The Sussexes are ‘rankled’ by the palace calling them ‘private citizens’

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were “surprised” by Buckingham Palace’s clarification letter about their (lack of) royal status, their HRH abeyance and the fact that they are not working royals or backdoor half-in royals. Since BP’s letter was released, the Sussexes’ spox issued the “surprised” statement and then Team Sussex has made a huge deal over the timeline of the statement and when they were informed and why they were not allowed to give input on the statement. From the outside looking in, it seems like Prince Harry and Meghan are surprised that the Humiliation Factory only manufactures humiliations. I really don’t know what they told themselves about how this move would go down, but their surprise is the most surprising thing to me. Speaking of, the Telegraph got yet another briefing from Team Sussex and there’s some fascinating insight into the Sussexes’ mindset.

On the face of it, it is a rather unremarkable letter. The Lord Chamberlain, head of the royal household, simply sets out what we already know: that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are no longer working members of the Royal family, that they cannot use their HRH titles and are no longer represented by Buckingham Palace. But of course, things are never that simple when it comes to Prince Harry and Meghan.

The letter, sent to “key stakeholders” such as government officials, military figures and Lords Lieutenant, has only served to highlight the bitter tensions and distrust between the couple and the Palace courtiers they loathe. There is no doubt that the Duke and Duchess were taken entirely off guard when their office received this missive about their status on Monday. There was also no doubt that they were not remotely happy about it.

First, the timing. As it happens – coincidentally, the Palace insists – this seemingly innocuous email was shared just before a meeting that could determine whether or not the Sussexes are given police protection. The all-important Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) meeting, scheduled to take place this week, marks the climax of a deeply personal battle that Prince Harry has fought for more than six years.

The Home Office committee will discuss the findings of a risk assessment conducted in July. It will then decide whether the current threat level justifies a change in tack, whether the King’s younger son and his family should now be entitled to some form of taxpayer-funded police protection, or whether another risk assessment should be conducted now they are on UK soil.

The Duke is convinced that his protection was withdrawn as some kind of punishment for quitting royal duties. It is hard to overestimate what this decision means to him, wrapped up as it is in layers of personal trauma concerning the death of his mother, his relationship with his father and his status within his family and the wider institution. It is no secret that the Duke does not trust the courtiers who work for the royal household. He does not like Sir Clive Alderton, the King’s private secretary, who sits on Ravec, and who, he is convinced, has been a key player in the decision to deny him security.

It is unsurprising then that the timing of this letter, this punchy reminder that he and his wife are “private citizens” and should be treated as such, has raised eyebrows. The very term rankles. If they were truly private citizens, such formal guidance would not be necessary, or so the argument goes. The Duke remains the King’s son, and they are therefore public figures who cannot conduct normal lives. The language, as always, is key. And there is little room for nuance.

This is not a quick note dashed out on a whim. It is a carefully considered document intended to set the tone for the couple’s work and status in the UK. The letter will be widely interpreted as a shot across the bow, a warning to Prince Harry and Meghan that they have made their bed and they must lie in it. They should not, it suggests, benefit from public funds and other “courtesies” from the state.

The Duke’s spokesman admitted they had been taken aback when it landed in their inboxes. “We were a little surprised to not have been told about this in advance,” he said. The suggestion that they should have been consulted prompted guffaws at the Palace. But within Camp Sussex, no one was laughing.

The letter is the first official communication from the royal household about Harry and Meghan’s return from the United States. It may seem innocuous. But whatever the truth about its timing, it demonstrates just how far apart these two branches of the House of Windsor remain.

[From The Telegraph]

The most generous thing I can say is that there’s nuance on both sides of this situation. The Windsors are justifiably worried about the Sussexes in their backyard, stealing royal thunder and becoming the main characters of every royal story. The clarifying statement was an effort from the Windsors to say “actually, we’re not involved with the Sussex circus, they’re on their own.” Which, let’s be fair, has been the Windsors’ message for years. Harry and Meghan clearly believe that things have changed because of their move, that Harry cannot help the fact that he’s the king’s son, and that the situation needs to be handled differently, with conversations rather than clarifications and conventions. Harry is right that things have changed. But the palace has never backed down from their immovable stance either, you know?


.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

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

83 Responses to “The Sussexes are ‘rankled’ by the palace calling them ‘private citizens’”

  1. Brassy Rebel says:

    “The Humiliation Factory only manufactures humiliations.” There you go again! You really do need to trademark these truth bombs. I will just say that I don’t lump Meghan in with Harry. I think she’s trying to keep her family together and the only way to do that right now is to placate Harry who, as I keep saying, is a Windsor male. I hope for the best for her because she deserves so much better than she is getting from her husband atp. And, yes, I know she is a strong woman with agency. Strong women have less than perfect husbands too.

    • Mightymolly says:

      “Strong women have less perfect husbands too”. X100000 !! And mid life crisis is no joke for men. It just hit me that might be what’s happening here.

