Prince Charles doesn’t want Harry to marry Cressida Bonas, she’s ‘not royal material’


Do you think Prince Charles is in any position to give his sons advice on their love lives? No. I do not. Charles’ marriage to Diana was a disaster of epic proportions, and when he married his long-standing mistress Camilla Parker-Bowles, he could only go through with it by publicly promising that Camilla would never be queen (although she will be). Charles’ love life has always been a disaster. So why would he even get involved in Prince Harry’s love life? Harry has been dating Cressida Bonas for the better part of… what? A year and a half? Something like that. And there are significant rumors that Harry will propose to his beloved Cressida sometime this year. But not if Charles has anything to say about it!

IN the latest royal scandal, Britain’s PRINCE CHARLES has told his son HARRY to cool it with his sexy blonde girlfriend after her stepfather allegedly committed suicide, according to friends. Only months ago, “wild child” Harry, 29, appeared ready to settle down with society beauty Cressida Bonas, 24.

“Harry had a meltdown after his father told him to ‘back off’ from Cress because of her family problems,” a royal source told The ENQUIRER. “Charles has been thrilled that the Royal family’s credibility was restored after Prince William married Kate Middleton and (their son) Prince George was born. Charles doesn’t want Cress’ family problems to cost them all that good will.”

Redhaired royal rebel Harry – infamous for nude partying in Las Vegas and boozy nights out – spent December trekking to the South Pole to raise money for injured veterans.

He’s been dating Cressida for 20 months, and days after they were reunited in London following his Antarctic expedition, her stepfather – former investment banker Christopher Shaw – was found dead of a suspected drug overdose at his home.

Shaw, 76, was the fourth husband of Cressida’s mother and reportedly had financial problems.

Meanwhile, Harry – who recently switched from being an Apache helicopter pilot in the British Army Air Corps to a staff officer position in London – has said that finding a girl “prepared to take me on” is tough, and sources say this scandal will only make things worse.

“Harry told his dad he loves Cressida, but Charles isn’t sure she’s royal material,” said the source.

“Harry is under huge pressure to dump her, and friends say he’s ‘broken in two’ at being torn between his family and his lover.”

[From The National Enquirer]

Oh, please. I mean, it’s awful that Cressida’s step-father committed suicide and that’s a family tragedy, for sure. But don’t use that against her! And if the problem is “Cressida has dodgy relations,” I would like Charles to take a good long look at the Middleton family and then at his own family. The royal family is full of dodgy relations, as is the Middleton family (where art thou, Dodgy Uncle Gary?).

The reason I’m doing this story is because I partly believe it, though. I could totally see how Charles would tell Harry that Cressida isn’t marriage material, and that her family and her lifestyle are just too bohemian for the royal life. I wonder if Cressida is really up for it too, and if Harry and Cressida do marry, there’s a good possibility it will end in disaster. But that has to do with Cressida’s age, the fact that she’s walking away from her dance education/career to be a royal girlfriend, and because she just doesn’t seem to care about “royal life” in general.



Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

205 Responses to “Prince Charles doesn’t want Harry to marry Cressida Bonas, she’s ‘not royal material’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kali says:

    While she’d be marrying my ginger love, I really want those two crazy kids to make it! I don’t know enough to be able to comment on the class/royal/aristocracy side of things. I just want them to have fun and be slightly naughty and vaguely inappropriate (scrunchies4lyfe!) at public royal gatherings. They’re really cute together.

    • Dominique says:

      My thoughts exactly. Cress+Harry ftw!

    • Secret Squirrel says:

      My only opinion is that Harry should marry his best friend. He’s going to need to be with somebody he can get along with and have fun with after the initial flush of love has faded.

      If Charles had of done this, he would have married Camilla instead of Diana but would have probably been happier (and I am not being disrespectful to Diana here, she knew all along that Charles was pining for Camilla and only married her because she “fitted the bill” better).

      I want to see Harry marry the right girl for him, not the right girl for the monarchy.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Not true. Diana helped set up the Camilla & Charles storyline but the truth was more complex than that (Diana needed a villain and Camilla was an easy target). Charles had *numerous* lovers and at one point thought Kanga was ‘the one’ not Camilla.

        However, I totally agree that Harry needs to marry the right woman for HIM. I hope he can find or and if he has, keep her.

      • vangroovey says:

        Kanga! I recently learned about Kanga. That is one CRAZY story right there.

  2. Lark says:

    Oh Please. The Enquirer. And while Cressida’s family is like some soap opera full of infidelity and multiple marriages and wanna be actresses, she comes from super blue blood if I remember correctly. Isn’t that what they care about in the long run, the royals?

    I think that was a nasty hatchet job they tried to do on Chelsy at the hacking thing, so I do think Charles is capable of being the kind of person who would judge someone as not being of “royal material.” Honestly, I wonder if Chelsy thinks she dodged a bullet? She’s wealthy, educated (far more educated than any of the royals), and works as a lawyer. She doesn’t have to give up her job and live a life under the microscope.

  3. Aura says:

    I could maybe see it- I love Diana but she was fragile due to her difficult childhood. Kate, for all her faults, has had a stable home life. Maybe Charles is afraid Harry will choose someone with same issues as Diana

    • aquarius64 says:

      Also, William and Kate were together for 7-8 years (given a break) and they lived together before he put a ring on it. Harry and Cressida have been dating for a year and a half and not lived together. To make the lifestyle switch and become a princess is going to be jolting.

      Sidenote: Camilla may technically become queen when Charles ascends to the throne, but her official title will be Princess Consort. Just like her being now being Duchess of Cornwall and not addressed as Princess of Wales, although that’s what she technically is. It tells me that how Charles and Camilla got together is still a sore subject after all this time. To me, the lesser known titles serve as reminders to Camilla she was a royal sidepiece and not deserving to be addressed publicly by the primary titles. That’s got to sting. At least Kate will be addressed as HM the Queen Consort when William takes the throne.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Camilla *will* be Queen when Charles ascends as the UK does not have morganatic marriages. I also don’t think she’ll be called Princess Consort as that isn’t a real title in the UK either. Charles was blowing smoke up people’s asses when those two married.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I agree and I kind of admire his cunning…if not his wife 😉

      • LadySlippers says:

        @Tulip: I don’t think Camilla really cares what she’s called. She doesn’t get fussed up about that kind of stuff. But Charles was very smart about it.

      • Dani says:

        I have to disagree – being together longer and living together prior to getting married doesn’t always come to your benefit. DH and I married after 2 years and never lived together and we have one of the most thriving relationships I’ve witnessed. Whereas my best friend has been dating the same guy for 5 years, was a fight to get married and is a fight to stay married. It depends on you and your relationship. Not the length of time you’ve been together.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        “It depends on you and your relationship. Not the length of time you’ve been together.”
        I agree with this within reason. I mean don’t marry after two months but, then again, don’t marry after ten years when you don’t get along in the first place.
        As far as Harry and Cressida, I have doubts as to whether they have spent enough time together at all with Harry often being away (charities, Vegas, etc.). Even if their relationship is in the context of years, those years may have been more of the first blush of a blooming relationship then any real chance at getting to know whether or not they are truly compatible.

      • FLORC says:

        Kate’s homelife with her parents seems to be so stable she’s never left. Seems to life more at her parents than with her husband. That’s backed up by pap evidence. And that image is not one they was to duplicate with Harry.

        And this story is BS of course. Mostly because Charles (allegedly or was it confirmed?) suggested William marry Cressida’s sister Isabella because Kate wasn’t wife material and she came from a beter family.

      • L says:

        I’m sure LAK can answer this better, but a good example is Prince Phillip. He’s not king consort or a prince consort formally. His prince title is his from before marriage although the queen gave him a prince of the uk title 5 years after they got married. He’s a HRH, but his main title is that of the the Duke of Edinburgh.

        She can legally be called Queen Consort (and I think that’s Charles’ endgame) but Princess consort is also available to her if that’s their choice. It’s a rare thing though.

      • bluhare says:

        Mr. bluhare and I married four months after our first date, didn’t live together, and just celebrated our 27th anniversary.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        Don’t give me wrong, I think short courtship/long marriage is completely possible to work. I just doesn’t in most cases. My sister and BIL dated three months and have been married almost 30 years. It can happen and it’s great when it does but the odds are against it.
        Congratulations on 27 years !!! 🙂

      • bluhare says:

        Thank you, Tulip Garden.

        And I’ll take bets now on whether Camilla will be queen or princess consort. The smart money’s on Queen.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @L: Women in the UK (and in most English speaking countries) take on their husband’s name, rank, and status. However, men in the UK and elsewhere, usually don’t take on their wive’s name, rank, and status. So when Charles ascends, Camilla automatically becomes Queen as they have not changed that practice legally. And there is no ‘Princess Consort’ title in the UK — they would have to create it anew.

        As for Philip, he ‘renounced’ his Greek & Danish titles (there is a debate whether he could legally do this) prior to his marriage to Elizabeth. George VI created Philip Duke of Edinburgh shortly before marriage so upon marriage Elizabeth became the Duchess of Edinburgh (a title she loves). When Elizabeth ascended they (Elizabeth and Philip) chose NOT to give him the title of Prince Consort (for various resons). However, she did bestow upon him the title, style, and accordance of a Prince of the UK as if he were a child of a sovereign. That was quite unusual but many didn’t think he could renounce his Greek & Danish ones.

