Prince Harry doesn’t even know who decided he was ineligible for royal protection

On Friday, there was another hearing/court appearance in Prince Harry’s High Court Judicial Review. Harry is basically petitioning the court to receive high-level royal protection for himself, his wife and his children whenever he chooses to visit the UK. It’s also about his desire to reimburse the police for the cost of his security. Friday’s update was kind of confusing to me, a layperson and an American, because it seems to involve a secretive bureaucratic web within the government/Scotland Yard? The bureaucracy is called the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec), and basically, Harry finds Ravec’s decisions confusing as well. He doesn’t know who – within Ravec – decided that he should be ineligible for royal protection during his visits. Ravec is made up of “representatives from the police, Home Office and Royal household.” Ah, I think we’ve figured it out, Harry. Figure out which members of the Royal household are part of Ravec and you’ve figured out who cancelled your security.

Anyway, according to the Telegraph’s coverage, Harry’s lawyers (Shaheed Fatima and Jenny Afia) want the court to identify who sits on Ravec, because it’s vital for this case, and even with Fatima and Afia’s connections, they could not ascertain the membership. The judge “rebuked” Harry’s lawyers because, in his view, the Judicial Review was not about whether Ravec made the wrong decision in pulling Harry’s royal protection, but whether Harry could reimburse the police for the protection. There’s no ruling yet.

Meanwhile, the Daily Mail’s coverage of Harry’s Judicial Review continues to be appalling, and as we learned last week, Harry is suing the Mail yet again for their coverage on this issue. Sources close to the Daily Mail spoke to the Daily Beast about Harry and Meghan’s litigious vibes and these people are so pathetic! My God.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are so valuable to the business model and circulation of the British tabloids that the outlets won’t stop writing about and attacking them. Despite the couple’s increasing willingness to resort to lawsuits—which they have a habit of winning—in an attempt to silence their critics, industry insiders have told The Daily Beast the tabloids are more likely to react by doubling down on their aggressive coverage.

Harry’s new action is, prima facie, a complex case, and it is therefore unlikely the general public will give over much energy to trying to understand Harry’s latest beef with the Mail. As one former senior British tabloid newspaper editor told The Daily Beast: “This latest action is so obscure you have to read the story three times to figure out what he is complaining about.”

There is little doubt in the minds of reporters and editors, however, that the intention behind the repeated legal actions is to persuade news editors and proprietors that it is not worth the hassle of running negative stories about Harry and Meghan. The strategy —described to The Daily Beast by media lawyer Mark Stephens of international law firm Howard Kennedy as “reach for your lawyer at the slightest provocation”—stands in stark contrast to the once-hallowed royal tradition of simply brushing off and ignoring inaccurate newspaper stories.

Indeed, one Mail insider told The Daily Beast: “The Mail is on a crusade against Harry and Meghan, and these legal actions will only make ANL even more determined to keep it going. Harry and Meghan are the couple the readers love to hate, they are copy, and the lawsuits are just a business expense. Look at how much the Mail got out of the case [about the letter]. It really damaged Meghan’s reputation in the U.K. and although ANL lost the case, the editor of the Mail on Sunday who published that letter, Ted Verity, got promoted. That tells you everything you need to know.”

The former tabloid executive made a similar point, saying: “There are some people who try and operate this scorched earth policy to stop people writing about them, and for someone who is relatively low-profile it sometimes works. Reporters and desks just think why bother? But for Prince Harry to try and achieve a lower profile via suing people is just absurd. People are always going to want to read about him. It might make ANL more careful about the wording, and maybe this time they have made a mistake on the wording of whether it was secret or not secret, but ultimately if Harry wears a silly hat in a public place they are going to take the piss out of him. They are not going to slip up on something like that.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Once again, I have to ask: how stupid are British tabloid editors? They’ve really been out here ascribing false motives to Harry and Meghan the entire f–king time, almost like they have no idea what the f–k they’re talking about. The point of Harry and Meghan’s litigious actions has never been about “stop talking about us.” It’s been about “respect our privacy boundaries” AND “you can’t just lie about us whenever you want.” British editors think that the only way to “cover” Harry and Meghan is to go hyper-negative and libelous, then those same editors complain that H&M are just looking to be ignored? No. What a willfully stupid misread of Harry and Meghan’s motives. SUE ‘EM AGAIN.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, WENN.

return home

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

75 Responses to “Prince Harry doesn’t even know who decided he was ineligible for royal protection”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Noki says:

    I hope H & M can bring their own protection and they be granted to carry arms. Because i would NOT want anyone resentful protecting me and my family.

