Does King Charles ‘regret’ forcing his sons to walk in Diana’s funeral procession?

The Windsors are always whining about how people – mostly dumb Americans – believe The Crown is a documentary, that everything happened exactly that way. You notice that the Windsors don’t say the same thing about Peter Morgan’s script for The Queen, the 2006 film about the week following Princess Diana’s death. Morgan centers the film around QEII’s actions and Tony Blair’s attempts to talk some sense into her, and it ended up being pretty generous towards QEII’s motives overall.

What the film missed out was the palpable anger towards Charles, QEII and the rest of the family for how they treated Diana, and how many people believed (almost immediately) that the Windsors were responsible in one way or another for Diana’s death. What Morgan missed is that the Windsors were f–king terrified, and that’s why they used William and Harry as human shields, making those two grieving boys do a walkabout and talk to people, then forcing them to walk the funeral procession. Harry has spoken a few times about how traumatized he felt about the procession in particular, which happened just days before his 13th birthday. He still blames his father and his family for forcing him to walk behind his mother’s coffin on the world’s stage. But… does Charles have any regrets? I doubt it, but here we go:

A haunting decision. King Charles III deeply regrets making his sons Prince William and Prince Harry process behind Princess Diana‘s casket during her 1997 funeral after learning how much it impacted them.

“I think it haunts him because it haunts them, and they’ve spoken about it,” Christopher Andersen exclusively told Us Weekly on Tuesday, November 1, while speaking about his upcoming biography, The King: The Life of Charles III. “I’ve written that I believe it’s a form of PTSD.” The author added that while researching the book, which hit shelves on November 8, he learned that the Duke of Sussex, 38, has found it “triggering” to fly into London sometimes.

“[He said] it reminds him of that day when he had to walk behind the coffin, and they were more or less bullied into doing it by the palace — by the men in gray who really run the palace, the people that Diana used to complain about,” Andersen said. “[Charles, Earl Spencer], Diana’s brother … has also said that he felt that he was tricked into doing it and regrets it. He said it was like walking through a tunnel of grief.”

The entire experience was particularly upsetting for the Prince of Wales, 40, and his younger brother, who were forced to grieve the loss of their mother in front of thousands of mourners.

“I think both William and Harry thought, ‘Who are these strangers who never met her?’” the writer continued. “So they were angry about what had happened. And Charles, I think, understands that to some extent he was responsible for them having to suffer through [that].”

[From Us Weekly]

Yeah, Andersen has it wrong. Charles has no regrets about it. He did what he had to do to survive that moment in the short-term, which was feeding his grief-stricken sons to the slaughter. He would continue to throw them under the bus for his own convenience and PR whenever he wanted, especially Harry. As much as the Windsors have managed to convince everyone that they had William and Harry’s best interests in mind the moment Diana died, that was not the case. The Windsors just carried on like nothing happened, so much so that Harry had a hard time believing his mother really died. Queen Elizabeth wouldn’t even allow the local church to have a special prayer for Diana. Also: this wasn’t something that the courtiers masterminded, it was all a giant royal f–kup. This was QEII, Philip and Charles using William and Harry to shield themselves from very deserved criticism.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

return home

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

80 Responses to “Does King Charles ‘regret’ forcing his sons to walk in Diana’s funeral procession?”

  1. Nicole says:

    I said it before and I’ll say it again. I will never not believe that the Windsor Family had a hand in Diana’s death in some way.

    • Laura D says:

      I’ve always been on the fence as to regards to whether or not the Windsors had a hand in the “accident”. However, I did raise an eyebrow when in a recent episode of The Crown TQ told Charles that regardless of divorce, he would always be regarded as a married man in the eyes of the church (owtte). As I said I am on the fence but knowing that Charles is now Head of the Church, that scene did make me wonder.

      • Tessa says:

        The church relaxed the rules for Charles and the divorce from Diana was recognized. He could openly date camilla.