        So Philip really isn’t the best example to use.
        Google it and you’ll see several legal experts weigh in and almost all state that unless the laws are changed — Camilla will be Queen. Full Stop/ Period.

      • LAK says:

        aquarius64: William and Kate broke up several times. Only the break up of 2007 made the international news. how could it not given the media tour Kate embarked upon. It’s actually funny that in their engagement interview, they are asked about THE big break up that everyone knows about, and William discussed an earlier break up……….

        L : What Ladyslippers said.

        Philip and HM are so complicated in terms of how they made him a suitable candidate to marry our Princess now Queen. It demonstrates that despite the rules, they can be bent to suit the family when they wish.

        Firstly, he had to become a British citizen because our princess couldn’t marry a foreigner [the horror!] with dodgy relatives. His Nazi in-laws were and have been kept very much in the background. The less said about the fact that he *is* a foreigner the better.

        Thus when he renounced his Greek titles, he became garden variety Philip Mountbatten in the military[i forget his military rank at that point].

        Of course they then realised that our princess was marrying a commoner [the horror!!] so he was created a Royal Duke.

        HM made him a Prince of the UK sometime AFTER the marriage so he was restored to being a ‘prince’.

        QM never liked him. So disliking inlaws is nothing new in the royal family. it’s practically tradition at this point!!

      • LadySlippers says:

        Did you know that Philip never had to become a citizen because he was a descendant of Sophia? True story. According to that law, all descendants of Sophia are automatically British citizens so he didn’t have to ‘become’ one as he already was a citizen. Plus it shows how stupid Mountbatten (Philip’s uncle) was as he was the one pushing all those things prior to Philip & Elizabeth’s marriage. Read the biography about Philip by Philip Eade — it’ll really highlight that stupidity and how much Philip was trying to distance himself from his social climbing uncle.

        Also, creating Philip Duke of Edinburgh was more to do with not wanting to call Elizabeth Mrs Mountbatten than anything else. In the Eade biography, it wasn’t so much as QM not liking him as the ‘Grey Men’ (as Diana and Sarah so elegantly called them) disliking him. According to Eade, they would have preferred almost anyone BUT Philip for her husband. Sad as Philip is a fairly decent man that had to fight many uphill battles to get any respect.

        ETA: LAK he was a Lt in the Navy at the time of his marriage. 🙂

      • LAK says:

        Ladyslippers: I know all that, but it wasn’t a pointless exercise.

        The Royal Family were still in the process of establishing and presenting themselves as British as possible. A German princeling [yes i know, no actual German blood, but that isn’t the point], was never going to wash with the public.

        He had to be made as British as possible for PR reasons.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Actually, according to other biographies, Phillip and his douchy uncle were very close and even traded mistresses. According to several sources that was even one of the many reasons Charles found Camilla appealing – she had never slept with Louis. And both of Elizabeth’s parents very much disliked Phillip for her. He was known as a playboy with one or two indelicate escapades to his credit. But Liz had nursed a crush on him since her teen years and was determined to have him. It got to the point where concerned relatives and close advisirs were telling Phillip he should either propose or stop seeing the impassioned young crown princess altogether. When Elizabeth asked her father’s permission he emphatically said no. Elizabeth declared that she would have him regardless. Given what the family had been through with David and how much Elizabeth was adored her parents relented. The king never fully warmed up to Phil and the Queen Mother was an inveterate peacemaker. Phillip chafed constantly at his role when his wife ascended the throne but eventually hit his stride. I do like the old chap lol.

      • John Wayne Lives says:

        Wow all this royal back story is cool 🙂

      • mayamae says:


        Do tell why the QM disliked Phillip. His arrogance? Not good enough? I would never guess that HM was such a passionate and headstrong young woman. I thought HM was always pretty obedient to her mother, I guess only in certain matters.

        Also, in regards to the creepy tradition of the mother to the heir being “intact” prior to marriage, did HM have to be examined?

    • Tulip Garden says:

      Agree with you. I don’t even think that this makes Charles a “bad guy”, he’s trying to be a good father. Besides, Harry’s is 29 and despite wealth he is a great understanding of duty and responsibility, I expect with 24 year old Cressie it’s hard to say one way or the other what she would or wouldn’t be willing to do. Because of her wealth and privilege, she really hasn’t had an opportunity to become fully-formed like most her age would have. It’s kind of like taking a huge gamble if Harry does propose. She could be utterly fantastic or a complete disaster. I imagine that that would worry Charles. I would hope that it would worry Harry too but if he is in lurve, sometimes that is hard to see past…or if he’s just ready to settle down, emphasis on settle.

  4. DanaG says:

    I don’t think Cressida is cut out for royal life. They do actually do work something little Cressida knows nothing off. When Charles becomes King the workload will increase for Harry and William. Cressida has said she doesn’t want to do it and I think Harry needs to find someone who really enjoys public duties not just the parties and pretty outfits.

    • Angelic 21 says:

      Well William married the girl only known for partying, taking vacations and known for being pretty but that’s somehow okay and suitable?

    • My2Pence says:

      “They do actually do work something little Cressida knows nothing off. ”

      Cressida is 24 years old and still in school, in a physically and mentally demanding field. When and if she ever sits around for a decade doing nothing but waiting for the phone to ring – ie. Kate Middleton – then criticizing her work ethic would make more sense. This preemptive bashing of Cressida is wearing thin.

      And again, Bill and Kate did a total of 81 hours of “work” for the family firm last year. I wouldn’t hold them up as great examples.

      • Zadie says:

        I thought she just took a one year course – how is she still in school?
        And like her or not, Kate got a degree from a top University, that counts for something. And she did work for her parents. I don’t know what she did, but it’s still work.

      • Angelic 21 says:

        CB actually have 2 degrees also from a top British university Leeds. Also as far as ‘working for parents is concerned’ last time I checked it was reported CB has also started working for her father’s company also. I don’t believe either 1 of them actually worked/works but if you are going to believe Kate worked at her parents company, please note Cress is also known to work for her father’s.

        I don’t have the patients to find you links but specifics of her job was reported here also. You’ll find it if you care enough to search on celebitchy only.

      • Zadie says:

        I didn’t know that she works.
        What degrees does she have?

      • Suze says:


        I haven’t verified this with Dr. Google, but I believe it pans out like this:

        William, Geography, St. Andrews
        Kate, Art History, St. Andrews
        Harry, None
        Cressida, Dance, Leeds University
        Graduate Level Dance, Trinity Laban Conservatoire

        So technically, out of the four of them, Cress has the most university education. Dance is a valid degree and just as much work as geography or art history.

        She was reported to recently have taken a job in theatre marketing for 20,000/yr (pounds, not dollars). I don’t have the links here but they are easily found.

      • Zadie says:

        This will sound terribly judgy, but to me, art history and geography are more valid degrees than dance.

      • Suze says:

        You are on celebrity snark site, you are allowed, even encouraged, to be judgy.

        I think they are all a lot of work. I am sure people who have actually earned those degrees will chime in.

      • My2Pence says:

        It was my understanding CB was still in school. If she’s graduated with two degrees and is now trying to work in her field, even better.

        As for Kate Middleton working for her parents, your mileage and beliefs may vary. There is little evidence that she actually did work. I’ll quote myself from a few weeks ago.

        – The woman *barely* worked for a decade. She was a two-or-three-day-a-week part-time accessories buyer for 9 months, and during that time demanded more time off to be available for her boyfriend. Her boss was quoted in the press as saying she wasn’t exactly committed to the job.

        – If memory serves, she was papped twice outside the Party Pieces building in total, when she allegedly worked there for her family for a decade. The “work” she allegedly did was credited to someone else on the site and in the catalogs. When asked point blank what her sister did for the family company, her sister couldn’t answer.

        Bill and Kate spent ten years together before getting married, well-documented multiple breakups, vacations, and all-around laziness for that decade. Cressida has been on the scene *maybe* for 18-20 months – during part of that time she was still in school – and already she’s the focus of so many attacks. Chelsy was also ruthlessly attacked, when she clearly worked harder that Middleton ever has. Just more evidence to me of the “attack the spare and whomever he is with just because” idea.

      • Angelic 21 says:


        That sounds about right. Not to mention Laban is the most exclusive/top dance institutions in England. So I’m sure she must be very talented to get a place there. She also danced at Royal ballet school for years. again top ballet school and not very easy to be in. She also had few odd jobs as a ski instructor etc also IIRC.

      • Zadie says:

        Now, this will again sound pretty judgy, but the only reason I like Kate better is that she’s not from an aristo background (even if she was rich) and that her mother was working class.

      • Liberty says:

        I agree w My2Pence and Angelic 21.

        And considering that his father has a second family (“wife” and kids) and had to be closely minded on overseas trips…..well, hang it up, Charles – you got your sacrificial princess bride, you have your queen Sharon, now back off your son – he’s the one publicly saving your family’s rep at this point. And I still team Chelsy, but still. Holding up the Middletons as a watermark example of quality is pants.

      • Suze says:

        Cressida has also acted, and is apparently fairly decent at it. That may make her a good fit for royal life. Lots of acting required there.

        When she was at Leeds she played Desdemona in a production of Othello, it was later taken to the Edinburgh Festival:

      • bluhare says:

        Oh boy, Zadie. Wait ’til LAK gets here. She’s a dancer too.

        And a degree in dance doesn’t mean she didn’t study anything else.

