Prince Harry ‘does not feel safe’ bringing his wife & children to the UK at this point

Obviously, Prince Harry did not physically appear in a London High Court on Friday for the Judicial Review of his security situation. His lawyers appeared on his behalf, and reporters were allowed access to a live stream, I think. Seeing how this story has been spun in the British media has really upset me. I’m so grateful that Prince Harry, Meghan and their two babies are safe and sound in Montecito, because they would be in so much danger if they were still in the UK, and if they all returned for any kind of visit. That’s the whole point of this exercise: Harry has a completely realistic understanding of the kind of existential threat he and his family face on a daily basis, especially in the UK. And to watch the British media basically make fun of him and mock him for being justifiably worried/concerned, it’s disgusting. And the British media is such a big part of WHY Harry, Meghan and their children are facing such danger. In any case, Harry’s lawyer said some words:

Prince Harry “does not feel safe” bringing his children to the U.K. following the loss of his taxpayer funded police protection, his legal team told the High Court in London on Friday. Speaking at a preliminary hearing to have the protection reinstated — which Prince Harry did not attend in person — the Duke of Sussex’s attorney Shaheed Fatima expressed Harry’s concerns over the security arrangements put in place when he and Meghan Markle stepped back from royal duties in January 2020.

Following their bombshell announcement, Harry and Meghan lost their public-funded protection in the U.K. and have privately paid for their own security in the U.S. They were also later told that they could not pay for U.K. police protection out of their own pockets. This means that if the Duke and Duchess of Sussex return to the U.K. with son Archie Harrison, 2, and daughter Lilibet Diana, 8 months, they will not be entitled to state-funded protection and the deep level of security intelligence that comes with it.

“This claim is about the fact that the claimant does not feel safe when he is in the U.K. given the security arrangements that were applied to him in June 2021 and will continue to be applied to him if he decides to come back,” Fatima said at the Royal Courts of Justice, reports The Guardian. “And, of course, it should go without saying that he wants to come back: to see family and friends and to continue to support the charities that are so close to his heart,” the lawyer added. “Most of all, this is, and always will be, his home.”

[From People]

This is where the British media goes in two different directions at once: on one side, they’ll say that Harry hates California and he’s just looking for any reason to “come back,” how dare he! In the other direction, they’ll say he doesn’t have any “right” to high-level security because “he walked away,” how dare he! Incidentally, security *should* follow the threat level, not whether or not you’re the biggest, fanciest elegant Baldingham in all the land. How completely f–king random to think that security is only given to those with a certain royal status, instead of those people who face the most violent threats?

The Mail on Sunday had an exhausting story where their sources were agitated that Harry was trying to keep the Judicial Review “secret,” as in, he didn’t want to announce that he was going to court to fight to pay for his police protection. They’re trying to make it sound like Harry is awful for… wanting to keep details about his security arrangement private (and secure). And then they’re blaming him for issuing a statement about it when the story came out… because the palace and Met leaked it.

This tweet, below, was widely shared among royal reporters like it was some kind of “gotcha.” I don’t see the contradiction: in January 2020, Harry wanted to reimburse the police for use of the RPOs, and he was turned down. Then, when Harry returned to the UK twice in the past year, both times were for family events (his grandfather’s funeral, the statue unveiling). He barely ventured off of secure royal property for both of those visits. During his June/July visit, there was an incident where his car was swarmed with people when he did venture off royal property, and it was a security kerfuffle. That’s why he wants to pay for the full security team now.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

74 Responses to “Prince Harry ‘does not feel safe’ bringing his wife & children to the UK at this point”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Elizabeth Regina says:

    If someone shows you who they are believe them the first time. I don’t blame Harry for keeping his family away and I’m glad records will show that he did try his best to get them the security they need in his home country.

  2. North of Boston says:

    RE the headline

    Harry’s a smart man.

  3. Alexandria says:

    This is a no brainer for people with brains and decency so obviously British Media is incapable of reporting anything of value on this.

  4. Becks1 says:

    Of course he was safe when he came home for Philip’s funeral. He quarantined for, what, 5 or 7 days, attended the funeral, by some reports he may have met with a charity or his grandmother etc and then he went home to his pregnant wife and small child. It wasn’t a really accurate assessment or picture of what his visits back will be like.

    We saw what happened – and what would likely just happen again and again – when he came back in July for the statute unveiling and was chased after leaving the wellchild awards. He could not safely attend a children’s charity event without the press hounding him. Imagine if Meghan had been with him.

