Re: Royal Privacy and Security Throughout the Years

[Curryong]

Well I think this young man is ?a bit of a stirrer?, as we say in Australia. Where they eggs caught in this case or smashed on the ground? Can?t remember.

[Amabel2]

I wonder if the late Queen made this request to her heir? I wouldn't be surprised if RAVEC had determined that Andrew faced a greater security risk than Anne, Edward, Sophie and her cousins and would continue to need security for awhile.

I'd say that Since Andrew does not go out much, his security isn't going to break the bank and yes Charles may have promised the queen that he'd make sure that he had security for the rest of his life.  As long as he does it form his private fortune, I cant see what the problem is.

[Amabel2]

Well it?s not me that?s printing what?s been said about this development in every tabloid! Of course it?s up to Charles. However, the Press are just telling HIM with these stories that THEY will be keeping on eye on what happens with this in the future.

Of coures they will be looking for stories about Andrew and Charles, that's what they get paid for.  I doubt if the press is going to bring down the monarchy, if that's what you are saying. Charles will probalby pay for this from his private fortune, i doubt if he's going to use Duchy of Lancaster money - and the main thing is that ANdrew wont be getting tax payer funded security

[Curryong]

Of coures they will be looking for stories about Andrew and Charles, that's what they get paid for.  I doubt if the press is going to bring down the monarchy, if that's what you are saying. Charles will probalby pay for this from his private fortune, i doubt if he's going to use Duchy of Lancaster money - and the main thing is that ANdrew wont be getting tax payer funded security

No I?m certainly not saying that the Press would be able to destroy the monarchy, merely that every July when the Sovereign Grant and Duchies moneys have been presented and audited, the Press (and the tabloid Press in particular) goes through every little thing to see who among the royals has been flying too many miles, which Royal Household has gone near to over-spending and other things that can be used in articles to embarrass one or another of them. Any suggestion of large sums of Lancaster money going to Andrew for anything that hasn?t been made clear and the media will be onto it in a flash.

[Amabel2]

i daresay Charles will take that into account. 

[TLLK]

King Charles to pay for Duke of York?s private security - after refusing to do so for Prince Harry

The Duke of York?s private security bill is likely to be funded by the King, despite the monarch?s refusal to pay for Prince Harry?s protection.
Prince Andrew is to be stripped of his taxpayer-funded Metropolitan Police protection as he no longer performs public duties.
His armed personal protection officers will be replaced by private security guards at an estimated cost of up to ?3 million a year.
The King is expected to foot the bill as the Duke has no discernible regular income.

I can only imagine that the British citizens and residents would not be supportive of the DoY receiving that level of protection from taxpayer funds.

The Duke of York is said to have written to the Home Office and Scotland Yard to complain about losing his police protection.
His entitlement to taxpayer-funded bodyguards was subjected to a full review after he was relieved of his duties as a working royal by Queen Elizabeth II earlier this year, shortly before agreeing a hefty financial settlement with Virginia Guiffre, his sex abuse accuser. The Duke of York has always strenuously denied her allegations.
While he is understood to have enjoyed the benefits of police protection since then, the deal is believed to be coming to an end.
All decisions about royal security are made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec.
Members include senior figures from the King?s household, including his private secretary, as well as a representative from the Prince of Wales?s household.
They are joined by the chairman of the National Police Chiefs? Council counterterrorism coordination committee, the deputy assistant commissioner specialist operations at the Metropolitan Police, the director-general of the Homeland Security Group at the Home Office, and the deputy director of the National Security Secretariat at the Cabinet Office.

Again I believe that RAVEC has determined that Andrew likely needs some protection while out in public, but they can't/won't recommend that it be funded publicly.

[Amabel2]

He was lucky that he held onto it for  while, perhaps due partly to Covid, and the fact that he was living a very restricted life, like many of us.  But once the queen was gone and life is back to normal I think it was bound to be reviewed and he would lost his entitlement.  I think he does need some protection, the unpleasant scenes at the queen's death show that...but non armed guards should be enough to keep people at a safe distance form him, when he does go out.
we dont know what money ANdrew has, there may be more salted away than you wold expect but I dont think he could afford to pay for security on a regular basis.