    • Jan says:

      They will not allow Harry’s security from the US to bring weapons in the UK.
      Charles is on the Board, and this is his way of controlling Harry visits to England, if you’re doing Family events, you get security, like for Philip’s funeral not for his mother’s statue.
      They are so scared about H & M upstaging the family.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Noki: Harry will bring his own security as he always done since moving the US but they’re not allowed to carry guns and have no access to intelligence. This is why he wants police protection.

  2. equality says:

    ” People are always going to want to read about him.” I thought he was irrelevant. And they admit that they lie but think people should just “brush it off”?

  3. Julia K says:

    I would love to know who sits on Ravec. That it is not public knowledge says a lot. Why is it a secret? Who is being protected?

    • Nic919 says:

      Since when is a committee’s membership kept a secret especially for an issue like this? It’s not like they are part of MI-6. This seems very shady and all decision makers should be identifiable.

    • Pentellit says:

      I bet the revelations will be that it’s either William or Charles or both. Don’t think this had anything to do with the Queen. I think those two did it thinking they were squeezing Harry and it would cause him to come back into the fold like a lapdog, but the whole thing backfired on them and now they are screwed because Harry is trying to expose them. There’s a reason his lawyers are going in hard and why the judge is resisting and the solicitors are talking about Harry showing lack of “respect”. They know he’s moving closer to dangerous territory. LOL

      • North of Boston says:

        If there’s a Venn diagram of “royals who made racist remarks about the potential/actual color of Sussex children” and “royals who are part of Ravec” I’d bet real money it is simply one big circle.

      • Isabella says:

        I am sure that the queen would love to see Harry, Meghan and her two great grandchildren. It’s cruel to put obstacles in the way.

      • Christine says:

        Honestly, she has never struck me as being particularly into any of the kids in her family, except for Andrew. Even then, not when he was little.

        It’s like she’s gotten to a certain age, and now the cuddly grandma narrative is being pushed. I can’t think of one time she’s appeared to be interested.

      • Tessa says:

        THe Queen is selective it seems IMO in the people she helps. Like making the announcement about Camilla and helping Andrew paying up. She may have professed love for Harry and his family but did nothing when William worked against Harry. There is still the threat of COVID and when it is safe she certainly could make arrangements to see Harry and his family.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ @Tessa, I seriously doubt the Queen voluntarily decided to announce that Camilla would receive the traditional title of Queen Consort. It was Charles and his people forcing some kind of negotiation to get ahead of having to deal with the issue after the Queen passes.

        Let’s realize too that if Camilla wasn’t officially named Queen Consort, there would probably have had to be a Letters Patent issued to name her Princess Consort, which Charles never wanted in the first place. It was a faux concession at the time they married, which was never intended to be adhered to.

        Most of all, the Queen never writes anything. It is all written for her, and she signs off on it. Plus, she merely reads lines written for her in giving her speeches. Even her most well-known speech at the age of 20, declaring her faithful promise to steadfastly serve as Queen whether her life was ‘long or short,’ were words written for her! Believe it or not! 🎭 🇬🇧

  4. MsIam says:

    Man, are all of the British media this arrogant or just the tabloids? Its like they feel like they should be able to write whatever they like, truth or not and if you don’t like it too bad. Well it’s their money.

  5. GuestWho says:

    So the Mail can say this: “Indeed, one Mail insider told The Daily Beast: “The Mail is on a crusade against Harry and Meghan…” and the rest of the “legitimate” news agencies just keep re-reporting the lies they spew? Seriously? Shameful.