    • ChillinginDC says:

      I think he’s arrogant enough to believe he could come back and have things on his terms. The fact that the Palace was like do not reach out to coordinate their security and let other countries know is again them saying, hey you are on your own, deal with it. After not being allowed to stay at the Palace and only allowed an hour tea with the man, Harry needs to get his head out of his butt.

      • Androsoul says:

        But why should Harry give into this unfair treatment, just give up his citizenship and rights?

      • ChillinginDC says:

        It’s not given up his citizenship, it’s just looking eyes wide open on what his and his family’s reality will be in England. And I don’t agree that Charles shouldn’t just pay for their security, but he won’t do it so at this point, Harry needs to just accept either he pays for everything and knows that he won’t get the full security apparatus he needs to protect his family and leave, or stay and just do it in order to prove some larger no one cares point.

    • ABCD says:

      Thanks! I have been saying for years that Harry is more of a Windsor prince then his fans want to believe. Harry couldn’t truly support Meghan from the start and so many of her struggles are based on this
      Even when they left England, Meghan had to literally call a stranger for help because her royal, millionaire husband wasn’t able to act like an adult.

      • FloridaWoman says:

        So — this isn’t me turning on Prince Harry. I adore him for his work with Invictus and am extremely happy that he’s doing his damndest to be a good human.

        That being said, remember the story he wrote in Spare about Archie’s birth? He sat there next to Meghan SLOWLY TAKING ALL HER NITROUS OXIDE. until it was done. He seriously drugged himself up on nitrous during Archie’s birth. Then he says, very ashamed, “Next time I vow to be mentally present for the birth.”

        Meghan is tough and no-nonsense, but she loves him, which does tend to make people lose some of their braincells — she likely gives him rope and then gives him some tough love. I can see her hand in him saying, “OK, i won’t do that again!”

        And this. I have a strong feeling it’s Meghan saying, “OK, let’s let him see exactly how this plays out.” And when it fails, she’s like, “time to return to the sane state of Cali, where are kids are going to rub shoulders with so many famous people’s kids that they’ll be treated like normal humans.”

        I feel like tiny royals can still be excellently educated without having to learn orders of precedence for who goes into the cafeteria first.

      • Meredith says:

        The whole story about the palace determining Meghan could not get psych treatment put me off Harry quite a bit. They are rich and shouldn’t have needed to ask anyone for permission to get medical treatment, so why did they ask and defer to the answer? I’m just a regular person but would have gotten my spouse treatment and answered any questions that arose from their employer later (but realistically never if I paid out of pocket, because they’d never know).

      • GoodWitchGlenda says:

        Very this. I’m sorry, but Harry was raised as practically a demigod as a member of the Royal family. While I love that he served in the military and devotes himself now to veterans via the Invictus games, let’s not pretend that life was not served to him on a silver and diamond tray in a way that we could never imagine. His entitlement is likely off the charts. Additionally, it was clear they never *wanted* to leave the Royal family, they just wanted Megan to be treated better. He never really wanted to leave his life there. He just felt like he had to. There’s a pretty big difference and I think we’re seeing the consequences of that difference now

  2. maisie says:

    this whole mess is so so so baffling to me. Why are they in England? WHY? why would Meghan willingly put her children under the jurisdiction of the Crown? why would she return to live in a place where she and her kids would be subjected to this? If their marriage was faltering this surely seems the way to end it, and not in a manner that will be in any way to her benefit.

    this is all going to end in tears.

    • sunniside up says:

      In Britain the King is legally Archie’s guardian, and when the King dies William will become the guardian of both the children. William does not have their wellbeing within his interests. I wonder if he could actually stop the children leaving before they are 18.

      • Bailey S says:

        I don’t believe that is entirely true. The original rule from King George I was about grandfather’s rights…it never said anything about the uncles etc. Also I believe in the 80’s there was a law passed in the UK that applies to everyone including royals that states custody is with the parents.

        As for why they moved back, I’m sure they have their reasons. I also don’t think they were surprised that the palace called them private citizens (I mean that’s what they call themselves). Unless Charles had told them something different at one point.

      • Gtwiecz says:

        This is total BS. Do you really think this would play well in modern times? Harry and Meghan would never let this happen.

      • Siri says:

        That is not true. The King IS NOT the legal guardian of Archie and Lili. I don’t know why that lie keeps being repeated. That rule has already been superseded by modern law.

    • DouchesOfCambridge says:

      I agree. It’s gonna end badly. I am hoping for the best for both of them and their family. The reports for all sides are coming out of nowhere, I’m not sure what they want or what the real purpose of being in the UK.
      But from Buckingham palace, it’s now clear they’re royal private citizens with public lives, why would they be blindsided by this. They are exactly that since march 2020.

  3. Mads says:

    My take on this statement has changed to seeing it as something quite sinister rather than stating the obvious.

    The 2020 statement was an acknowledgment that the Sussexes were stepping back but still “much loved members of the family” because the institution was planning on them having to return; the statement afforded them some protection and allowed Harry to maintain access to government officials, military staff and still be acknowledged as members of the royal family when travelling overseas for Invictus and charitable purposes; that status has been publicly stripped away.