    • HandforthParish says:

      Where is the footage of that? I was going through twitter on Friday and the Home Office had a video of the event when he left, showing a completely emptuy car park. I was a bit confused, I am sure I saw something else here?

      • Chloe says:

        It was a speed chase. So i’m thinking it probably happened on the highway.

      • Becks1 says:

        I haven’t seen the footage, I don’t think we need to.

      • equality says:

        Empty car park but plenty of cars parked along the street where you would be to easily follow someone. Interesting how you take that 8 second video as some sort of proof.

      • Chergui says:

        Harry is asking for the security based upon the fact he is a British Royal. I guess the crux of this comes down to at what stage do they seem a British Royal as not needing police protection or are they duty bound to protect them regardless of where they live. If that’s the case, surely they should then be having protection in the US too?

        They’ve made it clear that police protection isn’t available for hire so Harry isn’t likely to win the right to pay for his own security. The times I’ve seen people here say that there is precedent, it turns out were actually retired protection officers, which Harry could also hire.

        They’re not saying he won’t get security for official visits. They’re just saying they can’t cover him for personal visits. That’s treating him as a foreign based royals or political figure. They get police protection for official visits if the risk is deemed to be high enough but if it’s a personal visit, they have to bring their own team, regardless of risk.

        In the UK there are foreign royals or significant political figures living here with substantial risk, who have no police protection.

        Right now it seems as though they’ve skirted around the issue of whether or not they have to provide security because he’s a British Royal and whether the threat level is high enough.

        I don’t think that’s easy to assess since the stories keep changing.

        The security breach I read about began as journalists waiting by his car and now it’s become a car chase. I’m not even sure how much RPO’s could prevent these things, since there have been intruders at Buckingham Palace and Windsor. Seems more like a false sense of security to me.

      • equality says:

        @Chergui Wouldn’t Di be precedent for H’s situation? She was supposedly offered security but declined.

      • HandforthParish says:

        I was just asking, as the only footage the Home Office showed appeared to be for somewhere else. I wasn’t taking it as ‘some kind of proof’- that’s a bit conspiracy theory isn’t it?
        As Chergui said they are offering full protection for official events, as is the case with minor Royals- that is what they are basing the argument on. You can’t buy royal protection for private occasions unless you are a senior Royal, which is not the case for them anymore.
        That is what the Home Office are saying- if any specific risks are flagged they will then immediately pass intel on and the situation will be reviewed.

      • Nic919 says:

        This is more than just being a British royal though. Harry is facing security threats that Anne or Edward don’t face because he’s been targeted by the media and the racists for marrying a biracial American. And white supremacist terrorists have already made credible threats against him and his family. And that doesn’t include certain enemy countries that would want to take him out for having served in Afghanistan.

        We can’t pretend that Harry is just the same as the others royals. He is not and the BRF by enabling the media has made the threat level even worse.

        If Harry can’t be allowed to pay for properly informed and armed security when he comes to the UK, that becomes a serious issue. Tony Blair can get the extra protection and he’s not paying for it so why can’t Harry. This isn’t a guns for hire situation as much as they want to spin it that way. It’s a security issue and it is ridiculous that the Home Office has let it get this far.

        Oh yeah and let’s not forget that Andrew is getting full time security right now not paying a cent. He’s not a working royal so who is paying for his security ? Someone is clearly allowed to pay for him to get the armed RPOs. So there is already precedent for Harry to have protection that is paid for privately.

      • Chergui says:

        Are they paying privately for Andrew to have security though? There are so many twists and turns that it’s not easy to establish the factsI thought Andrew’s security was still tax payer funded. I wish it was the family who had to foot the bill for protecting him but my guess is that he fits the criteria as he’s a British Royal, living in the UK and has a fairly high risk level due to all of the paedophile hunters who would love to get their hands on him.

        I’m not defending the system at all. I think it’s insane that he would get security while Harry wouldn’t but I don’t think they’re actually changing any rules here to single out Harry.

        Tony Blair might get protection but I’d bet it’s not around the clock. It’s most likely only for certain events.

      • Nic919 says:

        Andrew is getting security 24/7 and he has not been a working royal since 2019. So they have no reason to say no to Harry asking for it, on his own dime, for a few visits a year.

