Another example of royal media hygiene and the importance of media literacy and hygiene, period, because there’s the version that the UK tabloids are spinning with this story, and the facts of the situation. The problem here is that, well, so much of what’s out there has been shaped by the Daily Mail and the Sun and the other British tabloids that have been targeting Prince Harry and Meghan Markle for the last few years. And initially, the way this was reported by those publications, it was that Prince Harry was suing the Home Office so that he could be provided security when he and his family visit the United Kingdom, which is missing some key details: that he wanted to PAY for his own security and was denied the request. So he’s seeking a “judicial review” of that decision – and, again, to be clear, his initial request was to personally fund any security that would be assigned to him so as not to burden the taxpayer, because his own private security does not have access in the UK to all the resources (intelligence information and legal jurisdictions) necessary to carry out their duties.
This became an issue in July 2021 when Harry was in England for the Princess Diana statue unveiling and there was a security incident when his car was chased by photographers which was explained in a statement released by Harry’s representatives after the erroneous report was published in the UK tabloids.
Full statement from Prince Harryâ€™s legal spokesperson: pic.twitter.com/JU2hS7KKYH— Omid Scobie (@scobie) January 15, 2022
Did you read that part at the end? About the “surreptitious timing”? Let’s talk about the timing. Last week, after Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled that Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s lawsuit against Prince Andrew for allegedly raping her when she was 17-years-old would proceed, despite motions to dismiss filed by Andrew’s legal team, Buckingham Palace confirmed that he’d be stripped of his titles, and no longer an HRH. It was a BIG story, and it shared headline space alongside Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s wine parties – two major scandals that were dominating the news… until…
Prince Harry sought the judicial review of his security request back in September, so they had months and months and months to get it out there and the story just happened to get leaked this weekend of all weekends? Coincidence or conspiracy?
Word of the day is â€˜sparpleâ€™ (14th century): to deflect unwanted attention from one thing by making a big deal of another.— Susie Dent (@susie_dent) January 17, 2022
Who would have access to this information? We’re talking about a judicial review of a Home Office decision, it’s privileged government information that, you would think, would only be shared with a select few. So let’s not pretend that this could have happened easily. Let’s not pretend that there wasn’t strategy here. And intention. Because the Prince Harry security story certainly diverted a LOT of attention away from Prince Andrew and the Prime Minister, two posh upper class middle-aged white dudes with problematic party behaviours. But that’s what the status quo has always protected.
But Lainey, Harry’s a posh white dude too. He’s a posh white dude who married a Black woman and we all know how the English establishment feels about that.
As for this whole security thing…
I have to keep repeating this because initially the Daily Mail actually reported that he was pushing for taxpayer-funded protection. They ended up changing their copy later – but a lot of people don’t read the corrections so there are those who are still out there who don’t have the complete picture of what this complaint is really about.
Harry’s complaint was actually rather quiet; filed in September, no word about it for months, and probably because, up until last week, it wouldn’t have helped the British royal family or the government to have this out there. Harry has been villainised in so many corners of the British media and a story about him paying for his own security would have illuminated his independence and called into question why his request was refused if it wasn’t a cost to taxpayers, underscoring the assertion that he was being treated unfairly by the royal institution.
It was 100% to the advantage, though, to the British royals and Boris Johnson’s office to have the story come out when it did though. It diverted attention from Andrew and the PM’s scandal, by tapping into how polarising the Sussexes are in England, with the tabloids stoking that hostility when they broke open the story with an incomplete and inaccurate report about Harry’s security concerns…
While overlooking that Prince Andrew’s security is STILL funded by the taxpayer!
I mean, if we’re talking security here, one member of the royal family wants to pay for his own security and is asking to be allowed to do so and another, the disgraced one who was friends with a dead rapist pedophile and his convicted sex offender accomplice and is being sued by one of their victims, still gets “taxpayer-funded Scotland Yard security detail” ...
Where, really, should the outrage be?
But also… if this whole thing is about security, how secure is the Home Office if they’re getting leaked by the tabloids?
Like maybe that’s the biggest issue with Harry’s request for a judicial review. Might want to rethink this on the basis of – are you sure these people can actually protect you? Because they don’t seem to be able to protect their own files. It’s another maddening layer of incompetence with these royals and whatever the f-ck is happening inside the British power structures. Why are you telling on yourself?