[Nightowl]

I do wonder if there will be a loud voice of disapproval from the west coast.....the thing is PA lives in the country while others do not as Ca is thousands and thousands of miles away. Yet nobody on the West Coast of the US will even look at it that way as they will only see that they were denied something they thought they would get for life.  I also doubt if it will cost 3 million for PA as he seems to just ride horses anymore, after all those horses need exercise too.  That keeps the cost down on the horses when PA rides them...wonder if he grooms them also! 

[TLLK]

The Sussexes do receive tax payer funded protection for themselves and the children when they're in the UK for official business ie: funerals, celebrations and visiting their remaining British patronages/charities. They don't receive it for private events ie: Statue Unveiling in 2021. However since the couple have not dropped their legal action against the British Government regarding their security, I wouldn't be surprised if they did release a statement  of their own or through a spokesperson.

[Amabel2]

The Sussexes do receive tax payer funded protection for themselves and the children when they're in the UK for official business ie: funerals, celebrations and visiting their remaining British patronages/charities. They don't receive it for private events ie: Statue Unveiling in 2021. However since the couple have not dropped their legal action against the British Government regarding their security, I wouldn't be surprised if they did release a statement  of their own or through a spokesperson.

Is Harry still on about wanting to use the Met police RPOs and have access to intelligence services information? I dont think he can still be expecting for Charles to shell out for his security, while he is a yong man capable of working and living in the USA

[TLLK]

Is Harry still on about wanting to use the Met police RPOs and have access to intelligence services information? I dont think he can still be expecting for Charles to shell out for his security, while he is a yong man capable of working and living in the USA

Yes I believe that Prince Harry would like that type of security and information when he and his family are in the UK for private visits which are not covered by RAVEC approved security for the Sussexes.

[Curryong]

I?m just wondering why, if the danger level to Andrew is supposedly so high and RAVEC has been consulted (members include officials from the MET and the Royal Household) why Charles would feel he has to fund Andrew?s security. You would think that the Home Office (civil servants from that Department are also on the Committee) would be coming forward stating that they will be funding the whole thing if Andrew is in such mortal danger. .

And Harry isn?t asking Charles to shell out for his security or anything else. The Sussexes don?t get a penny from Charles or directly from the British taxpayers. Harry is in the middle of a legal challenge to RAVEC?s decision, and the case is wending it?s way through the courts at the moment,

[Amabel2]

Um I thought that was the reason for disputes between Charles and Harry that he felt that someone else, whether the tax payer or his father, should pay for his security.

[Curryong]

From a report in the Guardian in June regarding Harry?s dispute with RAVEC and the Home Office.

Prince Harry?s case against Home Office can proceed, high court judge rules | Prince Harry | The Guardian

?The Duke of Sussex has won a bid to bring part of his high court claim against the Home Office over his security arrangements while in the UK.

Harry is bringing legal action over a decision not to allow him to pay for police protection for himself and his family when they are in the UK. At a preliminary hearing last month his lawyers sought permission for a full judicial review of the Home Office decision.?

[TLLK]

I?m just wondering why, if the danger level to Andrew is supposedly so high and RAVEC has been consulted (members include officials from the MET and the Royal Household) why Charles would feel he has to fund Andrew?s security. You would think that the Home Office (civil servants from that Department are also on the Committee) would be coming forward stating that they will be funding the whole thing if Andrew is in such mortal danger. .

And Harry isn?t asking Charles to shell out for his security or anything else. The Sussexes don?t get a penny from Charles or directly from the British taxpayers. Harry is in the middle of a legal challenge to RAVEC?s decision, and the case is wending it?s way through the courts at the moment,

I'm guessing that there's a strange conundrum of evidence that there's a legitimate  threat but not one that requires RPOs armed with firearms.  Going forward,  they can only have tasers. Also  Andrew has stepped back from those royal duties so there isn't a threat to the safety of the public who might have gathered to see him either. As for the cost, I expect that Charles may have volunteered to take it on knowing that there would be huge backlash if the taxpayer was to foot the bill. I have a feeling that this financial arrangement was settled between mother and son(s) prior to QEII's death.
And it does give Charles a bit of leverage over his brother too.  :notamused:

[wannable]

It has reached a point of 'private' security, their own business. Solved. The media can't complain any longer.