      • LAK says:

        Bluhare/Zadie: Please would you explain why exactly you are judgy about dancers? Since dancers, particularly trained ones like CB are athletes, do you feel the same way about all athletes?

      • Zadie says:

        Yes. I also don’t think sports is equal to academics. When it comes to education, I don’t think you can compare Charlene to Maxima or Claire.
        There always was a hierarchy of subjects in schools – science comes on top, then humanities, then other things.

      • My2Pence says:

        As others have pointed out, Diana did not have a University education but she was great as a royal due to her emotional intelligence.

        According to Dr. Gardner’s theory, there are multiple types of intelligence.

        Not everyone is going to be smart in the same ways. IMO, to decide that one type of intelligence is the only one that matters would be to discredit the value that each individual brings to the table.

      • Suze says:


        Are you saying studying performance art is objectively inferior regardless of the course of study, the level of study, and the place of schooling?

        So, say, someone like Meryl Streep, with a graduate degree in drama from Yale, would have a lesser education than someone with an undergraduate degree in geography from the same school (like my cousin Davey, who graduated with a gentlemen’s C average)? Given your hierarchy, I think that’s what you’re saying.

        Personally, I disagree. There is a fair degree of rigor in studying anything at the graduate level. It takes time and commitment at the very least.

      • Zadie says:

        Maybe not geography, but chemistry, physics, medicine certainly. I don’t want to offend anyone, but that is just my opinion.

      • Suze says:


        I just wondered. And I chose geography because Wills and my stupid cousin Davey both majored in it. No offense to other geography majors.

        Physics and chemistry are tough majors. The day we get a royal who has studied one of those disciplines and received a degree in it, the palace walls will fall in. And medicine – you need an advanced degree to practice that ; ). I’m pretty sure none of our royals are up for that.

      • TG says:

        Now let’s be fair. Waity wasn’t always sitting around waiting for the phone to ring. She also went to the gym. LOL

      • FLORC says:

        Just want to chime in and say I love this back and forth and have little to contribute since most is well covered.. With the exception of “a geography and art history degree counts more than a dance degree.” bit.

        1. I will value a persons drive and use of their degree. Kate’s art history degree was never utilized by her at all. Not once. Which makes me think she got her MRS with a minor in art history.

        2. Dance is more than actually dancing. It is truly an artform and a wonder to behold when executed correctly. Not to mention the level of technical skill required. You are on par with athletes as far as diet, conditioning, and discipline.

        And as far as royal life. Kate was pitiful in regards to her training to be a royal member. 8 years waiting the ring and she had no will or want to take on a charity or 2. In this respect Cressida is ahead of the curb. She’s got a passion that can translate to charity work and has done events.
        I feel Kate has shown only a lack of passion outside of William’s attention. I l many of us might feel the same since many of us praise her endlessly when she acts outside of William.

        Not to mention St. Andrews and Leeds is nothing to laugh at. But I don’t care if you get a degree from all the ivy leagues. If you’re not using it it’s as good as toilet paper.

    • FLORC says:

      You have it backwards. William’s wife was suppose to be the one who had a sense of duty and Harry being the spare could have the wife that enjoys parties and pretty clothes.

      Really seems to be a cruel twist of fate Harry was born 2nd.

      • Liberty says:

        I agree. But look at history.

      • FLORC says:

        History regarding an heir and spare is always rewritten. Even with David and Bertie.Bertie was the screw up and David was better until Bertie became King. Then he was the flawless one and David was the screw up.
        Sadly history is not always accurate.

      • bluhare says:

        For those not familiar with British royalty, David and Bertie are Edward VIII and George VI respectively.

    • Suze says:


      I see where you’re coming from, I can’t give points to Kate for that. In some ways she has lived a more “aristo” life than actual aristocrats. It’s not like William married an actual middle class woman who actually lived an ordinary life.

      Kate attended boarding school and rubbed elbows with the very rich for many years, took many family vacations to ritzy locations, lived rent-free in her parent’s London pied a terre while clubbing frequently and only held down jobs intermittently throughout her twenties.

      Carol Middleton did come from humble beginnings. I think the real fascinating story would be how she built Party Pieces and hauled her family from firmly middle class into the landed gentry. Unlike Kate, Carol had real struggles, both monetary and class-wise. The real story behind her rise would be riveting, but I don’t know that we’ll ever really know it.

      (I still don’t buy that Party Pieces ever generated the kind of revenue that would support Carol and Michael’s lifestyle throughout their marriage, but I don’t know that we’ll ever know the truth).

      • bluhare says:

        Michael Middleton had access to a family trust fund (Carole did marry “up”) which was used to pay the kids’ school fees. So that went a long way.

      • Suze says:

        True, Bluhare. Somewhere there is a published story with how much Michael inherited (which was in the public domain) and how much the Middleton lifestyle costs, and the difference was significant.

        I still think the shadowy figure of Uncle Gary has something to do with it.

      • My2Pence says:

        This might be the article in question.

        Royal Wedding: Middletons’ money – how was it made?

      • Suze says:


        Thank you. That is the exact article I was looking for. The writer researched Kate’s grandfather’s inheritence and it was much smaller than most people realized.

        I have bookmarked it.

      • FLORC says:

        It’ll take a hacking of their private finances to truly know the numbers. PP will never go public.
        And should something happen to Uncle Gary I bet the Middleton’s finances will shrivel up without help. PP and investments are just not enough to cover their outrageous lifestyle.

  5. Talie says:

    She cares enough about royal life to work the media and take a “respectable” job instead of doing something with dance.

    • Jegede says:

      She and her family play the game as they come but she’s the ‘right sort’ so all is forgiven Seward, Richard Kay and Mondracke et al lactate at the possibility of a union with the Bonas Henriettas.
      Cressida quitting dance today to be a teacher tomorrow, PR agent the day after, and a maybe a monkey the following week is not proof of a aimless well connected party girl a la Paris Hilton, but a ‘bohemian style’ reflective of good breeding LOL

      Then again, Diana was the ‘right sort’ with her English rose beauty and Spencer family lineage and that was a disaster.
      Fergie was the ‘right sort’ hanging with the horse set, chelsea vibe culture and breath of fresh air unlike the dreaded Koo Stark . And that was disaster part 2

      The royal court and social snobs decree what the right sort it and eventually always fails.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      Oh I agree that she cares enough about becoming a princess, duchess, whatever to make sacrifices (which I don’t think is even a sacrifice for her but just a direction because she’s aimless) now but caring enough about “royal life” is a whole different kettle of fish altogether.

      • Juliette says:

        Yes, making adjustments in the beginning is the easy part. But how will she feel in 10 years? Its hard for anyone to keep constant for so long, let alone with eyes upon your every misstep and indiscretion. Unfortunately for Harry & Cressida, she will not enjoy the same protections as Kate.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I completely agree Juliette. In fact, depending on what she’s like (and we don’t know a whole lot), she may find the real adjustments to be made upon marriage to a royal very jarring indeed. I could be wrong but nothing that I have read about her suggests that she is up for making real sacrifices mostly because up until now she hasn’t been tested in that direction. I would be wary about marrying under these circumstances to this person without a bit more to go on if I were Harry.

      • LAK says:

        No one will know how anyone will turn out as a royal except those that have been raised royal. The biggest mistake the royals ever made was to stop marrying other royals. HM married a royal, so Philip truly knew what to expect in terms of what was expected of him.

        For non royal inlaws, it depends on the person’s character, not time.

        Diana = dated for 6 months = Fantastic royal
        Fergie = dated for 1yr = good royal despite her disastrous private life
        Sophie = dated for 6yrs = good royal
        Kate = dated for 8yrs = middling royal

      • ncmagnolia says:


        As always, I love your feedback, because you never cast blame. It is disheartening to log on here (my favorite gossip site, largely due to the mostly intelligent women who post here), only to find that most people judge or cast aspersions.

        I feel a lot of Cressy and Kate ‘hate’ here, and it doesn’t make any sense. Both women fell in love with Royals, and both are doing their best to cope with the public exposure thrown their way. Whatever Kate did in her past to ‘snare’ Wills, why does it have to be publicly dissected now? She appears to be a good wife and mother.

        However Cressida behaves, well hell, how would ANY of us hold up under the glare of public scrutiny? She may well be madly in love w/ Harry, or she may be considering the media as an unwanted intrusion into her life. Or *both*. Neither woman should be subjected to the harsh judgement of what complete strangers have to say and post about them. If Cressy is shy…so what. If Kate followed a path to Will’s heart in a manner that *we* don’t approve of…so WHAT.

        No wonder women are afraid to engage their hearts w/ Royals…it’s a losing proposition. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Errgg!!

      • My2Pence says:

        @ ncmagnolia. Okay, set aside the 10 years of grasping, laziness, self-abasement, etc. Pretend she loves him instead the idea of him. Say that none of her behavior for a decade speaks to the character of the person who is (potentially) going to be Princess/Queen Consort. All we’re allowed to do – in your mind – is to voice opinions from the point of the engagement on.

        So what has Kate Middleton done since the engagement?
        – Lies continually to the public (see: will work hard right away, being dedicated to her work, fake HG diagnosis fiasco tied to nurse suicide, too ill to work but not too ill to flit off to Mustique or Switzerland, not having staff, not having a nanny, had to “work” but instead flitted off to France to be papped topless instead of attending the para-olympics)

        – Wasted $150,000 of the taxpayers (Duchy) money on clothing in a single year For her abyssmal 46 HOURS of “work”. Spends a lot of this on non-UK brands when her job is to promote UK industry including fashion.