  6. LaraW” says:

    Sure, from a financial standpoint the lawsuits are a gift that keeps on giving. But what happened in the course of Meghan’s lawsuit? Jason Knauf decided to turn over completely irrelevant evidence, thereby exposing KP’s hand in that entire mess, blowing up their cover, and possibly setting up a dangerous precedent.

    Who knows what Harry’s lawsuit may unearth, because— do we know who leaked the proceedings in the first place? Is this another deal where KP or even BP gave a story to feed the MoS, and the connection will be revealed in the course of the lawsuit?

    • Amy Bee says:

      @LaraW: And in the process Jason lost his job. I agree that the lawsuit is probably partly pursued to find who leaked the information to the MoS. I hope we find out.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Christian Jones lost his job too, as a result of his boyfriend being paid to leak directly to DanW.

    • Harla says:

      I hope that it does set a dangerous precedent, one where any palace employee feels free to hand over any documentation regarding their bosses and their shady deals, shady donors and shady friends. William made a huge mistake unleashing Jason and I predict that one day he will reap the full benefits of his arrogance.

  7. Merricat says:

    Neanderthals. I can’t believe I once thought Britain was the apex of civilization. Lol, they’ve utterly destroyed that notion.

  8. Amy Bee says:

    That Mark Stephens was also adamant that Meghan was going to lose her case against ANL, the press sholud be looking for somebody to get legal commentary. If Harry didn’t think he had a strong case, he would not sue the MoS. It’s clear that their article lied about Harry never offering to pay for security and wanting the whole issue to be secret and I’m sure that Harry has written proof that says otherwise. I also suspect that the lawsuit is being pursued to find out who leaked the story to the MoS because it was a serious breach of confidentiality and it was done to distract from Andrew legal woes. As for Meghan’s reputation being damaged by the case, it was already damaged by the press and the Royal Family before she decided to sue the MoS so for her she didn’t have anything else to lose.

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Yep, for sure. This ongoing f*£kery by the firm, rota, and tabloids against the Sussexes is seriously insane and dangerous. I hope this entire shizz is coming to a head where it can all be exposed for what it is!

      The question is, who are the behind-the-scenes players who will eventually recognize and concede that these smearing attacks will never work? Someone needs to successfully convince the House of Windsor that the Sussexes are beloved and esteemed around the world. Moreover, the Sussexes have staunch allies in positions of power. The firm and the BM are in danger of digging an ever deeper hole for themselves.

      These ongoing petty attacks against M&H by weak, craven Salty Isle culprits must cease. The inept and deranged fools in the firm and in the BM apparently never really understood the spare younger brother. Thus, they have egregiously miscalculated Prince Harry’s strength and resolve as a fierce, courageous soldier!

  9. lanne says:

    What blows my mind is that the RF has given no thought as to how this will all blow back on them. What happens when William’s rose trimming goes public? Or something about Charlotte and Louis as teenagers? They may be creating a new precedent–the younger siblings of the monarch or monarch to be fleeing at first opportunity. There’s a good chance that Louis at least will bounce if the status quo remains. Maybe George and Charlotte will want to peace out as well

    • Watson says:

      Let’s be real here. Who cares about the spares? It’s tradition to throw them under the bus.

      • MelOn says:

        Agree. I totally think Margaret became a bitter alcoholic because she had to put her sister ahead of herself . Anne is mean, Andrew is well.. Andrew and Edward is just out there dangling. All of them should have been encouraged to get LIVES and CAREERS of their own, to do well in school instead of being raised to be a family appendage to be cut of when they weren’t useful anymore.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Melon
        Marg didn’t have to take a step back. She was forced to. She was already supportive of Liz, but as the spare the time came to need her less and the only purpose she had in life was gone. Spares are always written as the worst and with poor character.

        Harry broke the cycle and I think because he showed a royal can exist and thrive outside of the family that the Cambridge’s kids will have that pressure. Andrew, Edward and Anne will remain. They don’t know how to exist on their own.

