No, the Sussexes did not ‘demand’ that their neighbors avoid contact with them

The Wimbledon Championships 2019

At some point, I really hope the Duchess of Sussex just laughs. If the British tabloids weren’t so hellbent on being nasty as possible and trying to conjure up ill feelings towards the Sussexes, it would be a lot funnier. Meghan literally just sits there and breathes and The Sun and the Daily Mail have the pitchforks out for her. This story is especially interesting because it’s been something the tabloids have been sitting on for months, just waiting to manipulate a very basic, dumb little anecdote into “Duchess Difficult Issues Demands On Neighbors!” What really happened was that at a local community meeting in Windsor back in February, someone from Windsor Castle basically told the peasants to chill out and not act like a–holes once the Sussexes moved in. That’s it. But it got manipulated into this story:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s new neighbours were issued with ‘do’s and don’ts’ should they see the pair around the newly-renovated Frogmore Cottage, it emerged last night. The issue was raised at a residents’ meeting for those living near the couple’s home on the Windsor estate by a ‘well-intentioned’ member of estate staff. Neighbours were ordered not to strike up conversation with the pair or ask to see baby Archie. They were also told to refrain from offering to babysit – or even stroke their dogs should they bound over. Residents were also cautioned they should avoid petting the royal couple’s two dogs, even if the dogs come over. They should also refrain from offering to walk the dogs or babysit Archie and should not post anything through the letterbox of Frogmore Cottage.

Residents living close to the royal couple on the Windsor estate also include royal staff, officials living in grace-and-favour houses and Crown Estate employees. Palace officials last night said neither the Sussexes or their household made any request for any instructions to be given to locals. A source said: ‘A well-intentioned member of estate staff offered guidance at a community meeting. Neither the couple or their household made any such request.’

One local remarked to The Sun last night: ‘It would be funny if it wasn’t so over the top.’ Another neighbour commented: ‘It’s extraordinary. We’ve never heard anything like it. Everyone who lives on the estate works for the royals and knows how to behave respectfully. We aren’t told how to behave around the Queen like this. She’s very happy for people to greet her.’

Royal commentator, Ingrid Seward, told The Sun: ‘It sounds as if Harry and Meghan’s incessant demands for privacy means that palace officials are second-guessing what they might want. It’s odd because it’s just good manners to engage your neighbour in conversation in a pleasant way. It’s a very normal British thing to say ‘good morning’ and pat a dog. The Queen always chats to neighbours and even has tea with people on the estate as she’s very friendly with them. The ‘not petting the dog’ is particularly strange. Maybe Harry doesn’t want people approaching them and using their dogs as an excuse to talk. And of course the dog with no name keeps its privacy as they won’t tell us its name!’

A spokesman for Buckingham Palace said: ‘The Duke and Duchess had no knowledge of this briefing and no involvement in the concept or the content. This was a well-intentioned briefing to help a small local community know how to welcome two new residents and help them with any potential encounter. There was no handout or letter. The talk was undertaken by a local manager and was widely viewed as being well-received. The Duke and Duchess didn’t request this, didn’t know about it, and had nothing to do with the content or guidance offered.’

A royal source said the meeting was in February, more than two months before they moved to Frogmore and three months before Archie was born. They added: ‘Residents meetings are frequently and routinely held to update on building works/events etc – this was not a meeting specifically held to talk about the couple, it was one of several things discussed. Most importantly their Royal Highnesses did not issue the guidance and didn’t ask for it to be done – they simply had nothing to do with this and Didn’t even know it had happened. As it is they love people to stroke their dogs.’

[From The Daily Mail]

So, the Sussexes did not request this, nor did they issue the demands themselves, and it was just someone from Windsor Castle taking it upon themselves to tell people in the community to chill and be respectful and it got twisted into this. It’s so stupid and so funny. I mean, I imagine some people are working themselves into a lather about this – “can’t even say hello to their dog, HOW HIGH AND MIGHTY!” What’s funny is that now the royal reporters are twisting themselves in knots trying to blame Meghan and Harry for how they got the story wrong, basically arguing “well, misunderstandings like this are bound to happen when you expect any kind of privacy!” For the love of God.

Prince Harry speaks of his and Meghan Markle's Royal baby joy

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red and Backgrid.