      • TheVolvesSeidr says:

        @Tessa, I’m pretty sure the CofE considered Charles a widow once Diana died (even though they were already divorced). I believe this may be true because I was raised in an unusually religious family in a religion very similar to CofE and anyone divorced is considered to be an adulterer if they have another relationship, unless their previous/ex spouse has died. Weird isht but there you go.

      • Tessa says:

        The Volveseidr, If Charles were the “widower” the service for Diana would be a royal service since the “widower” did not divorce her. Charles was not a widower, otherwise Diana would not have lost the HRH. He openly dated Camilla and apparently she lived with him part of the time at Highgrove I recall “widower” Charles spin was floated in the media and then all of a sudden it was not mentioned again. Charles pulled out all the stops to make sure the divorce was legal and he could “see” Camilla. The rules were not strict for Charles otherwise the divorce would not have “counted.” Also, there is Camilla who had a living ex spouse but that was not an impediment for them and they were allowed a Church of England Blessing. Charles could not have it both ways. If he wanted to be a “widower” then he would actually have been “married” to Diana at her death and there would be no question of who would run the funeral plans..Charles hosted an elaborate 50th Birthday Party for Camilla and as a “husband to DIana,” he could not do this he’d be cheating on his wife. Charles got to have his cake and eat it too. He was a divorced person and the Church gave him a “pass” and considered his marriage to DIana legally over. As his “wife,” Diana would not be entitled to the hefty divorce settlement money she got from Charles.

    • Colby says:

      I understand why people believe that, but taking the Occams Razor approach to this…I have seen nothing about the BRF that leads me to believe they or their f*ckwit courtiers are capable enough to pull something like that off.

      • C says:

        Before Harry and Meghan and Harry saying they pulled his security I would have said it was a conspiracy theory. But now I think they were part of it. Probably not to kill her. Possibly to quiet/frighten her. I mean, she literally wrote that she felt her husband was planning to cause an accident with her car and then she died in an accident..? A lot of Charles’s “emotionally disturbed” narrative has helped steamroll the very real fears Diana had before her death. Perhaps the senior royals weren’t directly involved but courtiers were quite possibly. Or, it was more tabloid action, but the royals were leaking and cooperating with them too, so, yeah.
        A lot of the evidence doesn’t add up.
        And as we have found with the royal involvement in many areas of corruption, it’s not so much a question of pulling it off but who is willing to protect them.

      • Jan90067 says:

        But MI5/6 are. All it would take is one word from “up high” to make it happen.

      • Mtl.Ex.Pat says:

        @colby – yeah, she was killed by a drunk driver trying to navigate Paris downtown and swarming paparazzi. Did certain decisions -including her own & Dodi’s – about her security contribute to putting her in that situation, sure. But at the end of the day she was killed by a drunk driver imo. She might have survived had she been wearing a seatbelt since her bodyguard – the only survivor – was wearing one. The answer is sometimes the obvious. But sure, conspiracy theories will always swarm around this.

    • Cessily says:

      I agree…

    • DeepFriedDallasite says:

      Me too, well actually I believe Charles did it on his own and TQ and Phillip were informed later. Diana was a pain in Liz’s butt but I think she was just trying to avoid having to deal with her as much as possible. Directly or indirectly. As far as Chucky was concerned (and still to today), Diana was a detriment to his future that he had to deal with. He wouldn’t be the first royal who wanted a woman who outshone him dead.

      • Sugarhere says:

        The idea behind the Diana hindrance being dealt with once and for all first came about in the minds of Philip and Charles. The organizational part of the plan was then carried out by British intelligence services, with the collaboration of their French intelligence counterparts. The whole idea was to relocate the “accident” out of England, so as to dispel suspicions directly involving the Royals.

        The paparazzis thus became the ideal scapegoats, the driver the fall man. The Queen was certainly aware of everything and gave her seal of approval, asking to be spared the particulars, hence her disconnect with the people’s grief.