      • Tessa says:

        Margaret wanted a good education. But she did not get one and later was unhappy that her elder sister got a better education. And she expressed resentment over it. She was also stereotyped as the spare. This was most unfortunate.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ @Melon, Anne at least had her horses, her riding career, and her tough personality as a shield. But she is just as stuck, as her brothers are, within the gilded cage.

        Andrew has always been an accident waiting to happen. They should have allowed him to marry his first choice, Koo Stark, a wealthy young American who possessed smarts, despite her mistake of allowing a filmmaker to film her in the nude when she was 17. At the least, Koo was strong-minded, career driven, and in love with Andrew, which might have saved him from his current fate. Fergie was a disastrous second choice.

        Edward skates by, but he managed to make a lasting marriage with Sophie. Of course, all of the Queen’s children grew up with huge, overly entitled egos.

  10. Nic919 says:

    The UK media was never forced to learn anything from the Leveson inquiry and the papers are run by a few rich people who have agendas. There is no free press in the Uk as much as the people want to believe it. It is easily controlled and manipulated by those in power with few tools to challenge it.

    A regular person doesn’t have the financial resources to challenge these large media conglomerates but Harry does and that is what they don’t like.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Noki: Exactly. Harry and Meghan refused to play the game with the media and won’t allow them to get away with printing false stories about them. “Never complain, never explain” is really an agreement between the press and palace not a principled position of the Queen as the press likes to promote. I remember when stories were coming out about Meghan and people were asking why the Palace wasn’t saying anything, the refrain was never complain, never explain. But it was really part of the invisible contract that the Palace struck with the press to protect other members of Royal Family and to throw Meghan and Harry under the bus.

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      Yep. The threat here (“the tabloids will just double down”) is because they are actually scared & angry that their power to destroy lives is being challenged in a meaningful way. Eat into their bottom line, Harry. It’s all these people understand.

    • Christine says:

      You all make really good points. I would add that it’s really easy to “never complain, never explain” when you have the rr blatantly making things up and constantly blowing smoke up your ass. If they told the truth about the royal family, I bet we would see a metric shit ton of explaining.

  11. JMoney says:

    I’m glad it was put into writing how attacking H&M are central to the UK tabloid business model. So much so they now factor in a lawsuit costs when writing a story on them hence why the Daily Mail and The Sun refuse to change their tactics or what they publish. I don’t think people realise just how much H&M reputation is viewed negatively by the british public as a result of the influence of the british press. I know there are UK fans and its primarily poc who view H&M positively (there are obvs some exceptions) but they never had the majority of the public support the way Diana did and the tabloids are working damn hard to make sure they never will.

    Yes, many people don’t read tabloids in Britain but that’s not the point. Tabloids and their staff play a much bigger role in society in the UK than people are aware of. Many of those tabloid columnists work in other papers/websites parroting the same lies first stated on tabloids that people in mass believe them. For instance, the “privacy” lie that they claim H&M allegedly say they want. It was first written in the tabloids, then referenced by columnists in right wing newspapers (Telegraph and the UK Times) and on daytime tv in the UK and then half of the british public believe it b/c they don’t make that connection.

    I’m glad H&M left the UK.

    • Watson says:

      Agreed. They were wise to leave and direct a more positive and fair media campaign in the USA. They would have never succeeded in England as the tabloids have never given them peace or a fair shot at even handed coverage.

  12. Jane Wilson says:

    Rupert Murdoch pretty much invented the “we write whatever we like – it MAY be true” style of faux journalism that thrives like a poisonous weed wherever it’s planted.
    And in the 50 or so years since he launched his first UK rag “News of the World” nobody has yet figured out (or bothered to figure out) how to create journalistic standards that disallow publishing pure fantasy or outright lies.

  13. rawiya says:

    Literally, anyone of importance can come and visit them in the U.S. or Canada or on vacation in Australia. Eugenie’s visit proved that. He might *want* to go back to visit, but they, especially Meghan and the kids, don’t NEED to go back. Let his aunts take a trip to California. He and his friends can meet up in the Netherlands for the Invictus Games.