        – Has visited her charities 1-2 times each in the past three years, mostly for gala events. One charity had to cancel a fund-raiser due to lack of interest and she did nothing to help. Announced on invitations that she would attend Winter gala, pulled out at the last minute even though she was a 5 minute walk away, etc.

        Good wife and mother? Bill Middleton spends as much time as possible away from his wife and child. And Kate Middleton has hauled a 6-month-old child thousands of miles on a flight to a remote island that has no hospital or emergency services. Nearest medical services are a two hour flight away.

        Even if we just look at her from the time of the engagement on, IMO there is little positive to see in her.

      • FLORC says:

        You make a fair point, but only if PR fluff pieces are to be believed as gospel.
        The Kate we know through PR and the Kate we know through her actual day to re night and day.
        It”s a fair assumption to claim if you don’t see a camera or a vacation William will not be under the same roof as Kate. She’s often found at her parent’s and William elsewhere. This counters the happy newlywed image though so we only know this from random civilians and their cell phone cameras.You can’t hold a lie when instant information is everywhere.

        To be fair I’m sure there is a crazy amount of money being spent on a mobile hospital should an injury reach George.

        She’s proven time and time again she will not work unless pushed. This is not a lack of free time since she is seen shopping every other day (with George and nannies or without him entirely.)

  6. Penny says:

    Well if Kate was good enough for the heir, quite frankly the spare should be able to marry any random woman off the street if he so chooses. The bar has been set low. Any aristocratic young woman with half a brain and a little bit of money coming to her has far better options available, so beggars can’t be choosers and all that.

  7. Syko says:

    I don’t really see Harry as royal material either. That’s why I like him.

  8. Neffie says:

    This relationship to me seems so dry and forced, like Harry things it’s time to marry and is just scooping someone from a ‘good’ background. i loved the passion of Harry and Chelsy but clever girl she ran for the hills didn’t want a royal life. Can’t quite make out about Cressida but she doesnt look as eager as Waity Katy .

    • Tulip Garden says:

      Sadly, I agree. I miss Chelsy 🙁 but good for her, I guess.

      • Liberty says:

        Harry and Chelsy would have been a force to be reckoned with and could have potentially brought brains and a true will to do something meaningful with an archaic concept like royalty. That said, I totally see why she ran for the hills. But perhaps time will keep Harry strong enough to stick to his own road and Chelsy will look again.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        (Whispers) I hope you are right about chelsy taking a second look.

      • bluhare says:

        (whispers) Me too.

      • Milla says:

        i miss her too. she was so real.
        as for CB, she seems okay. way more down to earth that those Middletons. they are as classy as a bowl of soup.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Why does everyone insist that the Harry/Chelsy situation ended because she did not want to take on the headache of life and the royal spotlight? That relationship ended because Harry was too young/wild to fully commit and keep his hands off the ladies. Chelsy was not willing to just put up with it even though after each time Harry would promise to shape up. Its too bad because they were so well suited for one another and were really in love. Harry has matured since then and is such a credit to the royals but it bugs me when history is rewritten. Lots of credit to Chels for having standards and I just can’t with poor Cressy.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        @Dame Snarkweek,

        I completely agree that Harry couldn’t be faithful and that played the largest part in why Chelsy eventually called it. I think had he been faithful that she may have overcome her other objections to royal life because I do think they were in love. As you noted, Harry was young, rich, and a prince, those things didn’t auger well for faithfulness when he was so young. I think had they met at a later time (like now) that they would have had a chance of making a real go of it.

      • Suze says:


        We have no idea why they broke up. It was a private matter.

        However, the story that Chelsy was not interested in royal life for the long term gained traction because she reportedly told her friends just that.

        Again, who knows? But it was reported repeatedly that it was Chelsy who left Harry and that she did so because she just wasn’t interested in a public life opening shopping malls and smiling constantly.

        She’s a smart woman, she has a good career and a great life ahead of her. Frankly, she’s too intelligent and ambitious for royal life. I’m not sure even if she and Harry met know there would be long term potential.

      • LAK says:

        I’m curious. Where did the idea that Harry cheated on Chelsy come from? There has never been an incident, not with randoms in bars nor within their circles.

        There was one incident where The Sun newspaper insisted that he did, complete with pictures which turned out to be stolen pictures taken 3yrs BEFORE Harry had met Chelsy and both the girl in the picture and Harry sued and won a retraction.

        Apart from that one incident, nothing.

        Is Harry flirtatious? Definitely. Actual cheating? No. If you have names/links to his cheating, please post because I can’t find a single incident either in media or anecdotally.

        William on the other hand is a different story. There are names, incidents, ex-GFs, randoms AND Kate who can back up his cheating ways.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        During their relationship Harry cheated on Chelsy several times and not just with a random here or there. One was a South American beauty of African descent who dallied with him for several months and was his requested waitress at his and William’s favorite nightclub. She never went running to the press but it was an open secret among their set. But let’s start with Natalie Pinkham. Harry spent lots of quality time with her when Chelsea was away – especially during her finals. Harry met Natalie in 2001 when she was introduced to him by her then boyfriend rugby captain matt Dawson, a buddy of Harry’s. Natalie was an attractive TV reporter who was a sports nut and could “drink most men under the table”. harry found her to be fun company and they were photographed kissing after a long night of boozing and dancing at a house party. After the pics ran Harry had to explain things to Chelsy. She forgave him until more skanky confessions popped up and made the tabloids. To me, these were less credible, but Harry soon found that Chelsy wouldnt take his calls. A girlfriend of Chelsy’s, Kirsten somebody or another (can’t remember the last name) ran interference and gave Harry a good talking to over the phone. They made up again and spent a really long, happy summer together.
        When Chelsy decided to pursue grad school in the UK it was with the understanding that it would further solidify their relationship. But that is not exactly what happened. Harry was very busy with military endeavors and charity/sporting junkets in Africa with his brother. Frustrated, Chelsy accused Harry of taking her for granted and putting her at the bottom of his priority list, reminding him of why she decided to study at Leeds in the first place. Again, trusty Kirsten intervened and attempted to smooth things over.again, Again, the make up vacation (Mauritius) and promises to do better but not much changed. So Chelsy removed the blue topaz ring Harry had given her and changed her facebook status to not in a relationship, which enfuriated and embarasd Harry. Predictably, he was seen three weeks later at Kits nightclub with Natalie Pinkham clingingg to him.
        This, of course is not to really dwell on the attention seeking famewhores who reported their trysts to the media. The stories may or may not have been true but it is impossible to say with complete certainty that ALL of the stories are false, given Harry’/ wild, indiscreet youth,
        I just do not see how anyone can say that it is impossible that Harry ever cheated on Chelsy. I know that the press criticizes the spare way more than the heir but Harry made that job so much easier for them with his antics.
        He has matured into a mature, compassionate and hardworking royal, but it bugs the heck out of me when history is rewritten. People repeat a story so many times that it takes on the glow of myth, eventually. Didnt Charles and Diana teach us anything?

      • Suze says:

        I have spent the last half hour reading old Daily Mail articles on Harry and Chelsy. All I can say to all of you who “just love Chelsy” – they had a relationship that appears to have been messy in the best of times. Yes, true love, but that isn’t all it takes, no matter what the Beatles say.

        Why on earth would you want her to get back together with Harry? Honestly, they are better off having moved on.

        If I were a Chelsy lover, I would transfer my royal watching ways to Maxima of the Netherlands. She has many Chelsy qualities: a hot mess style-wise, but brilliant, extroverted, energetic and well-educated. Out-spoken as all get out. Plus, bonus, three cute kids. Seriously, look her up.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Thank you for saying this. Chelsy was Harry’s first love and there is a certain charm about that that people find engaging with young people. But beyond that can people really care that strongly about them breaking up? She had a much better life and future destined for her, I suppose.
        And although people are singing a different tune now I remember how much criticism Chelsy used to get on this site because of her behavior. She was called dirty, drunken, inappropriate, haggard and rough. People criticize her horrible taste in clothes, her smoking cigarettes and her obvious enjoyment of alcohol. People did like the fact that she would probably shake up the royal family and cause a stir. But even that bit of praise is a strange way to wish long term success and happiness to a young, married couple. And now she is St. chelsy? But yeah, at least she was smart enough to save herself and her dignity and walk away.

      • LAK says:

        Dame Snarkweek: Harry had a series of flings/relationships before he was with Chelsy. No overlaps or cheating. All normal for a teenager. I won’t bore you with names, dates and places, plus the girls are private citizens.

        He dated Chelsy from 18-25yrs. There was no other girl during that time. Sure they broke up a few times, but it was never due to cheating. Much of it had to do with the set up of their relationship and trying to find a balance and as you put it, priorities.

        Natalie Pinkham has sued and won her case every time when any paper has insinuated or stated outright that she is dating or has dated Harry. The infamous pictures were the starting point because a so called friend had stolen them from her flat and sold to a paper.

        The sun ran those pictures as proof that Harry had cheated on Chelsy. Pity they didn’t now or care when the pictures were taken. 3yrs before Harry met Chelsy. Natalie sued and won that case too. The sun printed a retraction and an apology, but it was a very small print in the middle of the paper, meanwhile that same edition ran more examples of Harry’s wild ways ( I think the headline ran along those lines) so no one noticed the retraction and the Harry cheats on Chelsy narrative was born.