    The Lord Chamberlain’s statement on behalf of the King is giving official notice to the Establishment, other countries and the media that Harry and Meghan are 100% on their own and not even considered royal adjacent. Harry is going to find himself in a similar situation to that of his mother after her divorce: access blocked and things becoming more difficult.

    The irony is that Harry has played into Charles and the institution’s hands by moving back to the UK and handing them a reason to issue the statement and effectively exile him from being a royal (I know it sounds ludicrous but that’s how the system works); if they had stayed in the US this wouldn’t have happened. I expect Letter Patent to be issued before the end of the year.

    Harry needs to wake up leave this pit of vipers and return to their US support network rather than stay and be further humiliated, because that’s the future here unfortunately.

    • ChillinginDC says:

      Agree with you 100. They have effectively boxed them in and how many countries are going to want to start some mess with the UK right now over this? I just again am baffled that they played this all wrong. I wonder if that’s why some of their people quit? Because I bet some of them were like this is a bad idea/call and just got ignored.

    • Gtwiecz says:

      I think the meeting with Charlie and Camilla and the Suxesses and their children went very well. Harry thought he had a father again. But nope, Charles is the scorpion. He will bite his own son across the river. Such is the royal brainwash these people get. Anything for the heir and the medieval institution.

      There’s a lot of sociopathy in that Hapsburg Saxe Gotha bloodline. Both Charles and William are sociopaths. Kate only survived in the Firm because Carole played the game well and both women have damning proof against William that would make him have to resign. Harry is not a sociopath, thanks to Diana. He’s sentimental, and it’s hard for him to admit his father does not care for him at all.

      I hope Harry stops any attempt to see that non-father. Chuck got that visit he needed to clean up his image. Harry and Meghan really need to stay away from those cold blooded vipers and live their lives like any wealthy family.

      • Noteworthy says:

        I think that’s exactly what they are doing. Why should Harry a british veteran be exiled from his own country because he stepped down. Why should he give up everything he has built for himself because of the insecurity of others. I would be different if they had left them alone the past 6 years but they didn’t.

  4. Sigh says:

    I may believe a Sussex spokesperson from their UK office said they were surprised a letter was released. But now ithe British media with all these “sources”.
    They just waiting for Harry to speak and then complain he can’t keep family matters private.

    • HandforthParish says:

      Well, the latest is that they are annoyed at being deemed ‘private citizens’ and want to be referred to as ‘public figures’ (which in itself, doesn’t mean anything official in terms of special treatment).
      This is apparently coming from their camp, according to the press.

      Regardless of what really happened, the optics are not good for them right now. I feel they have been played.

      • M says:

        They played themselves by walking straight into the vipers’ nest. I guess Harry thought proximity and grandkids would change things, but Charles never gave a damn about his own children, so why would he start now? It’s the stupidest thing they could have done. Trade your peace for this mess? Dumb.

  5. Mumster says:

    At first, when I saw the story, I was like “they just need to stop with the fake outrage. They are not working royals. They are private citizens. Like they wanted. The statement just confirms that.” But seeing the explanation about the timing and the full name of the committee (royalty and vip ex committee), I can see that it was meant to throw a wrench in the deliberations of the committee. If he’s a private person, he doesn’t need private security. But why wouldn’t he fit into the “VIP” part of it? At the end of the day, he is still the king’s son and his kids are the reigning monarch’s grandkids. They could be valuable to some nefarious characters.

    • Mumster says:

      *public/taxpayer-funded security

    • ChillinginDC says:

      It would have to be taxpayer funded and if you have so much money as you claim, why come back to a place that is going to have to pay for your security and which you know is going to rile up public sentiment against your wife and kids?

      • Androsoul says:

        Because he is entitled to it other people lower security risk, and even lower ranking get government funded security (Salman Rushdie still gets security, as does Prince Andrew)

      • Happy1 says:

        Harry can’t have proper security unless it comes via RAVEC. Harry’s personal security team *cannot be armed* in UK. Harry HAS requested to pay for the proper security, LIKE TAYLOR SWIFT OTHER CELEBS ET AL. But for some reason, that’s not acceptable to allow Harry to pay for proper security in his HOME country.

        Hope that helps explain this for you.

      • ChillinginDC says:

        Who are you talking to? I know that. I am pointing out that it doesn’t matter if he gets RAVEC in the end since the next talking point that will go on for ages is how much this is costing the UK citizens. And I have already seen in a ton of places, not the DM, no one wants to pay for them. I think him doing this and arguing for something that is going to cause bad feelings for the citizens of the country he claims to love so much and wants to be of service to would have him rethinking doing this right now with the UK is going through a cost of living crisis.

      • Noteworthy says:

        Because he is british, his kids are british and he wants them to know his homeland. I would not give up so easily. He’s in the UK now with autonomy. He makes his own decisions and goes where he wants and does what he likes just like everyone else.