  14. Becks1 says:

    As we’ve said on here before, its clear there is a line in the sand that H&M have drawn about when they are going to sue and not sue. They know they can’t do anything about a DM article trashing Meghan’s outfit at the Image awards (I’m assuming there was such an article bc, you know, DM.) That’s the kind of coverage that they know comes along with being a public figure.

    What doesn’t go along with being a public figure is lies being published about your children, your protection, and your work, and that’s what they push back on. Criticism, even outright hate and abuse? I don’t think they’re “okay” with that, I just think they expect it at this point. But lies that damage their reputations or affect their children? Nope.

    I do think whats kind of “funny” though is that I think the British tabloids have just overplayed their hand. Like yes there are people who hate Meghan and yet read everything about her that a tabloid or newspaper will publish and track her every movement on social media, but there are a lot more people, at this point, who are just bored of it in my opinion and are calling out the tabloids more and more. Like 2 years ago I don’t think someone like Piers Morgan would have gotten the twitter pushback he got on Saturday. But more and more people see the tabloids (and some more legitimate british news outlets) as the racist and toxic institutions they are and even if they aren’t Sussex fans per se, people understand more and more why H&M left with every article the Mail et al publish about them.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Becks: Meghan has always said that she has no problem with anybody criticising her but the problem comes when the press print lies. She and Harry have taken a decision to not allow lies to be perpetuated in the press. Their tactic is to either issue a statement or to sue the press.

    • Isabella says:

      Criticizing them on Twitter when everyone was heartsick over Ukraine was bone-headed even for Piers.

  15. Over it says:

    This article makes my blood boil and i am not Harry or Meghan. These tabloids are the definition of pure evil cage lining

  16. Cessily says:

    It is very obviously a personal and full out “hate” campaign against the Sussex’s by the Daily Fails owner and staff I do not understand anyone who can pretend to defend any of it. The entire system is corrupt Patel, Johnson, BRF & rags are all complicit.

  17. Catherine says:

    They are not misreading or misinterpreting the Sussexes motives. They are deliberately misrepresenting them. Painting the Sussexes as litigious and controlling is an attempt to paint the Fail as the victim and the Sussexes as the villains. They want to claim their coverage is simply the result of public interest which they used as a justification for publishing Meghan’s letter and that the negative tone simply reflects public attitudes. But that source said the quiet part out loud. The Mail is on a crusade against the Sussexes. This article IMO is an indication that Harry’s lawsuit has them shook. Constantly during Meghan’s lawsuit there were articles about how unwise it was and that she was just making things worse and she should drop the case. And we saw how that turned out. She didn’t even have to go to trial to win and they were getting help from William. The only question in my mind with this current lawsuit is how quickly will they settle. Just as in his previous defamation case Harry had against them this is clear cut. Their original articles “Harry demands taxpayers pay…..”; “Harry SUES government ……”; “Harry didn’t offer to pay……”; “Harry tried to keep lawsuit secret to deceive…….”. And then last but not least the article that claimed his statement was misleading pr spin. These are all demonstrably false. They have completely backed off all of that since the lawsuit dropped. And the coverage of the latest hearing was very circumspect. They know they have no defense.

  18. Eurydice says:

    The DM isn’t on a crusade against Harry and Meghan – that would imply they want to destroy them. Bashing H&M is part of a business plan that includes the “unspoken contract.” For the DM, Harry and Meghan are the best of several worlds – they are guaranteed money-makers, they are royals who can be bashed with impunity, and bashing them pleases the royal family, which fulfills part of the contract.

    • Charm says:

      @Eurydice said:
      “The DM isn’t on a crusade against Harry and Meghan – that would imply they want to destroy them….”