        The guardian paper wrote a piece about the case of Natalie Pinkham and media and the royals which explains how that particular rumour had ended up in a court of law. I’m on the phone which won’t allow me to post links, but if you google, hopefully you should find it.

        I’ll take it for granted that you are right about the friend who ran interference for them to re-establish the relationship, however I think that Chelsy being a member of Eugenie’s set which includes Harry’s longstanding best friends means she was likely to be helped to re-establish the relationship by any of them.

        As to why they broke up in the end. I’d say the relationship ran it’s course, different priorities for the future, and the media’s witch hunt and smear of Chelsy’s family.

        You are absolutely right that we can’t say never, but we can say something is unlikely based upon past and that person’s character. So far, despite several attempts to paint him as a cheater, there is scant evidence to support that assumption. And this is an area where Harry doesn’t have the benefit of help from the palace. I know for a fact that JLP used to trade dirty harry stories to squash William stories, so except for Natalie Pinkham, which a court of law proved false, there is nought in that area.

        Re: Chelsy as a royal. I have one word. Fergie. She was already treated like Fergie whilst a GF, it would have been worse as a royal.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        I am afraid we will just have to agree to disagree on this. I love Harry but I see no need to obscure my objectivity with admiration. As for Miss Pinkham she was a long standing and loyal companion of the prince. Ias such she is expected to endeavor to keep her relationship with Harry unsullied (snort) in the media. Royal friends know that if they want to remain royal friends they better deny, deny, deny. I also wonder who paid for her attorneys. And the picture that first appeared was from a pap, not an earlier taken one from a friend.
        And even if it was an earlier pic it would establish that Harry and Natalie had a clise, intimate relationship. That is trouble because no gurl alive would accept the fact that her boyfriend is partying with an ex fling. The whole thing is what it is. They were friends with benefits.
        The funny thing is that so many of the details are from a biographer who had Harry’s blessing. Still scratching my Head over that one. And Harry never partied with Natalie around Bea and Eugenie. They were close friends of Chelsy and would never have stood for that.
        If Harry’s if Harry’s explanations didnt help him hold onto his girlfriend then, they certainly have not improved with age.

      • bluhare says:

        My Chelsy love is recent and based solely on the fact that I liked her better with Harry than I like him with Cressida. Cressida just doesn’t do it for me and now that there’s talk of him marrying her Chelsy looks good all of a sudden.

      • FLORC says:

        I really dislike the love fest of the memory of Chelsey.
        They were young and in young love. They both have grown up and into new people. To glorify the memory is rewrite history. It’s a pet peeve of mine.

        And Harry (as LAK covered) was never proven to have cheated on Chelsey. Lies get the bold front page cover and corrections are buried in the back once it’s old news. He seems to be quite dedicated to his duties in military and public service life as well as personal wants and obligations.

        And on a side note I find it hilarious in the worst way that the press tries so hard to make William the good prince who loves his wife and never cheats or ignores his duties and tries to show Harry as a direct opposite. Harry is still seen as the better prince despite the attacks and William can have all the whitewashing in the world, but we can still see the cracks.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Natalie and Harry had many trysts before Chelsy and several during. She sued the tabloids specifically for infringement of copyright and unauthorized use of her photos. If it was me and that happened plus I wanted to stay in the good graces of a handsome prince who fancied me I would sue as well. But the newspaper printing the pics without permission and the story being untrue are two different things. Sources very close to the prince have been quite detailed about that relationship. Their is also the fact that the owner of the elite nightclub where the princes partied made elaborate arrangements to have a VIP section filled with free booze, beautiful girls, Harry’s fave attendant (who carried on with him for several months to the point that Harry once drunkenly ordered the owner not to let her near any other rich playboy oatrons) all in a cordoned off area free of eavesdroppers etc. There was so much clamoring for photos outside the club that eventually arrangements were made to have the princes and their guests enter and leave the club via an undergground garage. When leaving the clubs they would all go to Mark Dwyer’s house to further party until sun up. He was a wealthy, long time friend of the young royals who gave them private, boozed up, party girl filled access to his bachelor pad. Kate, by the way, despised both Dwyer and the club owner because she felt they did a lousy job of protecting the privacy and image of the princes. If she figured things out of course Chelsy, who seems much sharper, eventually did and called it quits. But natalie Pinkham has fared well. She is a celebrity, does charitable work, appears on reality shows, hobnobs with the wealthy and yes, is still friends with Harry. She and her glamorous boyfriend just spent a week lounging on a houseboat Harry owns in Africa. I hope Cressy is paying attention.

      • LAK says:

        Natalie doesn’t deny being the girl in the photos. What she denies and the point of her lawsuit is the use the stolen photo was used for and the tale and date ascribed to the photo. The lawsuit was copyright, use of stolen property and libel for implication that she was in a relationship with Harry when he was with Chelsy. She’s never denied the people she’s been in relationships with, and it serves her no purpose to deny one with Harry, before or after or during his time with Chelsy.

        Also, she’s now married. Has been since 2012. Are you sure you know who Natalie Pinkham is since you claim she was in SA with ‘her boyfriend’?

        Finally, i know Mark Dwyer. I can’t help but laugh at everything you’ve just written about him.

      • LAK says:

        Correction> Dyer not Dwyer.

    • Suze says:

      Agree Dame Snarkweek.

      As much as I find Chelsy very interesting, I think Harry and Chelsy would be disaster as a royal couple.

      Cress? Who knows? She’s a blank slate, much like Lady Diana Spencer. And we know what happened there.

  9. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I don’t think Charles has much room to give advice. However, I have a bad feeling about this union, too. Cressida seems like able and nice, but I’m not sure she wants the royal lifestyle enough. For all people rag on Kate, I think her success and popularity is due to the fact that she really, really wanted to be exactly where she is today, and she was happy to forgo a career or even a real identity beyond being William’s wife. I think it’s tempting Cressida, but I’m afraid she would get bored with all of the constraints and constant scrutiny, and I’m not sure she’s mature enough to handle it.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Like able? Stupid autocorrect

    • FLORC says:


      I think Cressida has been so lowkey and making small life adjustments for so long because she is ready to be a public figure. Harry seems more nurturing and protective than William. I mean protective in a less selfish, petty, self-serving manner of course.
      And the girl found a passion in life. So she’ll have a direction she wants to go in for charity work on top of coming from a famliy that is involved with charities.

      She may be young, but i’m better she’s better prepared for a royal life than Kate was.
      Also, Harry is no fool. I doubt he hasn’t made sure she’ll be ok.
      Not to mention she’s been so low profile that whatever image they want to give with her she’ll be like a blank slate. This is being played very smart and the only bad articles I think will come out will be from camp Middleton to make Kate seem better by comparison.

      • Liberty says:

        Yes x100. I love your posts and LAK’s.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        That’s interesting. I just worry about anyone, or most people, marrying into that family, although I like some of them, I think it would be very challenging.

      • FLORC says:

        Thank! I also enjoy LAK’s, Sachi’s, Bluhare’s, Mich’s, LadySlippers, and many others royal posts. They are quite well versed in the history of royalty and make great threads.

        Me too. Marrying into that family must be nerve racking.

      • bluhare says:

        Thank you FLORC. Where’s Sachi and Mich? They’ve been AWOL for a while now.

      • FLORC says:

        They’ve been here and there. Mich was on the last post for sure.
        Not always around, but well versed.

        And much of what I know and shaped my opinions on came from seeds you, bluhare and LAK planted.

  10. We Are All Made of Stars says:

    Oh please. Firstly, Charles’ entire love life isn’t a trainwreck. He was forced into a staged marriage because the love of his life didn’t meet the ridiculously antiquated criterion for a bride back in the ye olden days, so there’s that. Then there’s the fact that Charles seems like a pretty reasonable guy and a good father, so I seriously doubt that he would callously go after his son’s girlfriend if they were indeed serious. Raise some concerns and initiate a fatherly discussion, sure, but just tell the lad off like he was told to dismiss his desires for his own happiness for the sake of duty? Doubtful. Who among us does not have dysfunctional relatives, or ones that could be make to look like bad people by an abusive press? Also, I am very sorry to hear about Cressida’s stepdad. How sad.

    • Juliette says:

      Except that Charles was very much involved in the choice of his child-bride Diana.
      Charles could have proposed to Camilla, but did not. She married someone else, Andrew Parker-Bowles. Camilla’s on-off affair with Charles was as much to make philandering Andrew jealous as it was motivated by “love.” Camilla was not Charles’ only “love” either. Charles had many others, including a very intense romance with “Kanga” who was his primary mistress for many years.

      The whole Charles-Camilla affair has been white-washed into a star-crossed lovers saga by a clever, strategic, long-term PR campaign to make Camilla more palatable to the Diana-loving public.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Okay…. so that covers your opinions as to Charles being forced into what largely amounted to an arranged marriage, and nothing else. And why was he involved in picking a child bride as you so aptly refer to her? Largely or perhaps entirely because Camilla was a loose woman by the standards of the day which made her a non-contender for a royal bride. He had to pick a wife not based on personal feelings or love, but from a buffet of “suitable” women who were docile, pretty, virginal, and “came from the right family.” I can’t picture him wanting to inflict that situation on his own sons. He may very well give fatherly advice and offer opinions and direction, but I can’t see him telling his own sons to put aside their happiness and stay loyal to some chick selected for reasons of propriety. He couldn’t do it, why would he want them to?