      • Darkwing Duck says:

        I am British and I’m not a fan of the couple, although I do have a lot of sympathy for them and want for them to be happy and safe. my lack of devotion has in the past had me getting flack on here. Now it seems I’m less blase than most, crazy times indeed. I mean I’ve got to take a second really to reflect on how there was a time when it was article of faith that Harry would never come back , would never speak to his Dad unless there was an apology to Meghan, knew what he was doing and never made mistakes… Admittedly I had also thought the security was non-negotiable…

        We are going through a cost of living crisis and doubling the amount of money we spend on the Royal Family? I wrote a letter to my supposedly leftwing MP asking them to oppose this increase and they simply responded with guff about how they heard me and were doing their very best but not going to stop it and not explaining how it was in any way necesary. I’m one of thousands who did this – ‘oh well, what can you do?’ was the response.

        This is about what people are being given permission to care about, and the targets they are provided to channel their very selective outrage towards – – not what actually justifies concern? The British public, by and large, despise ex PMs Tony Blair and Liz Truss but they will both get security without comment for the rest of their lives (and Truss a pension) because the newspapers and the TV shows DON’T KEEP DRIVELING ON ABOUT IT?

        Harry’s misfortune is not just to do with his awful father (who invited Camilla’s Son-In-Law  along for the state dinner in Washington which was all readily swallowed if noted at all. How did you feel about that, by the way, in a cost of living crisis? The US Taxpayer would have footed the bill, after all…? We have always known that if you say that part of your constitution rests on a family that’s codifying and embedding nepotism and we have chosen this, claiming it’s more ‘stable’! Americans are well on the way to the same, with Kennedys and Trumps… and did anyone say that RFK Jr should give back his title ie his last name, because he basically stands for the opposite of his family? Not understanding these things is very deliberate choice people make IMO) as much as it is the cowardly Labour government which had the ideology and the parliamentary majority to not only clip Charles and William’s (who by the way, did not ensure a great trade deal with Trump as routinely touted, nor prevented him attacking the sovereignty of the nation of Canada) wings, get transparency on royal finances, get accountability on the Andrew front, get the press under control (which they will need to do if they want to survive past this current term to enact any long term transformational policies anyway?) and get Harry his security under a fair process which had got absolutely zero to do with how beloved he may be (and even Andrew if he warrants it, that’s the corollary, we did after all continue to fund the security of the Duke of Windsor for his years in France as a much less prosperous nation than we are today) and chose not to.

        It seems to be a given that it’s not just to do with how hard you work, or how useful you are to the state, that is key to this decision, but also very much the impact on the UK’s reputation if you were to come to harm? If Harry, Meghan and/or their kids were to come to harm in the UK that would be a big problem for the UK even if the only reason would be that the blooming press wouldn’t stop milking it, acting like it had nothing to do with them (as per Diana) and using it to mint new villains (Charles and Burnham seem likely candidates).

        As taxpayers we all pay for things that we don’t want all the time. The British people are implicitly resigned to paying for all sorts of things that they wouldn’t like if they thought about it but they don’t think about it and they also do not need to. All Americans are paying security for Trump and his family members, Democrats do occasionally bring it up but which members of the public do you see doing so when they cry about affordability in the US today?

        The majority of the working royals are human quangos whose upkeep we try not to think about, whose activities we have no interest in and who are tolerated on the basis that surely soon someone will get rid of them? (though it’s not an urgent priority).

        We have no interest in their ‘good work’ and that includes Harry and Meghan’s? Not really. Diana, Charles, Camilla, Harry, Meghan, Philip and Andrew are celebrities. They are treated as star performers in a public funded soap opera. William and Kate are just Harry and Meghan’s second billed co-stars. The interest in them is in their lives and dramas. Going on about security is just a reason to be able to go on about them. And, as I say often, an excuse to be outraged. Tell people that the Prince Lucian had a chair with 3 holes in it he had reserved for him at his favourite Parisian brothel to use on his taxpayer funded trips and Brits will just sigh and be like ‘Yeah, we know, but what can you do?’ .

        British Royalty 101 is this-every, but every, single member of the royalty is vulnerable to the complaint that they (a) don’t do anything useful and (b) cost too much. They would be vulnerable even if they cost 0.01p because they are pointless? So these complaints are simply always available to the press and we can see, such a reflex, and taken so for granted, that they are deployed against the Sussexes even when they are using their own money for things. The big issue is the double standard, who the media choose to activate this objection for. Harry is a senior Royal in the way most valuable to the public i. e as a subject of public discourse, and if he doesn’t qualify for security none of the others should, apart from Charles.

        What I feel the Sussexes can control, that they should, is communicating clearly without sources briefing and certainly not to the Telegraph – that’s utterly mad. Could they not just, I don’t know, use Bluesky? As I’ve said before why give the Mail the opportunity to be able to make money from you by claiming you are communicating with them or you are furiously briefing behind the scenes ie are ‘up to no good’? None of this is any of the publics’ business that’s the reality. And it’s quicksand or a finger trap trying to engage the media on such an issue and as I’ve also said before that includes Oprah and many many others. Their job is to make money by exploiting the Sussexes’ existence for content? That is their absolute only priority – from the Guardian and BBC on down. You can’t win with them, it’s sucks but you can’t.