      I guess you never heard the story about the frog & the scorpion. (google it)

      • Eurydice says:

        I don’t have to Google the story, I know it. But to say that it’s in the DM’s nature to destroy absolves them of their conscious decision to focus negatively on H&M and also ignores the RF’s involvement. For me, the word crusade is a matter of ideology, but I don’t think the DM has any beliefs that are higher than money and kissing royal ass. If there is a crusade, it’s coming from William.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ I’m not certain what your point is @Eurydice. There’s no doubt that the Daily Fail has a careless intent to destroy people. They are only interested in making money off of being peeping Toms against high profile people, and attempting to tarnish and smear people in the public eye by any means. They are used to doing this on a regular basis with impunity because many people they smear and try to defame, aren’t able to launch long term, expensive legal battles.

        Destroying people is the DF’s M.O. After destroying people, they can still write about them endlessly, so again, I’m not sure that what you’re saying is apt. Or else, I’m missing what you’re trying to say.

      • aftershocks says:

        It doesn’t matter @Eurydice, that members of the royal firm are involved in the smearing attacks, as part of the silent contract. Certain royal firm players gave the BM carte blanche to go after Meghan, and then after both Sussexes once they escaped Salty Isle. But the royal firm’s role in the media’s attacks doesn’t negate that the DF is viciously out to destroy people, including M&H.

        You seem to think that somehow the DF wants M&H to continue existing in order to write negative stories about them. I say the DF doesn’t care one way or the other. Playing a role in literally destroying Diana via writing negative crap about her, hasn’t kept the DF from being able to write about her endlessly/ ad infinitum.

  19. naomi says:

    Let’s just admit that under white supremacy it’s never about the money/reimbursement. Money /taxpayer money is used as an excuse or cover for the racism. This whole situation shows that. It doesn’t matter if Harry & Meghan reimburse the police or security. The press & royals don’t actually care about that. What they do want to do is make it is hard as possible for Harry & Meghan to visit, and if/when they do so, to be able to control them as much as possible, dictating what kind of security they do and don’t get. This is a life or death matter.

    anyway: money “concerns” are just a way of covering up racist motivations.

  20. Mslove says:

    Can you imagine having a dirty tabloid constantly printing lies about you so they can make a buck? I’m glad Harry is taking them to court. Also, I hope we see the ravec names. Everyone is sick and tired of the royals being secretive and devious about their true intentions.

  21. Colby says:

    “ the lawsuits are just a business expense”

    This makes me so mad but they’re not wrong. The Mail got so much content out of Meghan’s letter that the lawsuit paid for itself and then some I’m sure. It’s really unfair and frustrating

  22. Justplainme says:

    Harry knows, he just wants the rest of the world to know too.

  23. Likeyoucare says:

    Reveal the names in RAVEC and you will find the royal racist.

  24. Polo says:

    Mark Stephen’s is so full of sh*t and so is Tom Sykes who I assume wrote this story because I refuse to click on Daily Beast. Mark tried to tell us that Meghan would lose her case blah blah and here we are. At least this time they recognized that Harry and Meghan are just fine in the US. They don’t need to “carry” favor in the UK. Will and Kate wouldn’t be so obsessed about the US if them being “popular” in the UK really mattered.
    All this says to me is Harry will win his libel case.
    I noticed that there’s less stories being picked up by US media from the Daily F or the Sun. The fake outrage is now exclusively from a couple of accounts like Piers and Angela..
    and I did notice more random blue ticks noticing the racist, sexist, hateful coverage from the DF.
    Meghan and Harry will keep winning and eventually the invisible contract will be exposed.

  25. Sofia says:

    Royal Household can also mean members of staff as well as royals. I imagine Lord Chamberlain who is the former Director of MI5 (NOT Rose’s husband who’s the Lord *Great* Chamberlain), Private Sec of the monarch and other senior figures are part of RAVEC. And I wonder if Harry *does* know but wants that information public so they can’t hide behind *unnamed sources* and the queen.