Related stories

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

48 Responses to “No, the Sussexes did not ‘demand’ that their neighbors avoid contact with them”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Becks1 says:

    Emily Andrews is the worst. THE WORST. She wrote this, and kept insisting on twitter that she included the palace’s denial, but 4 paragraphs in, and its clear she doesn’t believe the palace’s denial. But like….how could residents have been told not to touch/ask about/mention Archie (or whatever the rules were) months before he was born???

    • PrincessK says:

      Andrews is awful, and willing to sink so low. No wonder Omid has stopped doing On Heir with her which l kinda used to enjoy. The tabloids are all fighting for survival with the advent of social media, and Emily Andrews in order to keep her job like so many other royal reporters is happy to write lies. Shame on her!

      • BeanieBean says:

        Oh, so that’s the reason. I wouldn’t mind if Omid created his own podcast, or found somebody else.

  2. BeyondTheFringe says:

    Long time lurker. De-cloaking just to say:

    Ingrid Seward can go shit in her hat.

  3. Erinn says:

    I mean, I can see why people would assume it WAS from Harry and Meghan / their people because it just makes the most sense in a way. I don’t think anyone’s first assumption in that circumstance would be that they had no idea it was happening.

    But I do wonder if this person who took it upon themselves did it as a helpful gesture, or to stir up trouble.

    • M says:

      The list was sent back in February long before the Sussexes moved in, so the only reason it’s being exposed now is to hurt Harry and Meghan.

    • Megan says:

      The fact that BP issued a denial suggests the strategy on the BS hit pieces is simply to ignore them. They only respond when it affects other people, like their neighbors.

  4. Lara says:

    I just read on Twitter – anytime there’s anti Meghan stuff in the press just know that someone is working hard to cover up actual bad stuff that someone else in the Royal Family has done. So imagine Prince Edward propositioning a poodle.

  5. TeamAwesome says:

    If I got taken down trying to pet a goodest royal boi, well, there are worse ways to go….

  6. Seraphina says:

    How sad the British press is and they really should be ashamed of themselves. No ethics or integrity when it comes to their reporting. At this point I don’t even read what they write about Meghan because they will soon ANYTHING into SOMETHING.

    • Megan says:

      It’s not the entire British press. It is the tabloids and royal reports who are the issue. The Daily Fail is the National Enquirer masquerading as a newspaper.

      • Seraphina says:

        By the Daily Fail, you mean Daily Mail? American here, so not sure. And which is the more reputable of the newspapers? I go to daily mail but it’s just full of Kardashians and stupidity.

      • Lady D says:

        Seraphina, at the top of their site they have a US option and a UK option. (Aus too) You might be reading the American version of the DM. They are more Kardashian-centric.

      • Seraphina says:

        Lady D, thank you!!!

  7. AB says:

    “As it is they love people to stroke their dogs.”

    I’m not sure why but that sentence made me LOL. “Actually our doggie loves to be stroked and contrary to recent reports, he IS a very good boy.” This story could not be sillier.

  8. Valiantly Varnished says:

    Royal reporters are useless and every story like this proves that point. They will be obsolete soon. And then all of these folks will have to find real jobs.

  9. Chisey says:

    I’m imagining the dogs bounding up to someone who tries valiantly not to pet it in the face of puppy dog eyes. Honestly, I’d be pretty annoyed if I were a neighbor too – this talk ranges from ‘don’t do normal things’ to instructions of things everyone would know like ‘don’t post your mail in their mailbox.’ I hope Harry & Megan are able to calm this sort of thing down. They understandably would be extra concerned about security and privacy but there’s no point in irritating the neighbors.

  10. Wigletwatcher says:

    H&M seem so low key and drama free that these stories are struggling. The frequency is shameful, but nothing sticks because it’s false and that shows with actual events.

    This is so stupid. We all knew the spare’s wife was going to be attacked, but like this? How awful.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Right? How can they ignore decades-worth of Harry and a couple of years-worth of Meghan coverage and not pick up on how absolutely non-divalike these two people are? Also, I absolutely love that photo of a joyous Harry announcing his son’s birth.

  11. NopeyMcNopers says:

    That hilarious line jumped out at me too. It sounds vaguely filthy and I like that.
    ETA: this was supposed to be a reply to AB’s comment above… derp.