        Harry is not being a spoiled brat here. There are legitimate security threats against him and his family. The Home Office cannot logically justify providing security for Andrew and deny Harry’s request.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Chergui, this is how I interpret what the Home Office is saying it will operate. Prince Harry who is a nonworking SENIOR member of the royal family is now considered a minor member of said family because of his nonworking status. If he is at royal events (PPs funeral) he is protected by the officers there to protect the REAL senior members of the royal family and the Home Office will not need to add even one protection officer for Harry. If Harry wants to do some private event (visit charities, friends, etc.) then he’s on his own. I believe they are saying that Harry and his family are simply not important enough to protect. The Home Office, in my opinion, is not looking at threat levels at all. They simply do not want to provide effective protection for the Sussex family. Instead they want to frame it that Harry thinks he can pay for cops. They’re idiots who are playing with 4 people’s lives–two are young children. I think this is the clearest indication to me that if the Sussex family did not exist all would be right in their (Home Office, royal family, BM) world. Please don’t tell me that I don’t understand how things are done in the UK. I am telling you what I believe is going on from my view outside of the UK. I’m American. I wonder what people in other countries believe.

      • equality says:

        When Harry is in the UK, he is a British royal (and UK citizen) residing in the UK in a house he is paying for and is high risk level due to white supremacists (some of whom have been charged in the past with threatening him). So where is the difference?

      • ABritGuest says:

        This move around security is driven by the royal family. Why didn’t Andrew’s security change given he stepped back in 2019 before Harry & was basically told to lay low?

        The home office say that Harry’s protection depends on reason for coming to the uk & so far he’s just had protection at royal family events. How does that make sense- surely it’s about the risk profile not the reason for coming. I would imagine that Harry has one of the highest risk profiles in the family given that his father & brother are the next kings but also because of fighting in Afghanistan & due to far right nationalists & other fixated people who hate his marriage to a mixed race woman.

        So far he’s only had protection at a royal family event but would also guess things would be risker ie he would be more exposed at a low profile event with less royals & therefore less security around generally.

        And given that we always hear that Diana might have survived if she hadn’t turned down RPOs, how was that even an option for her if apparently not being a non working royal reduces your risk profile overnight? As I said Andrew definitely has protection given recent stories of women tricking guards at his home & causing a security scare. Some reports claim that Elizabeth is paying for his protection privately through Duchy of Lancaster which means there is precedent for this unlike what the Home Office claim. Or taxpayers are actually paying for it. Kate Middleton also had police protection (not retired guards) when she was a girlfriend. RPOs also attended to Sophie Wessex when she was a girlfriend. How were they more in need of protection then Prince Harry??

        Ken Wharfe said Charles & William would ensure Harry had protection but guess he forgot part where Tyler Perry had to stand in the gap. Another said if Diana was alive she probably would have just lent hers when Harry needed it. It says a lot that Harry doesn’t want to (or can’t) rely on Charles to assist in this as it would probably be used to manipulate him. Which is why the press/Priti Patel are upset he’s going through official channels & claiming he’s being disrespectful.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Nic919, thank you for pointing out that Pedrew is still receiving royal, taxpayer protection! In addition to Blair and a number of non working figure heads.

        This hearing should take into account for many serious threats have been made and are still made against a Harry and Meghan, especially Meghan. The fact that Harry has had to bring this up to a court review is ridiculous! They certainly want to ensure that they make any attempts to visit Britain as hard as possible. Given Harry is a Prince should be reason enough for him to have protection. End of story!!!

      • Chergui says:

        @Saucy&Sassy, I’m not going to tell you that you don’t understand how things are done in the UK because I think you’re spot on. It’s all good until you try to change or go up against the system but I think that’s true of just about every country. Those in power don’t want the system that’s built to keep them there to change. Whether thats royals, white privilege, the number of women in the workplace or the people who’ve attended the most prestigious (and expensive) schools getting the highest ranking jobs.

        @ABritGuest I can’t find any legit info which suggests that Kate or Camilla had their own RPO’s before marriage. In fact there is a lot out there to the contrary if you look back at old stories regarding security scares and issues with journalists.

      • ABritGuest says:


        I didn’t mention Camilla in my post. A guardian article mentioned that Charles had hired guards for her when she was his girlfriend but was not sure if these were old police officers or actual private security. In contrast this article talks about a court case involving a policewoman who guarded Kate when she was William’s girlfriend & escorted her to her car from work etc. There are a few articles about Kate having police escorts as the press thought it was sign of impending engagement.