    • JanetDR says:

      When it seemed like she might be marrying a man who wasn’t European, my first thought was they will kill her before they would let the boys have a stepfather of color.

  2. CultureCannibal says:

    He is and was a horrible parent and a horrible man. Always was. Always will be. In perpetuity.

  3. JCallas says:

    This is just another attempt to soften Charles The Cruel’s Image.

  4. Vanessa says:

    Charles doesn’t regret anything Harry and William we’re literally used as human shields bodyguards to protect him . It amazing how Charles complain so much about how his parents were awful to him yet he turn around did the most damage to Harry allowing the press to abuse Harry and Meghan their children.

  5. Eleonor says:

    Losing a parent is a trauma.
    I lost my father last year at the age of 40, and I am still recovering. It took me months just for saying “my father is dead”.
    I can’t imagine going through all of that, on the world stage at THAT age.

  6. Becks1 says:

    I’m sure he regrets nothing. He used his sons to protect himself and he’s been doing it consistently since then.

    • Lucy says:

      He used them in such a selfish and ghoulish way. It’s clear that Harry was irreparably harmed by her death and what followed, and so much of that lies squarely at Chucks feet.

    • Lady D says:

      Your post makes me think that in about ten years, William will be in front of cameras calling his father paranoid and delusional. I will lmao.

      • lanne says:

        Or he’ll be calling Louis paranoid and delusional in 20 years. Or maybe Charlotte if she doesn’t turn out according to plan.

  7. Nicegirl says:

    Sure doesn’t seem like the actions of regret to me from sweet Papa Chuck.

    So much blame onto the Sussexes, heavily burdening harassment of Meghan, myriad penalties to Harry for loving 🥰, leaving, speaking, breathing, creating life, surviving. He was the pos that was POW when Diana passed, he’s the head of household and the ceo of the dang firm now as KCtrios – like he could’ve and should’ve been his son’s main support the entire time but he never stands up for his youngest, he’s the one driving the big ass London double decker bus 🚌 deal over Harry.

    He may know regret someday soon tho. What’s that saying about the chickens 🐓 coming home 🏠 to roost? Maybe like when Thanos pulls a Mimi and ‘doesn’t know’ Wanda/Scarlet Witch high key level know regret but what do I know. What a terrible excuse for a father.

  8. Noki says:

    Do we think that had William and Harry been left out of the procession the crowds would have truly booed? Yes I’m sure the odd heckler would have tried it but I think it was all so heavy and unnecessary for these young boys.

    • Tessa says:

      I believe Charles would have been booed. He was when he accompanied Diana’s sisters to France. One spectator thought Sarah Spencer was Camilla and made angry comments. There were comments like what’s he doing there

    • Mtl.Ex.Pat says:

      @noki – yes. I think the BRF thought there would’ve been booing and I think there would have been. The hostility towards the BRF was palpable at the time. And Earl Spencer was no better (serial cheater who turned his back on Diana when she was still alive and then once she was dead tried to profit by painting himself as her greatest ally)

  9. Allison says:

    If he were a decent person, I’m sure he’d regret it. But he’s not so he probably doesn’t

  10. Amy Bee says:

    Yeah Charles has no regrets and it would seem that all Andersen’s research comes from what Harry has said about the situation.

  11. Nicolez says:

    I’ve never met or heard of any perfect parents. It’s easy to judge what Charles did 25 years ago and condemn him for it.

    Whatever else Charles did in his life, I seriously doubt that he intentionally tried to damage William and Harry at Diana’s funeral.

    • Eurydice says:

      I don’t know, this seems to be a bigger thing than just not being a perfect parent and it’s not a question of being intentional. Diana’s funeral was a gigantic world-wide orgy of grief. Sure, he let others manage the process (I was grateful to let the military handle my father’s funeral) but that didn’t relieve him of his responsibility to his children. He didn’t look out for them at the most important time of their lives – that’s not imperfect parenting; it’s a gigantic failure. And if he says now that he deeply regrets and is haunted by his failure, it’s not up to us to absolve him.