  12. TeddyPicker says:

    I do find it kind of wild that the damn dog’s name is still under wraps…

    • Himmiefan says:

      People might deliberately call it over for who knows what. There are a lot of crazies out there.

      • kerwood says:

        That’s probably the reason. There’s also the fact that it’s nobody’s damn business and the sense of entitlement people feel to EVERY aspect of the Sussex family’s life is remarkable. It was a marriage license not a bill of sale.

        And if the British taxpayers have an issue, maybe they should spend their time getting receipts for Kate’s botox. Or maybe figuring out what the country’s going to do once it leaves the EU

  13. Enn says:

    Okay, but this from the BP statement:

    “This was a well-intentioned briefing to help a small local community know how to welcome two new residents and help them with any potential encounter.”

    Like residents of Windsor are complete rubes who have no concept of social mores?

    • Wowsers says:

      I know, that was a massive eye roll. Why would one need “help” with a “potential” encounter (not even an actual one)…? Do the sussexes think plebs are such morons they can’t say hello? Didn’t the sussexes hire some new PR genius? I hope this isn’t her wording.

      • kerwood says:

        The Sussex family is not responsible for this latest fuckery. Nice try though.

      • Becks1 says:

        I actually wonder if any of this came from the RPOs. H&M have received a lot of threats reportedly, so I wonder if the RPOs were like, “hey, make our lives a little bit easier, don’t rush up to them if you see them walking outside.”

        Meghan especially, despite what the RRs try to push about her, seems to be social and outgoing and to enjoy meeting new people. I cant imagine if she’s walking her dog she’s going to avoid talking to anyone and everyone because she’s just so important.

  14. Sofia says:

    Most of the time it’s royal courtiers who do all this. They brief people on the rules for royals like “use their titles”, “don’t turn your back on them” etc etc but the royals themselves don’t care and introduce themselves by their first names.

  15. mk says:

    Instead of just calling out The Sun and The Daily Mail, you should also include the owner of these vile tabloids, Rupert Murdoch every single time. Name the vile SOB who drives these publications.

  16. castletoz says:

    Maybe we have it all wrong. Maybe it’s the Dog’s who are fiercely private and they’re the ones issuing the demands. We as a people are slaves to our pets so it just makes sense

    • Harla says:

      So true castletoz! My Dog refuses to let just anyone pet her and demands complete privacy to conduct her business, yes I’ve gotten the memos before :)

  17. HB says:

    So who did release the statement, and why are they releasing statements without the Sussexes knowledge?

    I notice none of the alleged neighbours are named.

    • Erinn says:

      This is why I’m confused as well. I wonder who did it, and why. I mean, I don’t believe that M&H put it out because it’s clearly not their style. But the whole thing is just strange.

    • Senator Fan says:

      Good questions and it is quite strange indeed.

    • Becks1 says:

      What do you mean? BP released a statement saying that this had nothing to do with the Sussexes and made it sound like it was just something discussed at a community meeting.

      I imagine the actual contents of the community meeting were either shared with the DM et al at the time, or someone has decided 6 months later that it was a sign of MEGHAN BEING UNREASONABLE and they called up EA.

  18. kerwood says:

    There are probably going to be new developments in the Epstein case soon.

    • Kumquat says:

      Future headlines: “Duchess difficult appeared in public with an unruly eyebrow hair out of place!”

      “Diva Megan DEMANDS quilted toilet paper at Frogmore, on the taxpayer dime!!”

      “A tiara-less Duchess Megan attends event, PROOF that the Queen hates her on a molecular level!”

  19. Hope says:

    So this obviously came out now to detract from the Vogue issue.

    • Olenna says:

      No, this obviously came out before the magazine cover story because the RR needed another hit piece for $$$. The tabs were caught short-handed with no release news about the Vogue story, LOL! Haven’t you noticed the tabloids can never have enough Meghan stories? The Fail, alone, has about 8-9 just on the Vogue issue, to including a Piss Morgan one.

  20. Syr says:

    Would you believe this was fabricated out of whole cloth if it was anyone else?

  21. Well-Wisher says:

    Probably a normal practice for the new neighbors in Kensington and Buckingham Palaces etc.
    So obvious why it is being highlighted.