      • sunniside up says:

        Happy1 Harry cannot pay for his own security because he needs the security provided through the government by the police, the inside information about the threats, and nobody is allowed to pay the police for protection, it is part of the service they provide. Even Bill Gates wouldn’t be allowed to pay. It is a free service. If Harry does need this protection then he is entitled to it. The only question should be, is he at risk. Most experts seem to believe that he is at risk. The fact that he is the son of the King, increases the risk.

  6. Hypocrisy says:

    I’m just waiting and watching to see how this all shakes out…

  7. Amy Bee says:

    As I said on another post, I understand Harry and Meghan’s reaction to letter and the fact that it was published because the Palace is seemingly trying to influence the outcome of the security meeting that supposed to happen this week. Nevertheless it was still unwise to move back to the UK without guarantees that they were going to be protected.

    • Gtwiecz says:

      Yes, I would not have moved back without police security guaranteed. Unless Charles told Harry he would get it if he moved back.

    • Noteworthy says:

      They were never going to get guarantees. One of the main reasons ravec gave for denying them was the he was not a resident but an occasional visitor. The main reason for not doing a rmb was he didn’t fit into the cohort because he was no longer a working royal. But they’ve now done a risk assessment, they know what the threats are. Now the problem is at their doorstep

  8. Pumpkin says:

    This is why I was saying yesterday they needed a better and stronger statement. Because the vague one has allowed for a narrative to be manufactured. Yes it would have been manufactured regardless but it would be a lot harder to do.

    A statement along the lines of “The letter simply reiterates what everyone already knows from the last six years. The duke and duchess will continue to continue to live and conduct any work in the same manner they always have.”

    • Becks1 says:

      The statement was poorly worded because the word “surprised” made it sound like they were shocked to hear that they aren’t working royals. here, the full sentence from the spokesperson about the surprise being related to the timing and how they weren’t given a chance for input is more reasonable. But you’re still stuck with that word “surprised” as being the takeaway in the headlines. there was a better way to say “while we agree with the contents of the letter, we think the timing is not ideal” or something.

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        The thing is, because of how the quote was framed in the story, we don’t know what the Sussex team actually (as in fully) said. Unless I missed it, there was no official statement released, and the word “surprised” came in the story where it was attributed to a Sussex spokesperson. But said spokesperson could have said “we were surprised that the king sent out a letter that reiterated the obvious, is he going to release a letter saying water is wet next?” But of course, anything other than “surprised” was ignored by the media outlet (which has an obv agenda). And this is where the Sussex team are failing, IMO, in not releasing public statements that lay out facts.

  9. L4Frimaire says:

    Now that everyone has been blindsided in some way, it’s time to move on. The Sussexes need to get away from strife mode and focus on the good things in their lives. We generally think they’re hardworking but they never talk about what they’re working on, what they’re passionate about right now. Meghan had some very successful launches for AsEver but it’s not bring hyped, no talk of projects, upcoming events. What’s going on with Invictus? They need to mute the Royals and get on with living their lives in this new normal. They’re giving pessimism right now and people who root for them are tired. It’s showing up here everyday. Just give people a positive bone, something, anything, They consciously made this move, their decision. Be decisive.

    • Gtwiecz says:

      They’re still in moving mode, and settling the children into the new school. I think eventually we will see more of their plans.

  10. sunniside up says:

    The Telegraph has really gone downhill since it joined the tabloids.

  11. Sharon says:

    I was surprised it was released the day before George’s first day at Eton, as it naturally overshadowed it. But I can see now that they wanted it released before Tuesday, when the security meeting was originally to be held. Good ‘ol Clive again. Cant wait till he’s gone. I do kind of wish the Sussex team hadn’t responded at all.

  12. M says:

    “The leopards won’t eat MY face” says the gazelle raised by leopards. The FAFO portion of the proceedings is coming much too soon for Team Sussex. This move was always going to be a disaster anyway.

    • Androsoul says:

      Ouch and LOL!
      I have soft spot for Harry cause on some level, I understand his plight for something* (cause the void is never clear enough), with his deadbeat dad… like, “You’re my father, and YOU’RE GONNA LOVE ME DAMMIT!!” I still catch myself wanting to go there with my dad… it’s some Stockholm f#cked up ish… I’m rooting for Big Red and I have faith in his pivot game

  13. YankeeDoodles says:

    The late Queen was always very specific about her language and compartmentalisation of family / work / status / privilege with the obvious exception of Andrew, and I can forgive her for not understanding — or wanting to understand — her own son’s depravity, especially now that we’re seeing *so many* men of his generation exposed for what seems to have been generalised depravity. But the late Queen did not play the mind games that Charles does. The gatekeeping, the gaslighting, etc…. The point-scoring, the scapegoating, the sly shade, the passive aggression, he just gets super sloppy. He’s tabloid fodder. Really. He has a very grandiose self-image but precious little dignity (hello, tampon) …William is just a psychotic raging dude with most likely a drinking problem. It’s the combination of the two of them that makes this situation impossible.