    • Blithe says:

      Just adding here that some of us — even some of us who were children at the time — judged Charles and the BRF and condemned them for using William and Harry in such an excruciatingly exploitive public way to deflect criticism from themselves.

    • Becks1 says:

      I mean there’s not being a perfect parent and then there’s making your children walk behind their mother’s coffin in front of thousands of people (in person, millions more on TV) in order to protect yourself from being booed.

      • lanne says:

        They have shown, over and over, that they are not a normal family. The Crown is more important than family. Their love is conditional and transactional. Not perfect parent is a ridiculous strawman claim. They are a fundamentally toxic and self-serving institution before they are a family.

    • Yvette says:

      @Nicolez … I came here to say the same. I recall from the time of Diana’s funeral that it was Prince Phillip who had insisted the boys should walk behind their mother’s coffin. That royal protocol is fine in general, but these were young boys who had just lost their mother in an extremely tragic accident and they shouldn’t have been forced to endure it.

      Charles should have stood up for his boys, but he’d been cowed by his father his entire life. Phillip was still every much in control of family affairs at the time and none of the Windsors, not even Anne (probably not even the Queen), could stand up to his bully whip.

      Not making excuses for Charles. Just saying he may not have had a choice in the matter.

      • Tessa says:

        He cannot stand up for harry and meghan and their children and Philip had nothing to do with that. Charles is a bad father. It was not that long after the funeral that he neglected harry and even scapegoats him to protect William

      • twoz says:

        That’s interesting, I remember from that time that it was Charles Spencer who first said he was going to walk behind Diana’s coffin and the RF/courtiers said very shortly afterward that the Princes would walk behind in that case – they weren’t going to have the Earl Spencer upstage them.
        I think it was announced then that Phillip would join them, then Charles last of all.

    • C says:

      It’s easy to judge and condemn him because it was a betrayal on a scale you and I will never experience. Her sons were exposed like meat to the entire world and he was fine with it. And you know why it’s easy to still blame him? His actions toward Harry continually show he feels he has nothing to apologize for in regards to how he’s treated his second son.
      I’ve had to do a lot of therapy to come to terms with my parents and there is absolutely no guidebook for raising kids and most of us are messed up anyway so I can forgive them. But this was a moment beyond anything anyone here can ever have experienced because of how internationally massive this was.
      This is one of those moments where “we’re all human” is not enough to erase how horrible it is.
      And Yvette – this wasn’t protocol. This was something *they made up* for the funeral to protect Charles. They broke protocol in the first place by even having a royal observation of Diana’s death which the Queen was FORCED into.

    • teecee says:

      I don’t think he tried to damage them, because I don’t think he thought about them at all. Only himself. And that’s a much bigger failing for a parent, to prioritize your own wellbeing ahead of your children’s – even worse, to not even consider their wellbeing at all! Particularly in that moment, when their mother had just died.

    • Cerys says:

      @Nicolez, I tend to agree with you. I thought at the time that it was a dreadful thing to do to 2 grieving boys but Charles is the product of a very strange and formal upbringing. It probably felt right to him for William and Harry to follow their mother’s coffin. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, he may well regret that decision especially when he has seen the emotional trauma it caused to his sons.

      • C says:

        He very clearly does not give a shit and never did.

      • Carrie says:

        Ok it might have felt right to him to have the misguided notion that walking behind the coffin was somehow honouring their mother. But the walkabout when they looked at the flowers outside the Place??? That was horrendous for W & H. Human shields. All to save Tampon 111 and the Queen from being boo’d.

    • Lucy says:

      “Whatever else Charles did in his life, I seriously doubt that he intentionally tried to damage William and Harry at Diana’s funeral.”

      Babe…that’s entirely the point. He didn’t think about how this would affect them at all. He never has. And yep, I judge the f*ck out of him for that. You don’t have to be a “perfect parent” but you should at least TRY to be a decent one. He’s pathetic.

