

I have recently heard royal commentators describe the campaign as very successful but in their opinion Bolland’s methods too extreme.

The PR guru’s name is not mentioned in Spare but it is widely thought to be Bolland who was married to the head of the Press Complaints Commission at the time, Guy Black, and was and still is a friend of Rebekah Wade now Brooks, who was CEO of Murdoch’s News International from 2009–2011 who then resigned because of the Milly Dowler phone hacking scandal and was tried and acquitted in 2014 for the phone hacking and perverting the course of justice.

At the time there was a great deal of concern about the Bolland-Wade-Black axis.
It’s worth remembering that many of the management who were in charge at the time of the phone hacking scandal are still in charge now! Rebekah Brooks for example returned as CEO of News UK in 2015 and has been in place every since.

And Bolland launched a glittering career off the back of working for Charles & Camilla and is now a highly influential

They all have close links to Camilla. Bolland and she are said to be great friends and according to him, Bolland still meets her for lunch several times a year.

I am sure it’s constantly at hand but the real cost is to William and Harry.

What an affront. From the uncle who loved them desperately. But then he even used her funeral to make an ass of himself.

Yes but it wasn't you and you are surmising now. It's not fact though.

Was Diana working for the campaign?

@Musketpipeanddrum

”Posters keep asking for proof but do you really think the Palace are going to admit to it?”

That’s your proof?

I have reported potentially libellous posts before on MN threads and they’ve been deleted. If you have reported them and they remain on here, then they probably aren’t libellous.

Yep, word choice: “would be extremely understandable”

What do you mean?

Harry goes on about how his mother was murdered by the paps but her brother has done far worse - he has exposed her thoughts and secrets to the whole world , things that should have been private. Saying he believes she had ADHD for example. He is revolting.

I trust my own eyes and ears.

Good luck trying that line re Camilla !

I think you and others here have made a very interesting choice to back in Spencer.

To use a very RFF phrase, it’s speaks volumes.

“Earl Spencer turned down a request from his sister, Diana, Princess of Wales, for a home on the family's Althorp estate just six months after her separation from the Prince of Wales, according to private letters read to a jury yesterday.
Three letters found at the home of the Princess's former butler, Paul Burrell, show she was rebuffed by her brother who feared her presence would cause too much disruption to his family.”

He did initially offer her to rent the farmhouse on the Althorp estate, but then rescinded the offer.

archive.ph/xJiZR

Letter 1

Dated in June 1993, and read aloud to the Old Bailey by Lord Carlile, QC, defence counsel for Burrell, the first letter begins "Dearest Duch", the earl's pet name for his sister, and is signed "Carlos", her nickname for him.
In it he writes:

"I thought I should update you on the Garden House and keep you informed of developments. I am keen to have everything sorted out clearly in advance of any decision, so there are no problems if the whole thing goes ahead.
"I see your clear need for a country retreat and I am happy to help provide it as long as there is not too much disruption to us or to the estate.
"The Garden House seems to suit your needs perfectly. It has been previously let for £20,000 a year, although I don't ask for as high rent from you, but for £12,000 to include cleaning inside and lawnmowing and tidying up outside, on the basis of one day a week cleaning and half-a-day gardening.
"All in all there is a lot of room for conflict if everything is not sorted out in advance. I am sorry to be so businesslike about it, but it is vital that it is all sorted out now.
"I have to look after Victoria and the girls first and therefore it is my responsibility that their privacy and quality of life is not undermined by your moving in. I thought it best to bring it all up before the police got involved, in case you decide to pull out."

letter 2

Two weeks later, however, Lord Spencer had a change of heart.

"Dearest Duch," he wrote, "I am sorry but I have decided that the Garden House is not a possible move. There are many reasons, most of which centre on the inevitable police and press interference that will follow."
He adds that he is now employing a senior agent and the property is needed for him to live in. "I know you will be disappointed but I know I am doing the right thing for my wife and children. I am just sorry I cannot help my sister!
"Seriously though, there are farmhouses around here that may well not interfere with us, but I cannot afford to give them rent free although I wish I could. In theory it would be lovely to help you out and I am sorry I can't do that.
"Victoria and I really value our privacy and the combined pressure of the Northants police, neighbours and friends have definitely compromised that.
"If you are really interested in renting a farmhouse, either here or in Warwickshire or Norfolk, that would be wonderful."

Letter 3

The third letter, on June 28, shows the rift had developed, when Lord Spencer replied to a letter from the Princess with the words: “

”Dearest Duch, Knowing the state you were in the other night when you hung up on me, I doubt whether reading this will help our relationship.
"Therefore I am returning it unopened because it is the quickest way to rebuild our friendship."
He signs off with: "Have a very happy birthday on Thursday, Love Charles.

I think eyes and ears have very little to do with it.

Again, interesting choice to back this guy with his track record. He’s got a long trail of women including his own daughters who want nothing to do with him.

@Trainbleu Thank you for posting these.

This is the man some women here want to support. They think it’s an act against the King to do so. It’s really against Diana’s legacy and against her loved ones including her boys. It would never have been her wish.

Shameful.

I don’t think you are correct actually. The cases that CS won did not exclusively focus on him offering Diana properties. Some were more general about him being heartless towards his sister. One of the articles I quoted below states:

“The Earl previously accepted undisclosed libel damages from Associated Newspapers in 2018 over a similar claim in the Daily Mail, which printed that he had acted in an "unbrotherly, heartless and callous way" toward Diana following her split from Charles.

So presumably there was other information available to prove that?

No, it hinged upon not offering her accommodation. Amazing that he won given the nuance. But he offered to rent her a place she clearly found unsuitable apparently so he won.

You can win a case like that and still be considered not a nice person.

And obviously litigious since he supported his mistress suing his wife?

The palace is seriously rattled by the look of things.
‘The children’ that royalists are pointing to are middle aged men with their own families and their own issues with Charles I’m sure .

That family is a facade . We don’t know the half of it.

Do tell us...

@TheOvertGardener

A nice person?? Is that your measure ?

The Windsors have covered up for Andrew and Epstein for decades and god knows what else .
How likely is it that two brothers ( Charles and Andrew) would both be close friends with prolific pedophiles ?
That their adored ‘uncle Dickie’ would also be a prolific pedophile- also covered up .

They disgust me .

And you talk of whether Spencer is a ‘nice person’?!

I haven't reported them. But legally MN as I understand it needs to be pro active.