Royal row between King Charles and Earl Spencer

[Viviennemary]

Buckingham Palace said they don't usually comment but they can't stay silent. Apparently Prince Charles said at the time of Diana's death rest assured we'll forget her soon enough. Which is pretty horrendous. Charles has more or less said grief had clouded Earl Spencer's judgement and memory.

I don't know why he has waited nearly 30 years to come out with this.

You have no idea if it was C idea or not.

4 times married and 3 acrimonious divorces.

Didn't his sister ask if she could live in a house on the estate and he refused because the press would always be about?

I think at various times botj William and Harry have said they regretted being made to walk but would also regret it if they hadn't. The whole thing was just so sad. Somehow the real grief of the family was hijacked by the fake tabloid driven hysteria of the crowds.

I think I have heard or read that QE2 had wanted a private funeral for Diana.

I don't think Tony Blair meant to hurt the boys but I do think he had an eye to the main chance and wanted to put the boot in while smiling in the Queen's face. There are people like that. Hence the People's Princess speech. I saw a programme once which referred back to the marriage of Mary, the Princess Royal, to a member of the Lascelles family. She was the daughter of Queen Mary and I can't remember when she was married. The next day a newspaper referred to her with the words 'The People's Princess'. It wasn't a new term. I've no idea whether or not Tony's advisors had found that and thought it would sound good. Tony Blair could have paid tribute to Diana and called her the People's Princess and added. "I think that Her Majesty the Queen and Prince Philip have wanted to look after the boys and it has been the best thing for them to stay in Scotland this week.", but he didn't. It might have have shut up the stirring papers a bit and TB would have still got his picture on the next day's papers because he had said it.

Yes, exactly this.
I watched the funeral with an Albanian and she said it reminded her of the funeral of their dictator Enver Hoxha (sp?) and she was amazed because she thought this sort of thing only happened in Communist countries.

My biggest ‘wtf?’ was not the funeral procession itself, it was when Charles appeared with William to view the flowers outside Kensington Palace (ie to make an appearance as the mob demanded). People were stretching their arms out and shouting ‘William! William!’ to try to get his attention and he was astonishingly poised and professional in the face of the lunacy, going ‘thank you so much’ in proper royal style, and I was thinking,
1 how can anyone in the palace think it is reasonable to expect this of a bereaved 15 year old, these people were mad, it looked scary even though the mob was benign
2 how could the individuals in that mob think that what they were doing was in any way kind or helpful?

I do accept the argument that a lot of the tears in the crowd at the funeral were people crying for their own losses which hit you when you’re part of a public grieving ritual, but the stuff involving the princes was madness.

I've seen Camilla talk straight to camera saying the king can be difficult. I remember it clearly. They were out walking with their Jack Russells. And there are the tales of books being flung across the room. I cant imagine Anne having a hissy fit every time something doesnt go her way. No doubt he can be a force for good as someone with soft power who can host important meetings etc. And I believe he has a genuine interest in serious issues like climate change etc. but I still think he lacks the commanding presence of our late queen. She juat had to tuen up aomewhere in onw of hwr vibrant outfita and immediately a kind of gravitas was bestowed on the occasion.

Exactly.
Not a glowing CV for his relationships.

Egoist and very difficult man.

Yes that ' whatever love is' sounded like him trying not to tell the truth- which was ' I know what love is, and it's not this arranged marriage I'm entering into' whereas poor Diana was a particularly naive teenager. Of course she wasn't ' in love ' ( apart from with the idea of marrying the PoW). they barely spent any time together and had nothing in common. I think Kate having to wear that awful dated Ill fated engagement ring is a strange decision from William. It's like a terrible reminder of what happens if you cross the Royals!

It would be so hard to try to think what would be best in such a terrible situation. My mother died when I was the same age as Harry, and parts of her funeral have left me with trauma, and some haven't. I've actually noticed several posts on this thread where people have said that W and H should have been allowed to view their mother's body- I did this and still occasionally have flashbacks. It was the very worst part of what happened immediately following her death for me. So it's impossible to predict how an individual child will respond.

Anne is not the paragon of virtue people seem to think. She had affairs in her marriage and rumours are her current marriage only survives as a show and she can't divorce again. They spend a lot of time apart.

She does her bit for the RF very well but she isn't an angel.

How quickly people forget.

The press aggressively demanded that William and Harry (aged 15 and 12) should be seen and photographed, and make statements. The tabloids in particular whipped up public fury with demands that we must be allowed to see the boys. The alleged "awful royal response" was trying to shield them from the media frenzy by keeping them at Balmoral, whilst the press demanded that the Queen, Charles and the boys should all come to London and display their grief publicly. The press and the public did that to William and Harry, not the royal family.