Their pocket, it could matter of fact be a Tyler type private pocket and still be their own business.

[Amabel2]

I'm guessing that there's a strange conundrum of evidence that there's a legitimate  threat but not one that requires RPOs armed with firearms.  Going forward,  they can only have tasers. Also  Andrew has stepped back from those royal duties so there isn't a threat to the safety of the public who might have gathered to see him either. As for the cost, I expect that Charles may have volunteered to take it on knowing that there would be huge backlash if the taxpayer was to foot the bill. I have a feeling that this financial arrangement was settled between mother and son(s) prior to QEII's death.
And it does give Charles a bit of leverage over his brother too.  :notamused:

Andrew is probably at risk a bit when he goes out of the Windsor estate, but he's not entitled to royal security as he is not a working royal.  SO Charles or someone can pay for his security which will probably not be that high as he does not go out that much. POssibly the queen left money to cover his security when she was gone, or possibly Charles will cover it himself.  Its not being paid for by the tax payer

[sara8150]

Update news he guilty three charges include treasons but his sentence will be on march 31

Crossbow-wielding intruder Jaswant Singh Chail admits trying to harm the Queen | Daily Mail Online

Man admits to trying to harm the Queen after being caught at Windsor Castle with crossbow | HELLO!

Man caught on Windsor Castle with crossbow admits treason after threat to 'kill the Queen' | Royal | News | Express.co.uk

https://www.itv.com/news/2023-02-03/man-admits-treason-act-charge-after-threatening-to-kill-queen-with-crossbow

Crossbow man guilty of TREASON after threatening to kill Queen in Windsor break-in - Mirror Online

Masked man admits storming Windsor Castle on Christmas Day with a crossbow saying 'I'm here to kill the Queen' | The Sun

Man becomes first person convicted of treason in over 40 years ? Royal Central

[TLLK]

A recent  YouGov UK poll on the Duke of Sussex's security while in the UK. Question was posed on February 20, 2023. I've shared the results for "all adults." What I found surprising is that when I switched it to "age" the youngest poll participants who typically are most supportive of the Duke of Sussex were less likely to want to have protection provided to him when compared to the 25-49 year olds.

Daily Question | 20/02/2023 | YouGov

Do you believe Prince Harry should or should not be entitled to police protection when in Britain?
All adults
Region
Gender
Politics
Age
Social Grade
He should be entitled to police protection funded by the state
19%
He should be entitled to police protection, but only if he pays for it himself
37%
He should not be entitled to police protection
28%
Don?t know
16

[Amabel2]

but that's nonsense. really, he wants to have the police and security services working in tandem wiht his own bodyguards. He ca't have that.

[TLLK]

(Story was originally in the Daily Telegraph.)

Since the Sussexes no longer had  round the clock taxpayer funded security, I can understand why the Home Office and the Met Police would require some advance notice of the intention of their trips ie: Official royal duty ie 2021 Funeral of the  Duke of Edinburgh vs. Personal-Unveiling the statue of Diana, Princess of Wales as the former would be the one where Met Police protection would be provided. Also the Met Police would have to look at their officers' schedules and see who would be available at that time to provide security.

Prince Harry asked to give a month?s notice before making trip to the UK, reports claim

Prince Harry was told to give 28 days? notice of his planned trips to the UK, it has emerged.

The Duke of Sussex was told that the time would allow for security requests to be processed and that it would be a matter for the Home Office to consider whether the requested security arrangements were necessary.

According to The Telegraph, Harry pushed back on the decision, asking the Home Office committee responsible for royal security to give him an example of a person with the same threat assessment as him who had received no security after stepping back from public duty.

The Independent has contacted representatives of the Duke of Sussex and the Home Office for comment.