  26. JennyJazzhands says:

    Sue em to hell and back.
    Team Sussex

  27. L4Frimaire says:

    It’s obvious the tabloids, especially the Fail, like being sued regularly because they keep lying. They also keep making the issue about them, even when it initially wasn’t. The fact is they can’t quit the Sussexes, forever hold a grudge because they refused to engage with them, left the UK, successfully sued them, and still living their life while still ignoring these trash tabloids. All this, and they still need the Sussexes for the revenue. Stay mad, keep lying and keep getting sued.

  28. serena says:

    “The Mail is on a crusade against Harry and Meghan” and they even admitt it, wow.

  29. Jay says:

    So, one of the reasons they are giving about why it’s “okay” to publish their claims about Harry and Meghan is that the general public is “unlikely to give over much energy” to try to understand the case. Wouldn’t that be a reason to make sure that your reporting is super clear? Maybe they are acknowledging that if they told the truth, they wouldn’t generate hatred, which is their whole profit model.

    And they finally said the quiet part out loud: The lawsuits have not deterred them,they will use them as a way to generate even more copy. I hope the sentencing judge in Harry’s suit takes that into account when considering legal remedies.

    How can Harry and Meghan get one of those super secret injunctions like (some of) Harry’s family has? (Allegedly)

    • Eurydice says:

      The fundamental fallacy is that tabloids are about journalism and reporting the facts. They’re not – they’re about publicity and entertainment. They business model is to engage an audience and, with social media, the #1 way to do that is through anger. Harry and Meghan can’t have an unspoken agreement as does the royal family because they aren’t powerful enough (yet). Right now, their only value to the tabloids is as the villains in the royal fairy tale.

  30. Jaded says:

    I wonder if Cressida Dick sat on Ravec’s board? And Harry’s lawyer, Shaheed Fatima, provided the judge with two letters asking for information on the membership of Ravec, but Home Office claims Harry’s offer of funding his security wasn’t forwarded to Ravec at the time of his visit in June 2021, or in any pre-visit discussions. This is all so murky and underhanded, the orders had to have come from KP and/or CH to *dissuade* them from giving Harry the protection he needed.

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      I also wondered about Cressida Dick. And I’m guessing that the reason Harry’s attorneys are digging into the membership of Ravec is so they can ensure that his requests get forwarded to the right people without them being able to claim ignorance. I think all parties involved know that Harry is likely to succeed if his offer to pay for security gets a fair hearing.

  31. J+ferber says:

    Answer to Harry’s query: it was his father and brother who decided it (while Harry was unaware his family had no protection). I don’t know; it seems more like a Putin move (minus the Polonium) than a British Royal family move. But then, who (and what) are they really?

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ @J+Ferber, M&H knew exactly when security was pulled from Harry. It was after they announced Sussexit. M&H were still on Vancouver Island, and the Canadian government had to pull their security assistance too. M&H told us about this during the Oprah interview, but I guess it’s difficult to keep all the details and timelines clearly sorted.

      Remember how Meghan said she pleaded with the firm not to take security from her husband! If you have access to a replay of that earth-shattering interview, watch it again. They revealed a lot, while being strategic about not revealing everything. I’ll never forget Harry saying he wanted the firm to “call off the dogs” (i.e. the rota clowns).

      The BRF’s aim was to scare Harry into running back. They didn’t and don’t care about Meghan & Archie (nor Lili D).

  32. El says:

    If H&M are essential to the tabloid business model – why were the tabloids stupid enough to chase them out of the country? Now they have to get second hand pickings from the US

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ @El, I think the answer is, as I mentioned earlier, that neither the royal firm, nor the BM have ever understood Prince Harry. They are still unable to fathom how courageous and strong he is in protecting his core loved ones.

      They have no clue regarding Harry’s tough resolve, as a bada$$ soldier, in holding down the fort with everything he’s got!

      As Harry said to Tom Bradby in the S.A. documentary, “Now I have a family to fight for.”

  33. blunt talker says:

    I truly pray and hope that Harry is able to win his case-this invisible contract is a sewer-so if the dm has admitted they are out to get the Sussexes-this should be printed in every respectable news outlet in the world-I too would like to know who sits on this board and made this decision.