  14. Yvette says:

    @Maisie … I don’t understand this narrative of the Sussex kids being under the jurisdiction of the Crown now that Harry and Meghan have returned to the UK and that the marriage must therefore be ending.

    What has been undeniably clear over the years is that the British Crown doesn’t ‘want’ jurisdiction of the Sussex kids.

    I think we should allow this this play out without second guessing the Sussexes and their decisions.

    • Gtwiecz says:

      I agree. Maise is being preposterous here. That would never happen.

      • sunniside up says:

        AT the moment the King is the guardian of Archie, the first six heirs to the throne, and when Charles dies Lilibet will be sixth and become a guardian of William as well. William wants to hurt Harry in any way he can and I can think of no better way of hurting Harry than by taking the children away from their father. Too much? Taking away Invictus will be a close second. It makes sense. Harry lost Sentebale, and Iain Rawlinson was there and is now involved in William’s Earthshot. Uganda has left Invictus, is this letter the start of stirring it up everything for Harry? Could be a bit far fetched but who thought that Harry would lose Sentebale. Yes it sounds like a novel. But… I am worried about Invictus. That would really hurt.

    • Tessa says:

      THis talk of the monarch being the “guardian” is from some “rule” from ages ago. Charles is not guardian of Archie and Lili. First of all Charles is not going to be “guardian” of small children at his age. Second, this is an outmoded “rule” and third no way can Charles take away the children from Harry and Meghan. Why would Will try? He ignores both those small children, why would he want to have jurisdiction over them. Charles can’t be guardian to small children nor would he try to revive the old “rule.” And it seemed that this “rule” was described “on and off” over the years and it only seemed to apply to the Sussex children. There is no way Charles and/or William can be guardians. If Will even tries to seize the children (which he can’t) there would be loud calls for a republic. Who would want a King who is vengeful and seizing Kids he paid little attention to would doom the monarchy

  15. Julie says:

    I too believe clarification was necessary. However, it could have been done clearly and introduced with the reason for the clarification. Instead, the king was his typical ambiguous to make sure that this was to spin negatively.

  16. MaisiesMom says:

    My take is that yes, they are “private citizens.” They are not entitled to protection as working royals. But they are also public figures. They just are. Harry is the King’s son, Diana’s son, QE2’s grandson. He grew up in the spotlight. The media is obsessed with them. They are public figures and that is true mainly because Harry is royal. The state should give them some protection because it’s the right thing to do. And if they don’t, let it be on their heads if something happens.

    • HandforthParish says:

      Public figures doesn’t mean anything though.
      There are dozens of public figures, still doesnt mean they should get taxpayers’ funded security.

      • martha says:

        It’s a national security issue so super high profile public figures should get taxpayer-funded security.

        Taylor Swift got it on UK-leg of her tour.

        How does it look if something bad happens to a son of the king?

      • Gtwiecz says:

        Not everyone is the son or the grandchild of the king. The same king who protects his pedophile brother. Of course they need armed security. This is a very bad look for Charles, the deadbeat father.

      • Donety says:

        If something happened to Harry, how would this reflect poorly on Charles? For a man who was once the most hated member of the royal family, he’s proven to be fairly immune to shame.

    • Becks1 says:

      They are in an incredibly unique position in that they are very visible (even when they’re not being seen in public) and very popular (whether people like them or not, their every move is scrutinized) and yes, Harry is the son of the king. the children are very high up in the line of succession.

      There isn’t really another public figure that I can think of that is in such a unique position. Harry’s status means they will never be completely private. The press’s obsession with them means they will never be completely private. Attention is good for their projects and businesses and charities but the attention they receive, as we all know, is well beyond what any other celebrity receives.

      So its hard to put them into a box – they are private citizens but yes, are also public figures, and honestly – anything happening to them would be disastrous for the monarchy, even if Charles doesn’t realize that now. They probably didnt think Diana’s death would be disastrous either.

  17. GDUBSLADY says:

    Im going to make a point that I’ve made before with this clarification. When it comes to organizations like the Firm, it has a one year plan, a five year plan and a fifty to a hundred year plan. They have contingent plans and backup plans. This may sound crazy but if you look.at this institution they always have a team member on every side of a cultural issue. When Harry got with Meghan I think that was organized. The Firm was looking for a mixed race relationship. It manufactured the strife bc its members must be seen to be on different teams even though they’re all on the same time. With that said, I have this theory that Megxit was planned by courtiers that understand that transparency was critical to the future of monarchy. Charles and William will never open up the books on thefinanicial arrangements or the Duchies. They see Charles and William as difficult to manage. If Charles were to pass away before George came of age, declaring William unfit would give government officials an opportunity to bring light into an institution. Declaring a regency before George is 18 would give Government officials its only opportunity to look into the royals finances of both duchies. However to make a Regency work the Regent would need to demonstrate independence and separation thus Megxit. Harry and Meghan by leaving the UK and stepping down as working royals have achieved the financial independence and family separation necessary to make a Regency work. However the Regency Act requires a future Regent to reside in the UK which might be why Harry and Meghan are back on Salty Island.

