Gransnet forums

Chat

This might get interesting

(116 Posts)
pinkquartz Fri 21-Feb-20 16:11:10

The other day I read that the Queen has said that Harry and Meghan cannot keep their SussexRoyal brand with that name.
They cannot use the word royal.
There are in fact laws in place over this, some go back over a hundred years I believe.

Today Meghan has told her friends that there is NO legal reason for her to not use it because they only want to do good....(yeah of course) and she will do as she pleases.
She also stated that Harry and Archie are royal and no-one can take that away from them.

So is this now Meghan v the Queen and British Law?

trisher Sat 22-Feb-20 10:48:14

Chewbacca Oh come on! How many people lok at the small print when they are in love? And it's not exactly a law that is used everyday is it? Or one you would expect in a democracy.

Chewbacca Sat 22-Feb-20 10:51:08

Caveat emptor trisher

Urmstongran Sat 22-Feb-20 10:51:14

I fear this is only the beginning of the turmoil that will break Harry's heart, over and over again.

I had hoped that Meghan would bring happiness into his life, and it gives me NO satisfaction whatsoever to have my initial misgivings proved to be correct.

vampirequeen Sat 22-Feb-20 10:54:01

I just don't understand why it's all Meghan's fault. We have no idea what the dynamic in the relationship is. It's all supposition.

Anniebach Sat 22-Feb-20 10:59:21

If no one owns a language I can now call myself
Princess of Wales ?

Anniebach Sat 22-Feb-20 11:02:54

Harry loved shooting, stalking, fishing,Polo - Megan is against so -

Harry gives them up

ananimous Sat 22-Feb-20 11:06:56

Megs going to announce her pregnancy at the wedding, who the hell does she think she is?

www.ibtimes.com/meghan-markle-pregnant-duchess-allegedly-tries-hide-growing-baby-bump-canada-2924964

Yehbutnobut Sat 22-Feb-20 11:22:38

Another boring knocking a woman thread ???

pinkquartz Sat 22-Feb-20 11:37:34

From the couple own website:

The statement read: 'While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word "Royal" overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use "Sussex Royal" or any iteration of the word "Royal" in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020.'

The couple also insisted that security 'to protect them and their son' is necessary amid controversy surrounding the estimated £3million - £6million protection bill that would be split between taxpayers in Canada and the UK.

Sounds as though there has been some bitching/complaining going on....M wanted more than she is getting. Probably forgets that she is not an expert on UK law.

JenniferEccles Sat 22-Feb-20 11:45:09

I think a lot of us feel the same as you Urmstongran

I had hoped for the best for Harry but feared the worst.

Anniebach Sat 22-Feb-20 11:51:25

Thank you pinkquartz ,

So security is necessary, then pay for it.

pinkquartz Sat 22-Feb-20 11:54:42

People who want to "disappear" frequently set up Worldwide Charitable Foundations ?

And if you set up a Charitable Foundation you get a load of tax relief
plus, you only have to donate a small part of the income to charity.
So H&M will gain a lot of money while looking as if they are just "doing good" in the world.

Is this the truth if the statement "working towards financial independence"

Nezumi65 Sat 22-Feb-20 11:58:01

Oh here we go with the ‘she’s faking the pregnancy’ stories again from the tinfoil brigade.

No wonder they left the country.

ananimous Sat 22-Feb-20 12:49:37

Let's not criticise our betters, eh?

They are special like rainbows and unicorns...

eazybee Sat 22-Feb-20 12:51:08

I think it is time to re-evaluate the cost of, and the necessity for, the security of two people and their child who are very publicly distancing themselves from Britain and the Royal family.

£3-6 million is a huge amount to protect one family and I certainly don't see why Canada should be expected to contribute. By leaving Britain they are exposing themselves to risk, but at the same time reducing their publicity value.

People resident here would benefit far more if this money were used in policing the streets to reduce the knife crime which takes so many lives.
The greater good?

ananimous Sat 22-Feb-20 12:51:37

Is there any truth to the story that it's surrogate twins?

Can't find the link from Independent.
Good house keeping-
www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/a27152841/is-meghan-markle-having-twins/

Elegran Sat 22-Feb-20 13:01:26

That twins article was dated April 2019, so it would be the longest twin pregnancy ever recorded. Surrogate? No evidence that a surrogate is needed. They seem to be productive enough without any help

Any more wild suggestions to throw into the pot?

Anniebach Sat 22-Feb-20 13:28:01

Agree eazybee they want out, get out and pay for everything
themselves

ananimous Sat 22-Feb-20 13:31:58

I wonder if Diana was alive - Would Meghan would get on with her?
Maybe she would help her write her book?
Diana would want Hewitt mentioned of course.

Elegran Sat 22-Feb-20 13:41:41

They wouldn't get on at all - both would want all of Harry's love and attention - DiL and MiL would both be posting on GN and MN about how the other was manipulating him and estranging him from them!

Jane10 Sat 22-Feb-20 14:13:25

grin

Jane10 Sat 22-Feb-20 14:14:58

If they're not royal any more, just 'celebs', do they need security or more security than, say, a film actor?

ananimous Sat 22-Feb-20 14:24:53

Is there any truth to the Hewitt connection?

Chestnut Sat 22-Feb-20 14:31:58

ananimous - if you mean whether Hewitt was Harry's father then the answer is no. You only have to look into Harry's eyes to see he is most definitely Charles's son. They have the same eyes.

ananimous Sat 22-Feb-20 14:34:09

Teeth show more DNA traits though...