        This article also talks about Sophie having RPOs before marriage due to media intrusion

        Again Interesting it talks about Diana turning down RPOs as not sure why she was eligible for them after her divorce.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Chergui, we don’t know that he’s asking to be able to pay for armed protection & current intel based solely on being a member of the royal family. He is also a high profile figure that has received threats against him for other reasons. His Afghanistan service as a member of the royal family increased those threats exponentially. Meghan, his wife, has also been recognized as the most trolled person with sick hate accounts spewing bile all about her all over the place. There are precedences about paid police security. Blair has paid for some of his. The Home Office is playing pretend with the precedence argument-they want to keep (I’m sure Harry does too) examples of precedence confidential along with Harry’s witness statements. I’d put money on some high ranking names as witnesses to the need for Harry to be able to pay for armed security.

    • C-Shell says:

      I am imagining, and it’s terrifying. If, in addition to Meghan, they brought those wee babies, the swarms would be off the chain. They are not safe. I don’t think they will ever be safe in the UK.

    • L84Tea says:

      Or the kids! Can you imagine if he had Archie and/or Lili with him? They would be swarmed, mobbed, and chased down for a single shot of them.

  5. Piratesgal1 says:

    Gosh, the RRs are really getting desperate, aren’t they? Did anyone clock the DF article intimating financial shennagians re the Queens Royal Trust, who’ve partnered with BetterUp? (Nothing yet re Shout giving third-party ‘researchers access to millions of messages from children and other vulnerable users despite a promise never to do so.’)

    • Lady D says:

      How about the fact that they used a picture of H & M to go with the story?
      A story 2-3 days ago with a sleazy headline about Charles’s cash-for-access mess showed a picture of a smiling Harry standing with the Saudi billionaire. Three hours later, Harry’s pic had been replaced with one of Charles. I’m thinking they heard from Harry’s lawyers?

  6. Amy Bee says:

    The press can’t be trusted to report honestly on this case because of their agenda against Harry and because they are not privy to all of the information in the case. Parts of the hearing are confidential. Also the parts that the press have access to, they don’t understand. The Sun reporter who made that tweet had to come back and state that Harry did offer to pay for security. This issue has proven Kaiser to be right about one thing, Harry and Meghan has been exiled to the US because as it stands now, they can only come back to UK if they are invited to some Royal event where police protection will be provided for them. The Royal Family doesn’t want them making private visits to the UK because they would have no control over the movements of Harry and Meghan and there is a deep fear of being overshadowed by them when they visit the UK.

    • Leanne says:

      Yes- this is what it is really about. The possibility of being overshadowed

      • JT says:

        I saw something that said that the Home Office wants to review Harry’s security situation on a case by case basics, e.g, tell us what you want security for and what you’re doing, then we’ll decide if you need security, that they will then leak to the royal family no doubt. It’s still all about the royals trying to control Harry and his movements when in the U.K. so they can keep up with all of their bullshit. They want to know where he’s going, who he is seeing, and what he is getting done. It is absolutely about being overshadowed and being fearful of H&M being impactful in the U.K. while the royals are giving people Covid. Those call-in shows reveal that the British public is far more supportive of Harry than it appears if all you have to go by were the BM. I’m betting he would get massive crowds if he did an event, while the rest have to crop photos to hide the fact that nobody is there like the Keens at Keenshot.

        The fact that his security situation is being blasted all over the fucking tabloids is the reason why he needs high level security in the first place. Also, the Home office is upset that he didn’t show “proper deference” when asking to pay for security, apparently he was “too American” when asking. It seems that government officials in the UK are also taking Harry leaving personally as well. Just unbelievable. Harry has these people losing their minds.

      • Nic919 says:

        Priti Patel is a lackey for the BRF here and so a lot of this is coming from the family directly. In what sane country would you refuse security for someone who is willing to pay for it and who is a documented high security risk.

        I don’t like to follow down conspiracy theories in terms of what happened to Diana, but it does make it even worse that they are acting like Harry doesn’t have any reason or precedent to want to have proper security when he is being targeted by the media and by legitimate threats.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Amy Bee, that’s the truth of this entire issue. Bitter Bother and Keeny will be raging around their dusty old castles WHEN Harry and a Meghan visit! They can’t stand the fact that everyone LOVES Harry and Meghan and it’s eating at their precious egos!!!

        Funny how it’s February 21st, and we haven’t seen Bitter Brother and Keeny anywhere……..for at least 10 days plus!