    • Meredith says:

      There is absolutely no way they are skipping over a reasonably functional adult male for the figurehead position of king in favor of a regency. This is ridiculous.

      • GDUBSLADY says:

        William and Kate do little work, shun the Church of England and must be forced to do overseas visits. The UK royals financial affairs are hidden. William is rumored to have been engaged in extramarital affairs with both women and men. There are also rumors that his violent tendencies and criminal behavior may have already rendered him unfit to serve. He would not be going after the Sussexes if he didn’t fear the Regency. William may be susceptible to black mail and may have alliances that make his ascendancy to the throne impossible for those governing the UK. He has already announce his disinterest with Commonwealth Nations and shows little interest in Wales and Scotland. His reign may even threaten the United Kingdom itself. He appears to favor strongmen like Trump and Putin while Harry favors democratic leaders and NATO. Its said that Camilla’s nephew has Russian ties as well. Finally only five people in the UK decide the fitness of the King, the sovereign’s spouse, the Lord Chancellor, the Speaker of the House, the Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls. Only three of the five can decide his unfitness. A regency to be effective and weaken the crown would only need be for short term allowing government officials to inspect th estate and make needed reforms. William is not fit. His behavior indicates he has much to hide.

      • Donety says:

        William will be king. Full stop.

  18. Tis True, Tis True says:

    I think one thing missing is that Spare and the Oprah interview were genuinely betrayals, according to royal rules. I’ve been following all of this since Charles’s dating days and one constant has been that anyone who wrote a memoir (excepting the most anodyne puff pieces) was harshly cut out of royal circles.

    Did Harry have the right to tell his story about the truth of his life? Absolutely. Was it the right thing to do? I think that for his mental health and setting up his independence, yes it was.

    But it was a betrayal. I’ve done an in patient DBT program and one of the big things we were taught is that you have the right to set boundaries. The corollary is that other people have the right to freely react to those boundaries and set up boundaries of their own Your choice is how to act in response

    Harry doesn’t seem to understand that his family genuinely feels betrayed. The 2020 letter was before Spare, this letter is after.

    • ChillinginDC says:

      I think his family is a racist nest of vipers, but yeah they feel betrayed, don’t trust him, and his own brother refuses to speak to him. If that was me, I would have made my peace with it and moved on.

    • QuiteContrary says:

      Charles cooperated with the Dimbleby book that painted a very harsh portrait of his parents — and he wasn’t cut out of royal circles.

      • Jennifer says:

        Yeah, but he’s the heir, not the spare. They’re not going to get rid of an heir under ANY circumstances. Likewise, no matter how much of a brat William may be, they’ll keep him Priority #1.

      • MaisiesMom says:

        Yes. And I get what Jennifer is saying, but in a way, Charles being the heir makes his contribution to that memoir worse, not better. Like, you’re going to inherit the crown and all the toys and you’re still complaining? He’s the one who benefitted from the system and yet he was complaining the loudest about it. Meanwhile Anne never said a word.

    • Gtwiecz says:

      They had to clear the lie from Khate about Meghan. And condemn the years-long abuse of Meghan. I hope you followed that too. Could it have been a statement instead of controversial Oprah? Yes.

      As for Harry’s biography, it could have been delayed until later in life, after Chuck was gone.

      • QuiteContrary says:

        Did Charles hold off on cooperating with Dimbleby on his book? Nope.

      • sunniside up says:

        I don’t think Kate had the lie published, she would have known that it was something best quickly forgotten. I believe that someone else came up with it after Kate had sent the flowers. And she didn’t refute it because of the late Queen’s “never complain and never explain.”

      • Tessa says:

        Keen complained about an article about her and demanded changes after it was published. How come she could not have complained when she knew a fake story was spread about meghan. No excuses

  19. Over it says:

    A leopard doesn’t change its spots. Harry and Meghan were fully aware of whom they were dealing with and yet they made the decision to leave paradise and return to hell for round two of humiliation, abuse and mistreatment. I still say Charles and his flunkies did not have to tell Harry and Meghan a darn thing because like I said yesterday, Harry and Meghan don’t work for the royals and Charles doesn’t give a f one way or the other about them . And I also wish that Harry would stop trying to put all the blame on Clive A as if his own father was not co signing everything that Clive did to him and his family. You cannot separate the two . Clive can only do to Harry and his family what his master Charles gives the green light on.

  20. Lady J says:

    I think the letter was supposed to state that, as regarding the business and charitable things the sussexes are doing, they are to be considered private citizens. I think that sentence was poorly worded, and Harry is latching onto the wording as opposed to the meaning.