    • TheVolvesSeidr says:

      “Whatever else Charles did in his life, I seriously doubt that he intentionally tried to damage William and Harry at Diana’s funeral.”

      I honestly don’t think what William and Harry were feeling or what they wanted even entered into KC3’s thoughts at that time. Or ever.

    • Emily_C says:

      *He did not care.*

      Intentionally damage? Probably not. But he did not care if he hurt them. Charles has never cared about anyone but himself. He’s a thoroughly abusive, self-pitying, totally self-absorbed pos.

  12. Eurydice says:

    Even if he regrets it, so what? And in a couple of years he’ll be “regretting” how he treated Harry and Meghan. Talk is cheap.

  13. Mrs. CP says:

    The way things have turned out, I’m so happy Harry took his family and left, seeking happier days elsewhere.

  14. Zazzoo says:

    Watching the Queen was honestly the first time I saw her as human and considered the possibility she hadn’t put a hit in Diana. I no longer believe the RF was involved but their legacy is inextricably linked to the tragedy. A movie called The Queen was as much about Diana as Liz. And that will always be the case. They live and die in her shadow.

    • Kingston says:

      @Zazoo says
      “I no longer believe the RF was involved but their legacy is inextricably linked to the tragedy…”

      THIS^ is what the RF wants, hopes for and expects from their sycophantic subjects, as well as from gullible people who are willing to give them the benefit of doubt: they want, hope for and expect folks to buy into their worldview, their perspective, their POV………rmbr: history is written by the victors.

      Poor Diana is dead. But via means that none of us understands:………divine inspiration? providence? educated guess?……… she DID say with her own written words, that CHARLES IS PLANNING AN ACCIDENT FOR ME IN MY CAR!!!!

      And as we say in my neck of the woods: SO SAID, SO DONE!

      I need no more evidence than that, to be able to believe that indeed, charles/the RF/the Royal and UK Secret Service had a hand in Diana’s death. With plausible deniability available to them all.

      PS:
      The snr courtier who was private secretary to the monarch (betty’s dad and then betty) as portrayed by the actor who plays him in The Crown, seems to have been quite a formidable fellow who made no secret of the fact that HE was in charge of what the monarch says, does, believes……as well as everyone who impacts the monarch, inside or outside palace walls.

      His role in the monarch’s and RF’s life has been well concealed. I believe Edward Young plays a similar role in modern times but he allowed his head to get above the parapet which is why we even know his name and, with Prince Harry naming him in court papers, we also now have just an inkling of what he has done and is capable of doing.

    • Lucy says:

      We will be talking about Diana forever, much like Anne Boleyn. They will never escape what they did to her, and they shouldn’t.

  15. Brassy Rebel says:

    Charles certainly urged them to walk. I have also heard that Philip was a big factor in the pressure campaign. And Philip never gave much thought to anyone’s emotional well being. He, no doubt, thought it would make “men” out of them. This is the same thinking that made him insist that Charles attend Gordonstoun. He was always trying to “toughen up” young boys when what they needed was unconditional love.

    • Zazzoo says:

      Philip was toxic masculinity personified. I suppose he was told to be stoic and strong throughout his own difficult youth but once in the lap of luxury and fineries he could’ve relaxed a bit. Hit up an ashram like posh Brits do.

    • Nic919 says:

      Both Charles and Philip were behind the decision for the two boys to walk the procession. Charles certainly deserves some blame but Philip saying he would walk with them as well for support certainly played a role.

      • aftershocks says:

        I’d heard that Philip was not behind the decision, and had voiced that the boys shouldn’t be forced. There was lots of arguing for and against. Ultimately, Philip offered to walk with the boys in order to be supportive to his grandsons, after his views on the situation were not considered.