    • Bored suburbanhousewife says:

      Co sign

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      Spot on, Juliette.

  11. Gwen says:

    Middleton PR-people, sit down!

    This is crap IMO. I’ve always felt Charles and Harry are quite close and I seriously doubt Charles would do something like that to Harry. Beside with William married, there’s less reason to be strict on Harry concerning who he marries. But let’s by all means portray Charles as the evil guy. Why not.. so much easier to believe than reporters making up crap again right..

    • Tulip Garden says:

      I don’t think Charles would “do” anything detrimental to Harry but giving good advices or pointing out potential problem for a long-term relationship isn’t “doing” anything to him except being his father. Of course, you are right, that’s not how the media will/is spinning this.
      Also, the Middleton’s have zilch to do with Cressida’s press (or Charles’) imo. The tabloids would find a niche to spin for any potential mate of Harry’s, this one is believable if framed completely sensationally, imo.

  12. eny79 says:

    Well, I must say that I don’t consider Charle’s love life a complete disaster. He got married and few years and two kids later they got a divorce and he and his long time lover become an item. Now he is married and happy and he exactly knows what kind of life members of BRF have. So, maybe he is not that bad in giving advices as many sees him.

    Cress is very young and charming and I wish her much better life than this.

    Of course, all this matters only if you consider The National Enquirer a source.

  13. Tippy says:

    The entire concept of Royalty and Commoners is as absurd as the inbreeding that’s taken place in the Royal Family for centuries.

    Harry will eventually marry who he is told to marry.

  14. m says:

    He didn’t want William to marry Kate either, William is just too damn stubborn and doesn’t give a shit about what his family thinks. So maybe Charles is on to something…
    Also if it isn’t announced by March, its not happening this year. Harry will be expected to have a summer wedding due to the weather and since royal engagements are typically 6 months long, March is the latest it will happen. William and Kate broke tradition by having a rainy spring wedding and while the queen was married in November, that’s not done anymore because the cold is harsh on the crowds.

  15. Tiffany says:

    If there is any truth to this story, it will not be the family history. I think Charles does not want another Kate on his hands. A wealthy socialite will money and time on her hands and not much else. Kate Q rating is already down and the press has shown not to be kind this this girl. Although Harry is the spare, he does take his causes seriously and I don’t think Cressa will vide with that. Can you imagine her being near the downtrodden and showning any kind of empathy or sympathy.

    • My2Pence says:

      “Can you imagine her being near the downtrodden and showning any kind of empathy or sympathy. ”
      Personally, yes I can. Clearly Kate Middleton has shown she cannot show empathy or sympathy. I’m not ruling out that Cressida would actually care rather than go through the motions, or be a better actress than Middleton. We just do not know enough about Cressida to know one way or the other.

    • FLORC says:

      It’s a big issue with Kate. Especially shown when she tries to interact with others. She doesn’t ask them how they are. Only fields questions about herself. Her life has been easy and she’s shown no will to help others less fortunate than her on any level. And sadly, her level of apathy is unacceptable with her platform.

      Kate’s cousin in an interview trying to defend her said as much. That Kate doesn’t care about how others are doing and struggles to find other people interesting or to care.

  16. LadySlippers says:

    I’m calling BS to this whole story. It doesn’t sound right — it sounds ‘off’. Can’t put my finger on what but I’m thinking this is just made up crap.

    And I feel bad for Cressida — may she and her family get some comfort as they struggle with the death of a loved one.

  17. LAK says:

    It doesn’t matter whether this story is true or not from royal sources or the Enquirer simply writing fanfiction as they please.

    What matters is the Heir vs Spare narrative playing out. And yes, it does extend to their respective SO.

    So we have Cressida is terrible whilst Kate is the bees knees…..

    And of course Charles has now been recast as the big bad [though not as bad as his brother 😉 ]

    • LadySlippers says:

      ‘Tis true LAK. I hate the heir vs spare story line? Can’t we get a new one?? Please??? Pretty puleaze???

    • FLORC says:

      The seeds are being planted still, but just as they try to smear anyone to show Kate as the better option they can’t force us to read without a brain.

  18. Suze says:

    I find the whole story doubtful. The royal family is rife with dodgy marriages and divorces and scandal, even more so then the Bonas Anthruster Whatever clan. I also can’t see Charles wading into this.

    Whether Cressida wants to marry Harry and take on the spotlight is probably another, more interesting story.

    What I find fascinating is that Chelsy is being romanticized in retrospect. When she was dating Harry, all the press was about her partying lifestyle and rather ragged personal appearance. Now she’s Harry’s true love that he left behind.

    Anyone who really “loved Chelsy and Harry together” should be grateful she opted out of the royal lifestyle. She would have been forever crucified in the press and in blog land had she married him.

    • LadySlippers says:

      Agreed Suze.

      ETA: It’s funny. A month ago Chelsy was a clingy, needy girlfriend and today she is dreamy. I’m confused! Lol 😉

      Stupid press.

    • Angelic 21 says:

      I think Chelsy would have been a disastrous royal wife tbh. I really like her but she is just not suitable to be a princess. Being a lawyer doesn’t qualify her to be a good royal. To be a successful royals you don’t need collage degrees, look at Diana or Harry for that matter. Both are not at all book smart but very successful royals (yes I still consider Diana 1 of best royals in history). You need to have certain charisma, emotional intelligence, able to present yourself well in media, be media savvy etc, all the things I think Chelsy lacked. In reality her law degree or very high book intelligence would’ve been a complete waste as a royal.

    • Bored suburbanhousewife says:

      Agree she dodged a bullet, she would have been the new Fergy.

      She seems admirable though she does remind me in appearance of Busy Phillips on Cougar Town.

  19. Maya says:

    The only person who is not royal material is Camilla.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Ooh, come sit by me. Cannot stand her.

    • LadySlippers says:

      @Maya, @GoodNames, @Tulup:
      Several years ago I would have happily stood with you but I have since learned an awful lot about her. I actually like her. She’s a good egg — way better than Charles. I’ll take her over him any day.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Dahling, I have my opinion, don’t confuse me with facts, as my aunt would say. No, I know you are very knowledgable about the royal family (or knowledge able, as my autocorrect would have it) so maybe I’ll find it in my stony heart to take another look. Not promising anything.

      • aquarius64 says:

        Good eggs don’t sleep with other women’s husbands and disrespect their own. Diana was no saint but it still doesn’t cancel out what Camilla is: a woman who got the royal come up by way of being a married bed wench for the crown prince.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @aquairus64: Read ‘To Marry an English Lord’ to get a better idea of the culture of Britain’s upper crust. Adultery is very common in the wealthy ranks. VERY common and it was shocking for the American heiresses heading there over 100 years ago. Downtown Abbey paints those marriages in a favourable light but many lords had wild affairs with the American heiresses miserable.

        Charles apparently had a ‘revolving door’ of mistresses. Camilla is just his most famous mistress. To top it off, Diana was actually friends with his other acknowledged mistress Kanga (Diana knew about his many women too). In fact, Diana kept Kanga out of the crosshairs because of their friendship.

        Camilla didn’t actually want to marry Charles — not in the 70’s and not recently. Andrew was her love but circumstances changed and she had to adapt. Which she has done brilliantly BTW. I don’t fault her for that.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I agree that she has adapted and done so exceptionally well considering the hole she had to climb out of. Also, I don’t think that she’s evil incarnate but going from
        “the most famous” of Charles’ mistresses to Queen (and I believe she will be Queen) isn’t a ringing endorsement to me.

        (whispers) Love that LadySlippers but don’t listen to her in regard to Camilla’s good eggedness. That egg is just using a bit of Easter colored paint provided by the palace to disguise the fact that it is more than a little shady 🙂 Don’t tell Ladyslippers 🙂

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        @Tulip Gardens – that made me laugh!

      • Green Girl says:

        @Lady Slippers – thank you for the book rec! This type of topic is up my alley.

      • Bored suburbanhousewife says:

        @LadySlippers you are right about Camilla. I used to hate her but after reading everything I could get my hands on I switched camps. She is extremely good at being a perfect royal by royal family standards. She does not have the charisma of Diana or the media skills and that’s why many will never embrace her.

        Reminder — Diana also had lovers and she went after married men too, including harassing hang up phone calls, which is pretty cray cray.

      • FLORC says:

        I would like to note, for christmas my husband and I were given a lord and lady title with the gift of land in the UK. And we have yet to cheat on eachother in the 6 years we’ve been married and the 10 years we’ve together:)

    • SonjaMarmeladova says:

      She seems to be one of the most “royal material” people in the BRF.

    • Suze says:

      Charles was equally, if not far more, at fault in that mess as Cams. So you must think he isn’t royal material, either?

      • Tulip Garden says:

        Well, I didn’t think that my opinion, or anyone else’s, matters when it comes to whether Charles is worthy to ascend the throne. Either he does or it’s over regardless of his fitness for the position. Because I enjoy the monarchy, I’ll take him.
        Camilla, well, she’ll ascend too but I sure wouldn’t miss her if she didn’t. Also, I wouldn’t be broken-hearted if she didn’t become Queen but she will.
        I guess I have long reconciled myself to him. Plus I think he has done an admirable job in his philanthropy and would probably continue his charitable endeavors even with no title. I think he genuinely wants to make things better for England and the commonwealth. Camilla, OTOH, while I’m reconciled to her position (a feeling a think she shares), I think if she had her druthers she’d be married to Andrew Parker-Bowles and enjoying the position as Charles’ “top mistress”. For my part, I wish she had gotten her druthers. 🙂

      • Maya says:

        @Suze: Since we are talking about people marrying into the royal family and not actually born royals – that is why I only wrote Camilla is not royal material.