    • Gtwiecz says:

      Only because the communication between father and son seems to be practically inexistent (as far as we know, and I may be wrong). A normal father would call his son and say “hey, we are going to put out this statement and it’s just to set the boundaries and make sure people understand you are private citizens”.

    • Flamingo says:

      Oh I think it was intentionally worded. They want to punch down on them and be sure everyone knows. Nothing they do is on behalf of the crown. Nor were they invited back. They chose to move to live in England.

      There is no way in the world can Harry and his children be ‘private citizens’ they are in the line of succession no matter how much it makes Charles and William incandescent with rage.

      Or was it a dog whistle to lay down the foundation that probably not Charles. But William one day will do his best to strip them all of their titles. As Charles did to Andrew. The precedent is set. But for all the wrong reasons when it comes to Harry it’s just petty anger. He survived and thrived without them.

  21. QuiteContrary says:

    “The suggestion that they should have been consulted prompted guffaws at the Palace.”

    See, Harry?? That’s the contempt with which you and Meghan are treated. Why sign up for this, FFS??

  22. GMHQ says:

    This all makes one wonder if Harry has given up his therapist. There seems to be a lack of self awareness on his part when it comes to dealing with his family. He needs a refresh emotionally.

    • Lady Digby says:

      I would agree that Harry still needs to work through this with a therapist. Charles and William and a lot of courtiers are real happy with their gravy train. King and deputy king of cult are wedded to the cult and don’t want to be anything but adored. They have NO incentive to change. They are The Firm, cold, traditional, Image, elitist, exclusive, grand, snobbish and arrogant. To them Harry is the enemy and has to be diminished, destroyed and used as a warning to other potential rebels.

      • Angied says:

        Finally someone who gets it. They are treating Harry and Meghan as the enemy. The othesr have no incentive to change since they hold all the cards in England. Harry they don’t see you as a brother, son, nephew or cousin. You are to be treated as a traitor by them who revealed their secrets and showed the world the the fairytale is fake. You showed the world that everything they do is to keep the grift coming. For this you are to be destroyed and shown as a warning to the others especially William’s children. Stray out of line and this will happen to you if you don’t behave and do as we say. You and your family will never be in the fold ever again. You and Meghan have to make peace with this and live your life separately from them.

    • Kasztanka says:

      What I see is a mindset clouded by tabloid narratives.
      What I don’t see is the Sussexes trying to worm their way into the royal fold.
      They came for a specific purpose. They arrived, and then they disappeared. They are getting on with their work. Once they’ve accomplished what they planned, they’ll head back to the US. We can be certain that, in due time, we’ll find out what they’re working on. It is right that they aren’t making announcements; this way, at least the companies, individuals, and organizations they work with will avoid harassment and gaslighting.

  23. Mayp says:

    I think any confusion about why the Sussexes might be upset about being private citizens is down to bad, misleading, reporting.

    I don’t think that the Sussexes would be upset about being deemed private citizens. I do think, however, that they (especially Harry) would be upset about the sudden “abeyance” of their HRH styles. Because that means that they are no longer considered Royals (regardless of their being members of the Royal family). They would be surprised because their agreement at Sandringham specifically indicated that they would continue to be known and referred to as HRH Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

    While you and I likely wouldn’t care about that, they have essentially removed part of Harry’s identity. Those styles are very important to them. When Diana bargained away hers during the divorce proceedings she was reportedly very sad about losing it. It was reported that William said something like: don’t worry, I’ll have it reinstated when I’m King. That’s why I think that part of the statement came from William. He wanted to hurt Harry.

    I think the Sussexes should respond to the “abeyance” part of the statement and point out how it conflicts with the Sandringham agreement. Otherwise, they should just say all bets are off and if the royals aren’t going to comply with the Sandringham agreement we won’t – and, no more compliance with any other agreements . Stop coordinating with Buckingham Palace and don’t take any orders from them on what they should or shouldn’t do – release all of the pictures they want to when they want to!.

    I hope the Sussex is just live their lives as they wish, without input from the palaces, and, hopefully, they will overshadow the Royals each and every day!

    • Tongdes says:

      In the Sandringham agreement it did say that they retained the style of HRH, but it was not to be used, so the only thing Charles really did was to try to add another definition with “abeyance”. I think it really bothered Harry to not be mentioned as a member of his own family. But, technically, using abeyance still aligns with the original agreement. They weren’t going to come back the UK and insist on the HRH.

  24. Tessa says:

    But the Queen’s Never Complain never explain was never really followed. Charles authorized biography had many complaints about his parents. Will is releasing news about taking titles away. Kate had an article about her edited after publication because she “disapproved” of some of the content. They complain all the time. Kate saw that Meghan was taking the heat for something she did not do. If Kate had a working conscience she would have refuted it pronto

  25. Sean says:

    Poor Harry. Totally understand he misses his home country and culture, anyone in his position would.
    The emotion Harry projects is what makes him a global mega star, royalty is just gloss.
    The Duchess should urge him to consider another bout of therapy and to make do with the US and Portugal.

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