  16. SueBarbri33 says:

    Nothing he’s said or done in the last 25 years has indicated that he’s regretted any of this. It’s quite remarkable, really. If he’d been a little more kind and gracious about Diana down through the years, perhaps he would be a little more popular now. I never met the woman and wasn’t a particular fan while she was alive, but I was utterly shocked by the way she died. Still am. But he and Camilla immediately moved straight on. They viewed Diana as a problem to be solved and they are callous enough to view her death as a satisfactory ending and treated the whole thing with a shrug. I heard a rumor yesterday that Camilla was wearing the jewels Charles gave Diana for their engagement this week. Unbelievable.

  17. Liz Version 700k says:

    They don’t like me Uugh say words now! Nothing that comes out of his mouth means anything. I think that is Camilla’s secret, she just placidly agrees with him no matter what he says knowing it will be different in an hour. He has no soul and suffered no actual moral consequence of anything. But he hates to be disliked…say more words!!!!

    • Tessa says:

      IMO there was and is nothing “placid” about Camilla. She is calculating and not a doormat to Charles. She got to keep Raymill and can escape there on an as needed basis.

  18. Janey says:

    regret – whatever that means, eh Charles?

  19. Beverley says:

    Charles regrets nothing. I have no idea if the Windsors orchestrated Diana’s fatal accident, but I’ll bet Charles was tickled pink when she died.

  20. Visa Diva says:

    I wonder what the story would have been if they hadn’t walked in the procession? The public outpouring of grief was so shockingly large and there was a possessiveness to it, that Diana belonged to the public. I wonder if hadn’t walked if the story would’ve been “the Windsors are trying to keep the sons of the People’s Princess away from us (the public).”

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Visa Diva, wow, I can’t imagine any parent thinking that way. I’m not a parent and I definitely don’t think that way. I believe people would have understood that the boys were really grief stricken and not up for public consumption. I’m sure there would have been photos of the boys at the service or whatever and that’s the only thing that should have happened IF THAT. It was 1997 for heaven’s sake.

    • Lucy says:

      Diana would have wanted those boys loved and protected, not paraded around for PR. They were *children* who owed us nothing.

  21. what's inside says:

    Charles is a selfish man-child and only considers his future. Diana will always be inextricably a part of his past, his present and his future, all of the mistakes he made.

  22. Cobra says:

    I still vividly remember that photo, Harry walking in the procession slightly disheveled. My heart broke for him. I felt bad for William too.. but Harry was so young. As a mother now, It hurts more whenever I think about it.. I’ll always have a soft corner for Harry in my heart, I wish him peace. Looks like he has that now, I am so glad. I am tearing up now thinking about it..

    • lanne says:

      I watched that procession in college. I remember the British public in the days before pawing at the boys and shouting at them in their grief, as if they were actual relatives of the boys. It made me deeply uncomfortble to watch. I suppose it’s no surprise that a public would have a parasocial relationship with a royal family, but it struck me as deeply inapporpriate the way the boys were forced to perform their grief to utter strangers. Its even more inappropriate that the same public thought they had a right to intervene in their personal lives. It’s sad to me that no one in that family thought of the boys as children grieving their mother. They were tools to be used by the royal family as the RF saw fit.

      Honestly, that’s why I think the royal family needs to be diminished, or even dismantled. No children should go through what William and Harry did. No children should have to face what the Wales kids are facing with the access that social media provides. No wealth is worth it. It’s an unhealthy place to be a child. That’sbeen true for generations now.

  23. ecsmom says:

    I am 2 years older than Diana and I remember all of this happening in real time. But I was more naïve, so I didn’t suspect fowl play. It was just a horrible tragedy. What I do remember and it’s seared into my brain was Charles being asked about the boys behavior after walking behind their mother’s coffin. He was positively giddy with pride that they were, idk, able to hold a stiff upper lip. As an American I was horrified that this solemn moment was interrupted with his happiness over his boys behavior. Not their emotional state, not their well-being, not the horribleness of what happened. I brushed it off as this is a British thing because holding in strong emotions is part of the trademark of UK, keep calm and carry on, etc. In hindsight it really wasn’t a British thing, it was a narcissistic response to his own happiness/agenda. He needed them and they performed.