        I dont like Charles at all and it will be a disgrace if he is crowned king.

      • Suze says:

        Oh, Charles will be king regardless of what any of us think of him. He has his good qualities and has done some significant work in the fields of agriculture and architecture. He’s also a meddling old fool with a wonky moral compass.

        Charles was the major player in the whole Charles/Diana/Camilla debacle. He also had several other “outside interests” during his marriage to Diana. So it’s interesting when Camilla gets the lions share of blame in that mess.

        Not that I want to stand in the way of anyone and their Camilla snark. She has certainly given plenty of ammunition for it.

  20. ali says:

    Do you think Prince Charles is in any position to give his sons advice on their love lives? YES. Regardless of his past he is still his father. Yikes. No one is perfect and its good to get advice from someone who made mistakes.

  21. HoustonGrl says:

    I see a lot of similarities between Cressida and Diana – Cressi seems shy and sheltered, both coming from the “right background,” perhaps a bit naive, and both coming from broken homes. I’m sure Cressi was raised at boarding school like all the other aristos. I agree with one comment that all of this seems a bit forced.

  22. Angelic 21 says:

    A man known to cheat on his 21 year old child bride, heard of wanting to be a tampon of another married woman, promised people that his mistress wife will be given lesser title then of a queen consort and is by all means again going back on his words and is pushing her to be called queen consort despite her being ever so unpopular have the balls to call another woman Kate or Chelsy or CB unsuitable is absolutely ridiculous. The most unsuitable royal woman is Camilla, Kate is actually exactly like Cam . We all give Midds a very hard time for cashing in but Cam’s family is the one who started this. Chuck paid his sister in law millions for decorating his palaces. Also Cam only started working now, she was known as the laziest woman in Britain before Kate. She had her own mansion and billed tax payers millions in security there and did the bare minimum for years. I’m no fan of Kate but she will do 10 times the work done by this awful woman and this guy have the guts to call someone ,anyone not royal material. By the standards set by him only anyone who didn’t pride themselves in being a Future king’s mistress and didn’t sleep with a married man or cheated on their partner is royal material.

    Where do you guys think William get this huge sense of entitlement? His own father set the standards for lying to people to get what he wants, thinks he has a right to be above us ‘commoners’, stick his nose in political matters, have huge double standards when it comes to his believes, lie, deceive, cheat, do whatever the hell he want, face no consequences etc.

    I would like to ask what makes everyone think CB is not royal material or that she doesn’t want to? I think most people are judging her for her parents mistakes, and for all the divorces and such, her entire family seems to get along really well. Yes there were divorces but we see her spend so much time with her mother, sisters, step siblings, step parents, father etc. Her situation sound nothing like Diana’s, there is no reports of absent/alcoholic mother, terrible divorce battles, distant father etc. By all accounts she comes across as someone who was loved and is very close to her large, nontraditional family. I am so surprised by all the prejudice remarks on her just because she is a child from a broken home, I’m guessing everyone who is judging her for is from a perfect suburban family?

    And last but not the least Kate is from a solid middle class family and look how tacky her family is and what a disastrous royal she is turning out to be. God help us all if we also start getting judged for our parents mistakes.

    • Suze says:

      As far as I know, Cressida has never spoken in public or given an interview. The information about her in the press is scant because her family hasn’t spoken on the record yet (other than a brief sound bite from her brother) and her friends seem to keep their mouths shut, too.

      We’ve barely seen any photos of Harry and Cress together because it appears that he wants to keep this relationship private for as long as he can.

      No one knows anything about her other than the bare facts. We have no idea if she is royal material or, probably more importantly, if she *wants* to be royal material.

      I’m going out on a limb here but I am guessing that Charles hasn’t weighed in on this just because he appears to stay out of his kid’s life decisions. Quite frankly, if her ex-stepfather’s suicide is enough to keep her out of the house of Windsor, then the whole royal family with all their errors and mistakes should be thrown out on their ears.

      • Angelic 21 says:


        I completely agree with you. But if her parents were as troubled as everyone is trying to make them out to be, then surely we would’ve heard about it. Her family is very big on social standing, any scandal would’ve never been private and be a very big deal in social magazines etc. The fact that they can’t find any specific dirt or absent/ alcoholic mother and the fact she spends so much time with all her extended family, makes me believe it wasn’t as bad as Diana’s family. Anyway it’s just my opinion.

      • Louise says:

        Completely agree with both of you. Besides, Cressida’s former-stepfather didn’t suicide because of money issues, he was terminally ill. He was given about 18 months to live 2 years ago, he must have been in terrible shape, it was more like those “assisted suicide” scenario.

    • Liberty says:

      I don’t think CB would do badly as a royal wife. Her family is blue-blooded and close and would support her. My worry is that the royal nonsense would choke her free spirit and creativity — my hope is that Harry would cleverly help her find a way to still support what she loves as freely and usefully as possible.

      I think Chelsy would have provided a good sense of boundaries and professional career energy. I don’t see her being pushed around. I do see her showing little girls that education is important, not just shopping. Edward’s wife Sophie had a career too and is a very hardworking royal and she learned the ropes though she was a “commoner” entering the mix.

      Kate could have learned from her, but hasn’t.

    • Juliette says:

      Some really good points in here. Especially, the fact that Cressida’s siblings are close but still have their own lives. They have interests, hobbies and professional lives, and are not entirely co-dependent like the Middletons seem to be. The Middletons, for their part, probably had to be extra close because Kate & William’s courtship was so long. Carole probably kept James and Pippa strictly in line, preventing them from really branching out because that could lead to embarrassment for the family. Although frankly, Pippa’s columns are an embarrassment to the Middletons, but even more so they are an embarrassment to the English language.

  23. FingerBinger says:

    This story just doesn’t ring true to me. Prince Charles married Diana,a woman that he didn’t really love. I don’t believe that Charles would ever interfere with his children’s love lives.

    • FLORC says:

      He allegedly wanted William to be with Cressida’s sister isabella. . Of course Isabella refused him flat out and he went back to waiting Kate as we well know. That alone makes me call bs on this.

  24. aquarius64 says:

    @Lady Slippers – so basically, Charles put those lesser titles out there for Camilla to save his @$$. He didn’t want calls for his abdication rising to the same level as they did for his great uncle, the Duke of Windsor (aka Edward VIII). Back in the day there was an outcry about his relationship with Wallis Simpson, a divorcee. He had to abdicate; and when he and Wallis married letters patent went out to embassies on how to address Wallis: she was not to have HRH, she was not to be welcomed into royal circles. Charles probably remembered that; his mom the current queen certainly does. The Royal Family was going through an “annus horriblis” because of back-to-back scandals from family members. She probably used that as leverage and told Charles if you want me to sign off on your marriage to your mistress (they still need permission from the sovereign), she takes lesser titles. All statements about the queen getting along with Camilla was for public consumption and to restore faith in the monarchy. The point is, Camilla’s position is still precarious, depending on who sits on the throne and public reaction. When the Prince of Wales becomes Charles III he could have Camilla publicly take the title of queen; but if the public still says “hell, no” it’s not going to happen. If they were truly over it she would be called Princess of Wales now.

    • Angelic 21 says:

      Charles lives by do as I say, not as I do. Past kings have to leave there place to marry a divorcee but of course rules don’t apply to him. He have the audacity to put himself as widower to make his marriage legal with Milla, and now is going completely back on his words and the promise he made to his people. For better or worse, William is completely his father’s son IMO.

    • LadySlippers says:

      Yes, Charles’ PR team put the ‘Princess Consort’ idea out there to make his marriage palatable to the British public. And HM gave in because she was tired of fighting him on the matter (she was opposed to the marriage). And she’s not one to fight either (that was QM’s ‘job’). The trouble is — there is no title of ‘Princess Consort’ in the UK (except for the Pss of Wales).

      As for precarious? I wouldn’t say that. Legally she’ll be Queen. But I think the monarchy as a whole will take a battering because Charles lied to the public. It’s hard to build trust in something when the main figurehead lies in order to get his way.

      RE: David & Wallis. In actually, David *could* have married Wallis but several members of the cabinet were terrified of the many changes he was planning to make. He apparently had some very radical changes planned for the UK and the BRF (sound familiar?). Soooo (according to some) David was ousted and Wallis was the scapegoat. There was even speculation recently the Duke of Kent would be chosen as King because, unlike Bertie, he had married a Princess. And both Bertie (then D of York) and George (D of Kent) were seen as much more pliable than David was.

      As for denying Wallis the HRH — legal experts almost universally agree that it was not legal for them to prevent her from taking on the style and rank of her husband. And as David long maintained, she should have been HRH Duchess of Windsor. (There is an interesting counter argument too)

    • LAK says:

      Wallis was the convenient scapegoat reason for the abdication. It allowed all to depart in an honorable way except poor Wallis. The true reasons for the abdication had nought to do with Wallis.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I suspect you are right. I believe the powers that be decided that Edward just wasn’t right thinking when it came to political matters and that is what did him in. He conveniently provided the perfect cover-up.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Poor Wallis?
        Greedy, unkind, anti-semitic, social climbing Wallis?