      • Jais says:

        Agree @JT, the case by case basis is sketchy in the potential for leaks to the RF and thus the media. His family wants to know what he’s doing at all times in the UK and are using this issue to find out. Then they can feed the media and keep the heat off themselves.

  7. Jan says:

    Harry renewed his lease on Frogmore cottage and he is still can represent the Queen as a consular.
    England is putting a hold on Jamaica deportations until the Lamebridges visit is over. Hope they a real welcome in Jamaica.

    • Snuffles says:

      I hope the Cambridges are greeted with wall to wall protests when they come to Jamaica.

      • JT says:

        They’re putting holds on deportations until the Keens leave!? Like that’s supposed to make Jamaica better? These people are so f*cking dumb. I mean, come on.

    • Nic919 says:

      The Windrush families need to find them in Jamaica and protest their dissatisfaction. They are representing the UK govt so they need to face criticism for the racist decisions that are being made.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Yes they do! I hope the countries are holding protest signs asking where their Windrush compensation is? Or whether those that were illegally booted back to their home countries will be allowed to return to their lives in Britain and be compensated for their forced removal?

    • Princessk says:

      Postponing deportations until after the visit that is dreadful. I really hope the people in the Caribbean come out in solidarity with the Sussexes and ignore these visits which should have been done by the Sussexes. The welcome they would have received would have been tremendous.

    • kirk says:

      Clever of Betty to tap Naomi Campbell as QCT Platinum Jubilee Global Ambassador since she’s Jamaican, right? Oh wait, she’s British, but her mother is Jamaican born. Still diversity, right?

  8. Slippers4life says:

    I swear the BM is hoping and praying that Meghan Harry and their children are killed. “We abused you and successfully smeared you away. You should have stayed to take our abuse, but because you stood up to us, we hope you die!” That truly is, a very trapping environment.

  9. A says:

    What I will never truly understand about the british tabloids is why exactly they ran there meal tickets out of town? As dumb as the handlers at the palace are, its not a secret that the newpaper industry as a whole is hemorringing sales, and here comes someone new that actually helps you sell papers, and these morons just could not hold back even a little. So, now there stuck doing click bait materials like this, printing out one sided stories and hoping that journalist and publications with better reputations (i.e. the guardian, BBC, any blogger on instagram with access to google) pick it up and do the hard work for them. The best part however is that eventually the Cambridges will come back from vacation and they will have to talk about how there the best thing to happen in the UK since sliced bread and groveling like idiots, while the paper continues to operate in the red.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @A says: I think the press miscalculated. Other Royals have had to stay, take the abuse and eventually they would give access to the papers, as Camilla, William and Kate and Sophie have done. Harry and Meghan refused to be bullied by the press and had an option to leave but the press never believed that Harry would be bold enough to leave the family.

      • Blujfly says:

        This is it. They thought Harry and Meghan would be brought to heel by the palace – as the Palace promised them they would do. And I am no fan of William and Kate – but using whatever means (likely evidence of William’s affairs), the Palace and the press did successfully bring them to heel. They began their marriage refusing to give out their dog’s name, allegedly it was personal and private, and somehow before their children turned even 5 years old were allowing the publication of “Kate’s cuties.” I believe that William’s submission to this and then active participation in the game (which by definition necessitates leaking on your family) is what drive through first wedge between William and Harry.

      • Harper says:

        William used the tabloids to drive them out. He did a lot behind the scenes to crush Meghan and he and Kate leaked lies to the tabs (Meghan made Kate cry). Even when H&M were gone, KP still called her a bully before the Oprah interview and sided with the Fail to overturn her court victory. William opened the floodgates against Meghan to divert attention from his rose gardening and Kate benefitted by now being called the perfect princess.

      • Tessa says:

        Camilla was protected by Charles, the Prince of fact her PR had her praised to the skies. Charles made her “non negotiable.” William was supposedly the “best hope” of the monarchy and sailed along as “Diana’s son.” Kate had her fans from the get go. Meghan was criticized (to put it mildly) from the first time she was seen with Harry . I never saw such criticism of a royal as I have seen with Meghan. The royals apparently stand back and do not help her against the media. Sophie and Edward were lower down in the echelon and flew under the radar most of the time.

