Earl Spencer says Prince Charles was excited and giddy after Diana died.

[Flufffluff11]

News articles today have released a new snippet from Earl Spencer's book.

Earl Spencer says Prince Charles was 'excited, elated and giddy' after Diana died.

What are your thoughts on this comment?

I often think this in the context of any reporting about Harry and , from his own interviews etc. I think it was horrific and traumatic for both of them. Losing your mother at 12 or 14 is going to be unbelievably difficult and for them, made a worse by being in the public eye.
But because Wiliam had had the teen boy growth spurt and was more adult height, the physical difference between them was more stark, he is not seen as vulnerable, in the same way
The narrative is almost PH = little boy, traumatised, messed up
PW = just about adult, the heir, a shame but he'll have to get on with it.

Whatever else is or isn't true, it seems clear that Earl Spencer is now seeking to monetise his sister's untimely death.

Ok..That's not nice of course. But it doesnt automatically invalidate the things in his new book..

i believe the one who isn't trying to sell a book.

Charles Spencer cheated on every single one of his ex wives - often when they were pregnant.

In a birthday speech he called his 1st wife "thick and thin" when she was in the middle of an anorexia crisis. He described himself as vicious, cruel and a bully to her.

He dumped one of his ex wives via text, didn't attend 2 of his children's weddings.

Allegedly seduced his friend's wife, while the friend was in prison.

Another engagement was called off after a year in the midst of claims of "heated exchanges" tabloid speak for domestic violence

He cheated on his 4th wife with his current wife, I think he also sued her, but lost the case.

He is estranged from most of his adult children.

He was also cruel and dismissive of Diana, as shown in court. They hadn't been close for a decade and a half - he told her he was glad to be a less than peripheral figure in her life.

Meanwhile Diana told friends and journalists that her and Charles had established a friendly and relaxed co parenting relationship in the 2 years before her death, meeting each other weekly. Tina Brown (a close friend of Diana's) wrote that Diana had told her she would take Charles back "in a heartbeat".

Charles Spencer has been selling off property and auctioning items to raise funds. He started monetising his sister within weeks of her death, this is just a continuation of that.

He never mentioned to anyone before now about these alleged conversations? (other than to CNN and Larry King where he said KC had been polite). Doesn't pass the smell test to me.

Adding also, no his behaviour doesn't invalidate the things he says in his book, but when he presents inflammatory conversations, taken out of context, with no proof and no previous indication of them happening before - they get to be scrutinised within the context of his behaviour over the years.

Especially when he also.claima the late Queen was in love with his father but they were prevented from marrying.

That Diana said she had decided to divorce Charles because he was in love with his valet - despite the historical record showing they had been separated for 5yrs and the Queen told them to divorce after the Bashir interview, which Spencer organised.

That Diana lay in state in a chapel outside St James Palace, when the chapel is inside the Palace.

Inaccuracies in a supposed factual book call into question the truthfulness.

From what I’m reading in comments across a reasonably wide variety of sources, is the chat seems very much about the author (and not in a positive way) than his ‘work’.
If you are going to write a book that recounts 30 year old personal conversations (even if true) about relationships and someone else’s marriage, then sure as heck people are going to bring up your own three failed marriages, your mistress(es), your domestic abuse case and you fractured relationships with your own children.

If I was a betting person I’d put money on CS coming out of this looking the worse person than KC, quite simply because he is.

Oh, and I’ve just checked Amazon and it’s 50% off before it’s even released.

Diana dying was awful for Charles (King) in many ways. The tragedy first of all of the mother of his children dying and having to tell them and deal with the aftermath. Then he knew all the stuff about their marriage and how he’d cheated on her would be raked up. He had to deal with his mother, his ex wife’s family and the media. He was already divorced and free to marry Camilla. He had to go and identify her body. I had to do that once on and it is absolutely awful. The person I identified was elderly and lived a full life. Identify a young woman who you had once loved and been happy with would have been very emotionally draining. The notion that the death of Diana ‘helped KC’ is just not true. It actually made his life a lot harder.