Details of Harry?s security arrangements have been disclosed in papers as part of his attempt to rule that the publishers of the Mail on Sunday libelled him with an article about his request for police protection when he and his family visit the UK.

The prince is suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over the story, which was published in February 2022 under the headline: ?Exclusive: How Prince Harry tried to keep his legal fight with the government over police bodyguards a secret? then ? just minutes after the story broke ? his PR machine tried to put a positive spin on the dispute.?

The court heard that in an April 2020 email to Sir Edward Young, the Queen?s private secretary, Harry ?made it clear we couldn?t afford private security until we were able to earn?.

Harry?s lead attorney asked Judge Matthew Nickin either to strike out the publisher?s defence or to deliver a summary judgment, which would be a ruling in the prince?s favour without going to trial.

[TLLK]

A man has been arrested outside of Buckingham Palace and a controlled explosion has taken place.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65464885?at_campaign_type=owned&at_link_type=web_link&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_link_origin=BBCBreaking&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_link_id=B884C150-E923-11ED-969F-7990ECABB293&at_medium=social&at_format=link&at_bbc_team=editorial

A controlled explosion has taken place and a man was arrested outside Buckingham Palace after throwing suspected shotgun cartridges into palace grounds, police said.

A cordon is in place after the man was detained by police at around 19:00 BST on Tuesday after approaching the gates of the palace, Scotland Yard said.

He was arrested on suspicion of possession of an offensive weapon.

There are no reports of shots fired or injuries to officers or the public.

The man was also found to be in possession of a suspicious bag, the Metropolitan Police said.

A controlled explosion was carried out as a precaution after an assessment from specialists.

The King and the Queen Consort were not at Buckingham Palace at the time of the arrest.

Chief Superintendent Joseph McDonald said: "Officers worked immediately to detain the man and he has been taken into police custody.

"There have been no reports of any shots fired, or any injuries to officers or members of the public.

"Officers remain at the scene and further enquiries are ongoing."

[TLLK]

Update on the hearings for Jaswant Singh Chail who arrested when he was trying to kill the Queen at Windsor Castle.

Jaswant Singh Chail wanted ?heroic death? after AI girlfriend told him to kill Queen

An intruder who broke into Windsor Castle after his AI girlfriend encouraged him to kill the Queen wanted a ?heroic death? like Star Wars villains, a court has heard.

Jaswant Singh Chail, 21, was dressed in the style of the Sith group of characters from Star Wars when he climbed into the grounds with a loaded crossbow on Christmas Day 2021.

Chail discussed his plan, which he had been preparing for nine months, with a chatbot he was in a ?sexual relationship? with and that reassured him he was not ?mad or delusional?, the Old Bailey heard.

During a sentencing hearing on Thursday, psychiatrists for the defence claimed Chail, who admitted treason in February, had been suffering from psychosis, depression and autistic spectrum disorder at the time, and said he should be kept in hospital.

Dr John Hafferty, who assessed Chail?s mental state, said: ?I struggle to believe that he would have actually [killed the Queen] and I don?t believe that was his intention. He just wanted to kill himself.

[TLLK]

The Met Police are investigating former officers who served between 2001-2015 for allegedly sending racist messages.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-66512440

Six former Metropolitan Police officers have been charged with sending racist messages on WhatsApp after a BBC Newsnight investigation.

The officers served in various parts of the force but all spent time in the Diplomatic Protection Group, now known as the Parliamentary and Diplomatic Protection Command.

They were not serving during their alleged participation in the group.

But the BBC believes serving officers were in the group until early 2022.

A statement from the Met said: "The charges follow an investigation by the Met's Directorate of Professional Standards which was launched following coverage by the BBC's Newsnight programme in October last year."

It said the officers, who retired between 2001 and 2015, have been charged by post with offences under Section 127(1) (a) of the Communications Act 2003.

They will appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 7 September.

[sara8150]

Vegan activists charged after 'stealing' the King's sheep from his royal Sandringham Estate and 'driving away' with the animals | Daily Mail Online
Trio girls charge stealing sheep at Sandringham last May 24 and court date will be on Thursday September 28 but the trio girls are on release with bailed