    • Izzy says:

      The palaces promised the ratchet rota that the Sussexes would be brought to heel and take the abuse. They all miscalculated, badly, and apparently never watched that interview Harry gave when he was in Afghanistan about how he was enjoying being out of England. He literally preferred being in a theater of war to being around those aholes back home. And then he went and married a woman who has actually worked for a living and supported herself. Yet somehow, with all that, it honestly NEVER occurred to any of them that he could leave.

      Idiots. I hope all those papers go bankrupt.

      • JT says:

        The Keens pimping themselves to the BM only looks like it works from the outside, but I’m betting that behind the scenes Won’t and Can’t are stressed as hell. Everyday they are waiting for the other shoe to drop and the floodgates to open. That #princewilliamaffair business just proved that ALL of the BM is just waiting to blow up their spot at moments notice. Most of the things that people suspect about William are probably true, there are receipts, and Buttons is not far behind. One of the journalists even said there are numerous photos of Big Willy acting a complete ass and he’s even more scandalous than people think. Kate’s over here firing assistants, blaming it on Meghan, and making back door deals with the tabloids to cover her own ass and her family’s as well. It’s just a sh*tshow at Casa Cambridge and I’m betting that the separate households and the sham marriage are the least of their worries. Even Bradby hinted that there legal shenanigans going on behind the scenes that would be very damaging if they got out. The press is giving the appearance that they’ve heeled but I believe that they threaten the Keens daily. Making those deals with the media was probably the worst thing they could do for themselves and with the Andrew nonsense going on with the payouts and all of the scandals coming out right now, they are in an incredibly precarious position.

      • Tessa says:

        The Keens are vulnerable. Charles put his foot down and made it clear Kate would not be the “next Queen.” I think there is mutual distrust between Charles and William. There will be more fall out IMO.

  10. Sofia says:

    It’s actually a good idea for the rest of the family as well that Harry wants to keep the security details private. Because if his details are revealed, it could turn out that W&K have a very similar arrangement along with C&C or something and knowing the security details of the 3 future monarchs and 2 future consorts is absolutely a terrible idea. Plus the cost of it could come out as well and do the BRF really want the public knowing exactly how much money goes into security? Yeah I don’t think so.

    But as always, the rota (and even most family members) don’t think beyond “let’s try and spite H&M”

  11. Blujfly says:

    The Royal Family and Johnson Government’s argument parroted by their press puppets is that as they have decided Harry is a minor Royal so have the terrorists and crazy people. Unbelievably asinine when both parties (her majesty’s government if not the Johnson one) placed him into a high profile and famous position his entire life. Bad faith to the extreme.

  12. Harper says:

    I saw some of those tweets over the weekend. It’s pathetic that the Rota Rats have resorted to calling Harry’s statements “spin.” That’s all the Rota have left now that Harry is able to make his own statements not filtered through the grey men at the palace.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Harper: That’s rich coming from the British press when they are the ones doing the spinning. The four tabloids are angry that Harry is sticking to his guns and refusing to engage with them. That’s why the MoS put out this asinine story about Harry wanting things secret and briefing his favourite journalists. The true story is that the Palace leaked the story to the MoS in an attempt to distract from the Andrew case and the MoS tried to spin it as Harry wants taxpayer funded security. Harry putting out his statement calling out the MoS and the Palace and stating that he wanted to pay for security poured cold water on the paper’s agenda.

  13. Watson says:

    It will never cease to amaze me what lengths they will go to smear Harry just to divert attention away from Andrew’s sex crimes, William’s cheating, or Charles’ cash for honours scandal or for basically exposing his mom to covid.

  14. Over it says:

    It’s truly sad and disgusting that Harry is actually blood related to the people that are hell bent on bringing an end to him , his wife and his childrens lives.
    I say this a lot , but God don’t like ugly and believe me when I say that every single one of the parasites that continue to harass Harry, Meghan and their children, day will come very soon

  15. Colby says:

    The Mail is also going on about Harry not offering to pay for the police protection initially. To that I say: my understanding is that nobody who is under police protection pays for it themselves. It’s provided based on threat level. So yeah, he thought as a public figure, member of the BRF, and someone whose family gets threats all the time, he would get the protection free. When he didn’t, then he offered to pay for it. I fail to see the problem.

    • Nic919 says:

      It doesn’t matter when he offered to pay for it but that he made the offer. That they are still refusing to provide the security following that offer is the issue, which the tabloids are trying to distract from.

      • Colby says:

        I totally agree with you. I was just pointing out that this isn’t as much as an own as the Mail seems to think it is.