Similarly, Spencer previously claimed that he was opposed to William and Harry taking part in the funeral procession and that court officials lied to him, claiming that they wanted to do the walk. Spencer was indeed against the plan, but William and Harry disproved the rest of this claim in the BBC documentary Diana, 7 Days. Their statements in this documentary directly undercut Spencer's narrative. They were not tricked or forced into walking behind the coffin with Philip, Charles and Spencer. They were fully included in the decision that they should do so.

Are Spencer's new claims true? They may be, but I don't regard him as the most reliable of witnesses. I would want some third party corroboration before I accepted his account.

Guess what the royals are just fallible humans like the rest of us and not super beings.

I was once removed from a family death as it was felt right at the time. In the many intervening years I have thought that it wouldn't have hurt if I'd stayed put.

There is a time in most peoples' lives when they go to their first funeral and, if they want to, look at a dead person beforehand. Those things vary. I don't think it was awful for the boys to walk behind the coffin. I think what children and teenagers are told about death in general and a particular death are very important but I have no idea what is said in anyone's family except my own.

Because it's all very sensitive and would have been too shocking at rhe time. Like all ppl getting older, Charles,Spencer probably feels the gloves can come off and the truth can be revealed. I believe him. He absolutely doesnt strike me as the type who'd make that up.

The Queen used her ' gravitas' and presence to threaten people into keeping quiet about her disgusting son, take as much money as she could from the State and get her governments to bend over and giver her extensive tax breaks and exemptions from various laws. She squirrelled away millions in tax havens while sitting by a 2 bar heater with her Tupperware out pretending she was just a little old lady ' just like your old granny'.

I think that is spot on re Blair.
If he had been a different sort of person he could have supported the RF in putting the princes first. But he didn’t and they didn’t.

I don’t believe the public couldn’t have been made to accept the princes staying in Scotland, or at least in private. By pandering to the mob you just give it more power.

That may be true, but I can't think she'd have a public mini tantrum because a pen was leaking. Or( allegedly) throw books across a room because a servant wasnt colluding in a cover up about an affair.

Was Prince Phillips sisters funeral live streamed to millions all over the world? Was Central London closed off for the duration? Were there a million or so people lining the streets? I seem to have forgotten that amazing event.

And Queen Victorias children were all quite elderly adults when she died, they weren’t children who had up until that moment spent their lives being heavily protected from the great British public.

Charles spent the night with Camilla only 2 nights before his wedding. He phoned her while on his honeymoon.
neither were perfect but Charles and Camilla were both in their 30s, Diana barely 20. They were surprised she didn’t accept their affair. And yes she then had affairs of her own.
I can believe this comment given the RF initial reaction when she died.

I dislike Charles Spencer, as he was repurted to have referred to his frst wife (Victoria Lockwood), as both thick and thin (she was suffering from anorexia at the time). He is currently on his 4th wife!
I suspect K Charles said something that was misconstrued, and now 30 years later he is 'misremembering',
K Charles and Diana were apparently on good terms at the time of her death, and K Charles was clearly distraught at her death.
The one thing I actually admire about Charles S is that I bought his book 'The White Ship', and found it very well written, and as the author was just Charles Spencer (No Titles, etc), I actually found myself looking the author up, to confirm it was actually him. My point of admiration being that he did not feel the need to put his titles on his book.
Also, it was Charles S that convinced Diana, on falsified documents, to conduct her Panorama interview. I am sure Diana would have given an interview at some point, but it might have been a very different interview than the one given, convinced as she was that she was being bugged, etc
As regards walking behind the coffin, if Harry had not been there, he would have later complained about 'not being allowed to'.

Or rip a sink off the wall in a fit of rage.
Or shout at their gardeners leaving 11 out of 12 to quit within 12 months.

@milveycrohn it's funny how whenever someone reveals negative things Charles or other senior royals have said, the answer is always that the other person was confused, misremembering, or crazy. Every single time this happens.

Apparently Charles never says anything wrong ever. But the people around him are all terribly confused, with terrible memories.

He had a tantrum over a pen.
It was documents that will be around forever, its days after loosing his mother, days of touring the country and millions of people watching.

I think we'd all be stressed trying to sign those documents on a table that was too small. He tried to show his frustration and get someone to move the pen tray.

He didn't exactly go off in a strop.

I don't believe he said that about Di either. His kids had just lots their mum

Well, that may be true, but I was talking about a comparison between Charles and the queen in public. I wasnt talking about the ins and outs of monarchy.

Diana was 19 and Charles was her first ever boyfriend. He waited until she was 20 for the actual marriage, for a whole 28 days.

Yes I think if you were an adult at the time Diana died, then Charles comment is very believable