I still dont think any of that invalidates what he has said in his book. Lots of writers wouldnt pass the smell test..it doesnt follow that their books are therefore rubbish. I object to what is increasingly looking like a constant stream of PR guff that is fed to us by Buckibgham Palace about our RF..I'll tell you something, all right. I have NEVER had a particular view on RF or repiblicanism, or any of it until recently. I havent cared a jot. In fact, I quite like William and Kate. But as a citizen of this country, I have of late become increasingly aware of the utter garbage that gets fed to us about that lot just to appease us and keep us sweet so we dont object to paying our taxes for them. Well, if I"m paying for them, I DO want to know how they really behave. Most of us arent in a position to know what goes on behind closed doors, so if someone who IS in a position to tell us what really goes on decides to write a book and reveal unpalatable secrets then I'm all for it. And in spite of your list of character flaws, I happen to believe he is telling the truth. He's also not the king. And I'm not paying for him, so he can behave any way he likes. Although I agree that cheating and aggression isnt nice.

@Daygloboo - I can’t get that worked up about losing up to around £8 per year.

It's not just the principle of the money, it's the cheek of treating us like we all came down in the last rain shower and that we should all just swallow whatever we are told without so much as raising an eyebrow. Where else in your life would you just blindly accept everything someone else wanted you to believe regardless of whether the reality matched up.

I think KC said it

he’s been using his dead sister to make money for three decades - he printed his eulogy and sold it for £30 a pop - at the Althorp gift shop for the last three decades - including setting up a booth to sign the books

Who treats ypu like that? We're free to make our own minds up - as far as I'm aware tno-one has been executed, prisoned, fined, put in tge stocks or publicly flogged for their opinions of the RF.

A tawdry money grab.

What about the dreadful gaslighting about what Andrew did. All the ' nothing to see here' stuff. Not good.

@Daygloboo - as before, I can’t get myself that worked up about it. I think they’re worth the cost per year.

OK, we’re all arguing about something we can’t objectively prove either way.

So instead of just going round in circles, to those of you who believe he said it:

1. What do you think King Charles meant - it’s quite a strange thing to say even given the context of what they were arguing about? Charles Spencer has been very specific about the rest of the argument and other comments makes sense in context - eg/KC saying the Spencers have no sense of duty etc - this comment seems left-field and doesn’t fit with the argument they were having? What do you think CS said to KC to prompt this response?

2. Why would he have said that to Charles Spencer?** Bearing in mind there’s plenty of proof that Charles and Diana were on friendly terms with each other by the time she died and would regularly pop in for tea with each other.

3. Why would CS only bring this up now when a) he’d previously said that King Charles was polite and b) he’s never been shy about criticising the Royals before?

4. How do you square this with KC’s public behaviour eg/looking genuinely distraught, flying over to accompany her body home (which he wasn’t expected to do), and allegedly being the one who secured her a full royal funeral?

5. Do you think your dislike of King Charles and/or the monarchy is influencing your opinion? You can think that KC is vile/hate the monarchy while still not believing this is a truthful recollection by CS.

Why have you started a new thread when you're making exactly the same points as on @OneLilacHedgehog's thread?

Is there a law against it?

There are multiple threads about this.

The same thing has happened any time any event happens.

I've never seen one single thread when the Queen died etc. There were loads

On a site with thousands of people, multiple people are obviously going to come on and start threads about the same topic.

Exactly.

"I will never profit from Diana's death....it's so low it's inconceivable." Earl Spencer. Erm...

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DddzQYuAXdZ/

😆

I'm just asking. There's no law against asking, is there? If you want to write about it on various threads it's up to you. Just wondering.

Yes, and I read somewhere that when it was time to remove Diana's body from the hospital for the journey home, Charles became agitated because she didn't have her earrings. He was saying "She can't go without her earrings, she can't go without her earrings." They were the big gold ones that she often wore around that time. (One of them was found embedded in the dashboard of the car two months later.) I can't remember where I read it, as I've read quite a few books about Diana, but it might have been Sally Bedell's book. I would recommend that one to anyone. Her sources are all connections of Diana and Charles, and it's as unbiased and balanced as anyone could wish for.

I think Charles was in deep shock and heartbroken for his boys. I'm sure he was grieving as well. I do not think he is a cruel man; he was under pressure and he married the wrong woman. All respectable sources say that he did not go back to Camilla until five years in, when the marriage had irretrievably broken down. His friends became worried about his mental state and reintroduced him and Camilla, whose husband cheated on her mercilessly. I am sure that he did not want his co-parent to die.

There's a famous photo of Diana and Charles on a tour - South Korea? - where their problems were on full display and the press nicknamed them The Glums. In the photo, they are sitting next to each other on ceremonial chairs, Diana has a blank gaze, and Charles is looking down. He looks in despair and as if he's about to cry.