    • Princessk says:

      Don’t believe the Fail version which will definitely be economical with the truth in order to smear Harry.

  16. Jan says:

    I think some in England are fed up of the Harry bashing, the calls into call in shows are more supportive.
    One host was speechless when callers said he should not have to pay for security.
    One had Cameltoe speechless when he said the BRF was not worth the money, and she was saying they help millions with their charities, not to burst her bubble but the royals cost charities more than bring in.
    Just take Unable charities, closings and and not visiting others for years.
    They can’t people from loving Harry, he just have something the rest of his family don’t have.

  17. Myra says:

    I don’t blame him. There are videos of Princess Diana being swarmed by paps and being chased around. It’s ironic that the spin after her death is that ‘her’ refusal of royal protection officers contributed in some ways to her death. And yet, an actual heir is being refused the same protection. They need to stop insulting the public’s intelligence.

  18. Cessily says:

    In my mind karma would manifest in there being a King Harry crowned so we can watch him dismantle the firm, rota rats and monarchy from the throne. (Might make for an interesting book🤔 fiction of course).

  19. Margaret says:

    Well Russia is accusing the uk of pushing for war as a distraction, for Andrew, the queen, and charles scandals, also Johnson. Wow.

  20. aquarius64 says:

    I don’t know who is the bigger idiot, the BM or BRF. Covering up royal dirt, especially William’s. It does not occur to them that the BM, by non reporting, told enemies of the UK the FFK can be blackmailed.

  21. Jais says:

    Everything about this makes me angry. How dare Harry want his family to be safe is what they’re saying. Evil incarnate.

    • Liz Version 700 says:

      💯 agree. They are mocking a man for wanting to protect his family. The way they pimp their children out I guess they can’t imagine actually trying to protect them. Hell they are fine with breathing Covid on the Queen herself, no one actually matters as a person in this family…. Just the institution that seems to be 1000 years out of date.

      • Tessa says:

        The York Princesses do not go around trotting out the children. Eugenie even had a photo taken with the back of her August’s head shown. They are following Harry and Meghan’s actions. Protecting the children.

  22. SUNNYVILE says:

    He said what he said! BM & chuck thought they could publicly BULLY him/coerce him into backing down after they printed that story about chuck offering them to stay with him😤

    I hope he doesn’t come for either this or jubilee or sandringham fiasco. They just want to use him and his family

  23. Nic919 says:

    Who is paying for Andrew’s full security right now? If it isn’t the taxpayer then someone is paying for it privately. Which is what Harry is asking for but only on visits to the Uk and not 24/7.

    The Home office is playing a dangerous game here with this nonsense because they already have a non working senior royal getting the full RPO protection except it is done 24/7.

    Anne and Edward are irrelevant to this situation when there is Andrew.

    • Lady Digby says:

      Fail on Sunday reported that PA’secuity is only NOW to be reviewed by relevant Committee. He gets standard protection because he lives on a crown estate but Committee will review his personal security which has continued since 2019. As a UK tax payer I would appreciate some transparency on who gets full-time protection and whether Sophie and co just get RPOs when on official duty.

  24. Steph says:

    I saw on Twitter (so take the accuracy with a grain of salt) that the 6/2020 request was made during the Sandringham Summit and his family never fwd the msg to the Met. So now the BM is running with the Harry lied about requesting to pay for it himself madness.

    I feel bad for Harry. Of course he wants to safely be able to return to England. I don’t know if he ever can safely though.

    • Nic919 says:

      The whole “but Harry never asked to pay until Sept 2021” is meaningless because he did ask to pay and the Home office said no. The judicial review wouldn’t be happening if Harry offered to pay and they accepted it.

      It doesn’t matter when he offered to pay but that he did. The home office could shut this down right now but they choose not to.

      • Charm says:

        Just one correction, @Nic919:
        “The home office could shut this down right now but THEY HVNT YET RECEIVED THEIR INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE FIRM.”

  25. Athena says:

    I read in one article that by bringing this lawsuit Harry is failing to show the right level of respect for Priti Patel. This was the second article that I’ve come across implying that she is somehow taking a person’s interest in this.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      The word lawsuit needs to stop being used. It’s a judicial review. Harry is not suing granny or granny’s government…yet.

  26. aquarius64 says:

    I think the underlying fears are if anything happen to the Sussexes, three of whom are American, two are minors, there would be blowback from the US and damage the “Special Relationship”. Pritil as Home Office Sec’y would take the fall.