      • LAK says:

        Dame Snarkweek: yes. Poor Wallis.

        No matter her personal failings, she didn’t deserve going down in history for causing an abdication.

        As for the rest, most of the establishment were greedy, social climbing, anti-semitic , racist snobs and more. That includes QM and Bertie. David and Wallis never had the chance to white wash their reputations once the full horror of WW2 was revealed.

        And in the battle of King vs Ex-King, david became the subject of a negative campaign which naturally extended to Wallis. And Wallis caught the worst of it being a foreigner.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Yourfacts are spot on, as usual, but two wrongs do not make a snobby, mean-spirited, bigoted, adulterous right. The classic excuse when my friends and I were young was ‘everyone else is doing it’ That didnt get me far with my parents and it doesnt get Wallus Simpson apologies far with me. Heck, even when David was rapidly proving to be unable to satisfy her extravagant tastes she still drained the cups dry. In one retelling she had a case of French perfume ordered so that twice a day the expensive bouquets that filled her rooms could be spritzed. Puh-lease.
        I will grudgingly admit to feeling a pang of sympathy for her after David died. She was treated with an infinitesimal amount of courtesy. After the funeral she was literally left alone, staring out of a window, while the rest of the RF drove away to the countryside. But oh well.
        Oh, and I would have killed for her wardrobe.
        That’s all I’ve got.

      • LAK says:

        Dame Snarkweek: you and I need to have a sit down with several cups of tea to discuss Wallis. Alas, we only have CB.

        Here goes, my sympathy for Wallis isn’t to say that we should sweep her failings under the carpet.

        My sympathy comes from the fact that she was stuck with David. Having to keep him in royal style whilst he seemed to have remained oblivious AND never made any concessions to living less than he was used to. Her friend *Diana Mosley said that she felt she had to compete with the royal standard even though they were exiled because she felt guilty about David giving up the throne. Essentially making up to him for the loss of his status and trappings hence the very expensive living arrangements.

        I feel that rot about ‘giving up the throne for the woman I love’ placed a huge burden on Wallis to be worthy of everything he gave up. Who can live upto a kingdom? Or that great a love?

        And on the other side having the entire instrument of government and society vilifying you and making you out to be a super sexed mata hari unworthy of basic decency.

        I guess I don’t feel that the punishment fit the crime, if that makes sense.

        I would definitely kill for her wardrobe!!

        *i’m eternally disappointed by Diana Mosley because I love the idea of the Mitford sisters.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Well you have touched upon the one aspect of this story that does give me pause. As a female I despise the way that Wallis was snubbed and despised. But I cannot help but imagine how she would have treated the rest of the royal family had she been the one on the favorable side of fate. I would have never treated my worst enemy the way Wallis was treated/treated others. Unfortunately, however, it is the winners who write history.
        Why must we have a disagreement in order for me to be invited to tea? But no worries! I will bring biscuits (lemon ginger) and we can indulge in a bit of vintage gossip 🙂

      • LAK says:

        Dame Snarkweek: oh I don’t see us as disagreeing at all. Different view points that is all. Besides, we can always be distracted by the gorgeous wardrobe.

        Tea is always on, so we can have those long, long discussions of the day. And I love lemon and ginger biscuits, separately and together.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        *smoothes chignon, sighs contentedly*
        i’ll see your cloche hat and raise you an Hermes weekend valis 🙂

      • FLORC says:

        I won’t start, but I could go on forever on Wallis-Simpson. So many have that story backwards, but you ladies are great. And her wardrobe and jewelry were amazing!
        I pine for her jewels.

  25. Marybel says:

    Hypocritical crusty old bastard…will you have Cressida bumped off in a car chase as well?

  26. anne_000 says:

    I agree that at 24, CB is way too young to get married. Whatever woman Harry marries, she needs a bit more life experience. Look what happens when the next generation of Royals marry someone who’s not ready for public consumption. Kate has been a flop, imo. What is CB going to bring to the table at such a young age? If and when Harry marries, I hope it’s to someone who’s been out in the workplace for at least a decade & has some kind of work ethic.

  27. Sumodo1 says:

    Harry should settle down with a nice Jewish girl and live in Scarsdale. Lolz.

  28. Dominique says:

    Slightly off topic, but am curious… The Midds have been very quiet lately, maybe a little too quiet 🙂 Any evidence they have slipped away to Mustique for their annual winter break, possibly taking kate and the bonny prince? Any evidence to the contrary?

  29. Reece says:

    Isn’t there “Charles, Camilla AND Diana ALL made some idiotic, dumb a**ed decisions that had lasting consequences on all of their and others lives and not one of them is pearly white and crystal clean and clear in midst of that whole particular situation in their lives” boat that I can sit on?

    As for Harry Cressida, I mean it was a long time before they even publicly acknowledged each other(still haven’t really) how about we just let them work themselves out.

  30. Zombie Shortcake says:

    I read somewhere that Charles “publicly approved” when Billy was allegedly dating Isabella Calthorpe. With her being off the market, I would have guessed her sister would be the next best person for one of his sons to marry.

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      William never dated Isabella. Isabella never dated William. Run with the same set and know one another. Once Wikluam, tipsy, chatted her up at a charity ball, embarassing and angering Kate. But William has been good friends with her brother Jacoby and her then boyfriend/now husband Sam Beansom. These stories always get blown out of proportion.

      • FLORC says:

        She rejected him flat out.

        It’s amazing all the times forgotten when William openly flirted while with Kate close by. The boy (yes boy) had no shame. Kate was also, often very ashamed. All those articles sure did vanish with the ring.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Very much true FLORC but a rejected pass has been blown up to them dating to William longing/pining for the one that got away. Ppfffft!

  31. Dame Snarkweek says:

    It seems like people who are pro Kate will be anti Cressy and vice versa. When it comes to women the media is always divisive. There also seems to be some class/rank double standards att play here. Both make me hold my nose. The truth is that there is so little we really know about Cressida that it is too soon to say how she would handle being a royal. I just think that she is too young and too sheltered to know what is about to hit her. Although, being married to ginger prince hotness is quite a consolation prize.

    • Suze says:


      I’m hoping that doesn’t happen. I’m not a huge Kate fan and I really don’t know how I feel about Watercress, but I think that type of divisive coverage would really be a drag for everyone.

      But, on the Kate front, there is apparently a move to make her appearance more regal and give her more of a center stage role, starting with the Australia tour.

      Obviously, the is the Daily Fail so take it all with a grain of salt.

      (Can you tell I’m snowed in this weekend and bored out of my skull? I think I’ve read every royal article in the archives….)

      • LAK says:

        I saw that article this am. It gave me quite the chuckle. It’s terrible that I want it to be true.

        DM is definitely criticising Kate and is using Katie Nicholls to do it. She’s stuck in a rock and a hard place because Kate M is her meal ticket, so she keeps it sugary so she can continue to have access and write the super sugary ‘Kate M is a goddess’ articles to balance these critical ones.

      • My2Pence says:

        @ LAK. I really saw that clothing article as coming from the Middleton camp. Nicholl has been known as the Middleton DailyMail mouthpiece for the past decade, right? Wasn’t she the one who snapped back into line after William went after her, and she wrote that false sugar article about KM? Since then she seems to be (mostly) back on the KM sugar train.

        Yesterday there was one article where folks mercilessly bashed Kate Middleton for being on vacation (from what?) for two weeks. Today comes an article which, in my mind, is a “poor Kate, the royals want to change her just like they tried to change Diana” bit. To me the article is slanted to make people think HM would be wrong for wanting KM to dress appropriately, and most of the comments seem to be pro-Kate.

      • LAK says:

        My2pence: I didn’t see ‘kate is on vacation’ article. You are absolutely right.

        Goodness she’s dense!! And clearly the Midds don’t know what long term strategy is…….

  32. Skye says:

    I hope this isn’t true. Charles of all people should know better than to interfere; if his family had allowed him to make his own choices, several people would have been spared long unhappy marriages, and the whole family could have avoided a lot of embarrassing, undignified tabloid drama.

    Really, who cares who they marry, as long as they’re happy? It’s not like Harry’s going to wed a Spanish princess and unite the thrones into a superstate that goes on to make France the meat in a whup-ass sandwich.

  33. Evi says:

    I don’t buy this story for the simple reason that Charles went through similar, had to marry someone royal enough and wasn’t happy, so I doubt he’d dictate the same terms to his sons.

  34. Mozzley says:

    I wouldn’t worry too much about the opinion of someone who thinks science sits atop humanities and the creative arts when they refer to academia as ‘academics’.

    I’d suggest they don’t know a whole lot about it.

  35. AnnieCL says:

    The first thing one has to say is ‘who gives a flying f*ck’ & the second thing is the girl is 22 or something?? Who the f*ck would want to get married at 22?

  36. MSTHANG says:

    I think they’re serious but not ready to marry. They haven’t even officially confirmed they’re a serious couple ( meaning the Palace has announced her as his”official” girlfriend). His brother choose so poorly that I think the Monarchy will begin to fade. I’ve never seen so many anti Royal comments before.

  37. Mitch Buchanan Rocks! says:

    Harry should not marry Cressida, he should marry Lupita ! The children would be out of this world gorgeous.