    I was shocked at that response to the point I still vividly remember his giddiness all these years later.

  24. Mary S says:

    I am most bothered by KC3’s apparent desire to inflict suffering on Diana and now on Harry & his family. I believe Diana would have known no peace had she survived. I believe Harry & his family will forever suffer the harassment of KC3, PW, the Firm, the UK-Australian media & the monarchists, unless someone or something intervenes to put an end to it. I fear for A&L.

  25. Jay says:

    Charles made his boys into his own personal human shields on the occasion of their mother’s funeral, and the only reason we are hearing about his supposed regret is that he’s afraid of what Harry might say in his book.

    He’s trying to get out in front of it and heap all the blame on the courtiers. Charles can’t even pretend he gets why it was such a traumatizing experience for his sons or say what he would do differently. No accountability and no apology.

  26. Flowerlake says:

    Yeah, I was a teenager and not even from the UK, but I remember people thinking the family was mean to her a lot.

    It wasn’t just about the response after she passed but about what happened before too that made people dislike them.

  27. Ray Camiscioli says:

    I had read that the whole idea of walking behind the casket was Earl Spencer’s and that Charles was afraid to do so because of the danger that he’d be shot, heckled, or hit with flying produce. Again, from books published in the past, the earl was supposedly adamant about walking, even if it meant walking alone. Next, Princes Philip and Charles capitulated, agreed to walk, and Philip talked William into walking, too. Sigh. I think the Queen’s initial idea, as depicted in the Mirren movie, was correct: a private funeral and burial service attended only by the Spencer and Windsor families, followed by a public memorial service a month later at St. Paul’s or the Abbey. Her mistake was not coming back to London right after the accident and making the speech that she eventually made on the eve of the funeral, and explaining that her decision was based entirely on protecting the boys. Period, full stop

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ I’m not sure where you heard that @Ray. To my knowledge, Earl Spencer was adamantly against his nephews walking behind their mother’s coffin. The Earl argued against them being forced to do so. He was not at peace with the outcome, yet still managed to deliver a powerful, no-holds-barred, uplifting tribute to his sister, Diana, The People’s Princess: “… the unique, the complex, the extraordinary and irreplaceable Diana…”

      “Full Transcript of Princess Diana Eulogy – Earl Spencer’s Eulogy for Princess Diana” https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a10350548/princess-diana-brother-eulogy/

    • aftershocks says:

      @Ray, the Queen’s decisions and omissions after Diana’s death truly had little to do with protecting William & Harry. That’s just been used as the excuse for her actions. Diana’s death was not even acknowledged at the Balmoral church service, which confused Harry, as he has related.

    • ChattyCath says:

      I found those crowds pawing at two grief stricken boys as if they were entertainment the most disgusting thing I have ever seen. People had lost all sense of decorum and reason. I do blame the BM for this. Front pages, pictures of Diana’s home surrounded in flowers, TV personalities getting in on the act.

    • Tessa says:

      The queen imo was out of touch regarding Diana. From the get go.

  28. Emily_C says:

    Charles has never regretted anything he’s done in his entire life. Anything that happens to him that he doesn’t like, he blames on other people. He sees himself as perfect, and as the most put-upon, pitiable person who has ever existed.

  29. Feebee says:

    Absolutely the boys were used as human shields not just for Charles but The Queen also. Philip’s hand in it saw to that. There’s no regrets. Regrets may lead to examination of the behaviour, what caused it to happen etc and that certainly couldn’t be allowed to happen.

    Charles Spencer claimed he felt he was tricked into walking? Wasn’t he also tricked by Bashir? Was he also tricked into slagging off Diana recently with Charles and William? Thankfully Harry has his Aunties. Not Anne obviously.

  30. QuiteContrary says:

    It would take having an actual conscience for Charles to feel regret about the torment he put his sons through. But the Tampax King doesn’t have a conscience.

    He’s a terrible person.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment