Diana, Charles and Camilla - love drama part 2

[cinrit]

And once again ... I said for all intents and purposes the marriage was over after the separation.  Even if 99% of separated couples were to get back together, the fact is that Diana and Charles did not.  The marriage was legally over after the divorce.  Maybe the two terms are confusing .... or maybe my words are being twisted again to mean something I did not say.

Cindy

We're talking about ROYALS FAMILIES, you said the marriage ended 20 years ago, the TRUTH is their marriage ended in 1996. If you dont know what meant divorce...

dianab, in every single post, I have said for all intents and purposes the marriage ended nearly 20 years ago.  Please stop misquoting me and twisting my words.  Thanks.  :)

The truth is their marriage was for appareaces after birth of Harry. Then what really have value/importance are the papers/what is LEGAL. In this way worked monarchies.
You are trying to rewrite history with all is over 20 years ago.
I.E. What the difference between marriage of Charles & Diana to Duke & Duchess of Kent?

The legality of marriages in monarchs is the same as marriages among non-monarchs.  As for the "20 years" thing, please read my posts completely and correctly because this misquoting is getting ridiculous.  The difference between Charles & Diana and the Duke & Duchess is that we're not discussing the Duke and Duchess.  They're off-topic. 

Cindy

[amabel]

Maybe two wrongs don't make a right, but doesn't it, in fact, matter who cheated first?  I've never understood the claim it didn't.  If Charles hadn't strayed, would there have been Morton, Hewitt or Panorama?

To go over old matters again:  From my readings, Diana began her affair with Hewitt in 1986, while Charles abandoned Diana's bed soon after Harry was born two years earlier.  Some authors claim Charles restarted his physical relationship with Camilla (or even Janet Jenkins) as early as 1983, yet Diana claimed she and he were extremely close in the weeks and months leading up to Harry's birth.  But, there are also some authors who claim Hewitt and Diana were lovers by 1983 or 84.  It seems almost impossible to find the facts.

It only matters if the person who cheated first is the only person who cheated.  Once the other person starts cheating, it sort of lessens any complaints they might have about the first person.  If Diana and Charles had had an agreement to have an open marriage as long as they were discrete, that would be one thing.  But neither of them was discrete.  I wouldn't pay attention to the authors who say Diana and Hewitt were lovers as early 1983-84.  There were those who also swore that Hewitt must be Harry's father ... and yet the older Harry gets, the more his features look like Charles'.

Cindy

well I am not sure about the fact that it lessens the complaint, if the "person cheated on first" goes ahead and has an affair themslesves.. I sort of see wht you mean though.  I suppose you could sasy it does weakne their case a bit!  But I think that while C and D didn't have a tlaed out, rational agreement to be an "open married coule", theere was a tacit agreeement.  And I think that boht of htem were discreet in the sense that tehy kept up  a politie facade as to what they were each doing ont their weekeds apart when they were with lovers.  but given their peculair circumstances, they coudln't get a divorce (at least it wasn't thought that that was allowable in the 80s( and that tehy each had to have securty people with them all the time and could nto just go to an hotel with a lover on the spur of the momennt there were "modifications" on the usual unfaithful couples routine.  It seems there was a ge

[amabel]

sorry, my reply got truncated. Havne't time to repost jsut now.... will do so later...

[sandy]

I think only gossip mongers and/or sensationalistic journalists put out the Harry parentage rumors. As I recall it's nothing new, since there were gossipy people writing about Andrew's "real father".  Maybe some people get bored and like to gossip. I knew of no person in may acquaintance who thought Harry was Hewitt's. I always thought Harry resembled Charles. He looke more like his dad (when a toddler( than William did.  Hewitt has sort of a pointy face and looks NOTHING like Harry and never did.

Diana's and Charles' marriage didn't end 20 years ago legally. PLUS they did make joint appearances with their sons. In Summer 1986 the family group went to visit the King and Queen of Spain. Plus recently there were pictures of the Christmas cards. I believe Diana's and Charles' lasted until ca. 1991, pre separation. For all intents and purposes most of the public thought they were still a united couple--it was ca. 1991 that the "separate lives" rumors came out and the separation came in 1992. There was even a "togetherness" cruise on a yacht for their 10th anniversary (that the Queen decreed). It wasn't as if they were splitsville for the world to see back then.  They were still TRH the Prince and Princess of Wales.

Also the point IMO is not who cheated first. Charles pre marrying Diana admitted sleeping with a married woman. Lady Tryon spoke about her affair with Charles (she was another married woman). So the problem I have is that Charles went into a marriage with a history of sleeping with married women and a rather "lax" attitude towards another's marriage vows. Perhaps he didn't take his own marriage vows seriously given his attitude toward the married women he was involved with. A wise move on his part would be to let go the women once they married elsewhere and say goodbye for good to them.  It's a basic thing to walk away from a lover  once that person married someone else and Charles apparently though he was above all that and/or just didn't care. Some people can't be "friends" with a married woman if they have a history with them (and they slept together). Camilla also bragged about her great grandmother being a mistress so it may have been part of her ethos that it was "OK" to do this. And Charles thought Princes perhaps should be "above" morality as far as being with someone married to another man.

[amabel]

As a matter of fact, didn't Diana go to the Queen a year before the Panorama interview and tell her that she wanted a divorce, and the Queen denied it?  Diana later decided she didn't want a divorce, after all. 



Cindy, I can't ever get quotes ot work so I've had to put your post here like this, but AFAIK I don't think that this happened.  I htink what happened was that C and Di had so much trouble agreeing about things in the few months after Morton was published, that by the end of 92 they went for a separation because they could not agree even over their diaries and weekends with the children.  Once they'd reached that point I think it was pretty inevitable that they were going to end up divorced.  John Major stated in the House of Commons that there was no reason why they would not be crowned King and Queen in due course but this seemed unlikely given the fact that they were so publicly at odds with each other and obviously could not stand each other... There had never  been a separated king and queen before... or P and Pss of Wales... but i think the palace tried to delay the inevitable and hoped that maybe they could live apart but keep up an official marriage and work together at times... but the war of the waleses continued in the papers etc and I think the Queen knew that they had in the end ot make a clean cut and divorce.  Then Charles did his interview and made his relationship with Cam public which was committing him to marry her,..if he could do it.  But I think that by then Di had gotten cold feet about divorce.  She was afraid that being divorced would send her out of the RF and into the cold and she pulled back and said she didn't want a divorce.  But I think the public mood was now moving towards a feeling that if they wanted to, they could divorce and Charles could remarry, apart from devout Anglicans mostly people couldn't see why there would be a problem....
But it was Diana who wanted the divorce intitally... Charles I think then got to the stage where he also wanted it...

[amabel]

.

It only matters if the person who cheated first is the only person who cheated.  Once the other person starts cheating, it sort of lessens any complaints they might have about the first person.  If Diana and Charles had had an agreement to have an open marriage as long as they were discrete, that would be one thing.  But neither of them was discrete.  I wouldn't pay attention to the authors who say Diana and Hewitt were lovers as early 1983-84.  There were those who also swore that Hewitt must be Harry's father ... and yet the older Harry gets, the more his features look like Charles'.

Cindy

well I am not sure about the fact that it lessens the complaint, if the "person cheated on first" goes ahead and has an affair themselves.. I sort of see what you mean though.  I suppose you could Say it does weaken their case a bit!  But I think that while C and D didn't have a talked out, rational agreement to be an "open married couple", there was a tacit agreement.  And I think that both of them were discreet in the sense that they kept up  a polite facade as to what they were each doing ont their weekeds apart when they were with lovers.  I mean they didn't say "I'm off to see Camilla this weekend," or "I'm going to Devon to see James".  It was only later that tehy both talked publicly...

but given their peculiar circumstances, they couldn't get a divorce (at least it wasn't thought that that was allowable in the 80s( and that they each had to have security people with them all the time and could not just go to an hotel with a lover on the spur of the moment there were "modifications" on the usual unfaithful couples routine.  They could not be completely discreet, it was inevitable that servants and PPOs would know what was happening. It seems there was a gentlemans' agreement to share Highgrove, and have separate weekends there...
It would have been better had they talked it out and thrashed out an agreement and tried ot maintain friendly relations in spite of hteir separate lives, but I suppose emotions ran too high.....

[sandy]

I doubt Diana wanted the divorce intially. Fergie wrote how she talked to Diana about the "great escape" ca. 1992 and divorcing together. Diana did not go along with this plan.

I don't think Diana had any "tacit agreement" to be in any sort of open marriage. It was a one sided decision--on Prince Charles' part. I doubt Diana had any say in the matter as far as Charles' idea of the marraige.If Charles didn't make Camilla part of the marriage, I doubt DIana would have looked at another man. APB went along with the arrangement (with his wife and Charles and having the open marriage) so perhaps Charles thought Diana wouldn't mind or complain.

I doubt Diana enjoyed how Camilla played hostess at Highgrove which was DIANA AND CHARLES home and Camilla was pushy and nervy playing "hostess" and redecorator. Camilla's remains of cigarette smoke and even redecorating signs were there when Diana got there.

Charles was also known to be rather nasty to Diana. Bradford wrote that while some men  who take on mistresses are nicer to their wives and more solicitous (out of guilt perhaps) Charles got particularly nasty with Diana, giving the mistress jewels whhile Diana got a cheesy hat, a souvenir from Wales.  How can any "agreement" be worked out with an emotionally abusive husband.

Diana really had no choice. The marriage was directed by C and C.

[missing diana]

I found this article addressing the long friendship between Princess Anne and Andrew Parker Bowles  an interesting angle to the dynamic and events.  Camilla is portrayed as determined to get her man APB and she likely focused that same determination on a weak Charles, once he became jealous of Diana and unsupportive of her difficulties coping with the pressure.

It is interesting that he and Anne may have had lingering feelings for each other all these years.  APB seems like a cad and womanizer to me.  I really don't like how this article portrays him as this great stud while Timothy Lawrence is treated with great scorn.

Who knows, maybe now that APB is a widower he and Princesse Anne will rekindle things.  I do hate to see Timothy Lawrence treated shabbily if this is the case.

The article is old from 2007.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-463823/Why-Princess-Anne-spending-time-ex.html

[missing diana]

I don't think Diana had any "tacit agreement" to be in any sort of open marriage. It was a one sided decision--on Prince Charles' part. I doubt Diana had any say in the matter as far as Charles' idea of the marraige.If Charles didn't make Camilla part of the marriage, I doubt DIana would have looked at another man. APB went along with the arrangement (with his wife and Charles and having the open marriage) so perhaps Charles thought Diana wouldn't mind or complain.

I doubt Diana enjoyed how Camilla played hostess at Highgrove which was DIANA AND CHARLES home and Camilla was pushy and nervy playing "hostess" and redecorator. Camilla's remains of cigarette smoke and even redecorating signs were there when Diana got there.

Charles was also known to be rather nasty to Diana. Bradford wrote that while some men  who take on mistresses are nicer to their wives and more solicitous (out of guilt perhaps) Charles got particularly nasty with Diana, giving the mistress jewels whhile Diana got a cheesy hat, a souvenir from Wales.  How can any "agreement" be worked out with an emotionally abusive husband.

Diana really had no choice. The marriage was directed by C and C.

... this reminds me of the Panorama Interview when Diana stated every time she came up for air PC pushed her back down again.    I really believe it.  He was awful to her...just awful.  I do hope it comes back to him in spades.

[cinrit]

I think only gossip mongers and/or sensationalistic journalists put out the Harry parentage rumors. As I recall it's nothing new, since there were gossipy people writing about Andrew's "real father".  Maybe some people get bored and like to gossip. I knew of no person in may acquaintance who thought Harry was Hewitt's. I always thought Harry resembled Charles. He looke more like his dad (when a toddler( than William did.  Hewitt has sort of a pointy face and looks NOTHING like Harry and never did.

I know a few people who swore up and down that they were sure Harry's father must be Hewitt.  NOTE:  I am not saying I ever believed this ... I'm saying I know people who do, or at least, did.

Diana's and Charles' marriage didn't end 20 years ago legally.

I never said it did.  :)

PLUS they did make joint appearances with their sons. In Summer 1986 the family group went to visit the King and Queen of Spain. Plus recently there were pictures of the Christmas cards. I believe Diana's and Charles' lasted until ca. 1991, pre separation. For all intents and purposes most of the public thought they were still a united couple--it was ca. 1991 that the "separate lives" rumors came out and the separation came in 1992. There was even a "togetherness" cruise on a yacht for their 10th anniversary (that the Queen decreed). It wasn't as if they were splitsville for the world to see back then.  They were still TRH the Prince and Princess of Wales.

On December 9th (I think), 1992, Prime Minister John Major made a public announcement that "regrettably", Charles and Diana had decided to an amicable formal separation.  They continued to carry out their duties, at times together, but were living separately all the same.  This is fact.

Cindy

[cinrit]

Cindy, I can't ever get quotes ot work so I've had to put your post here like this, but AFAIK I don't think that this happened.  I htink what happened was that C and Di had so much trouble agreeing about things in the few months after Morton was published, that by the end of 92 they went for a separation because they could not agree even over their diaries and weekends with the children. 
Once they'd reached that point I think it was pretty inevitable that they were going to end up divorced.  John Major stated in the House of Commons that there was no reason why they would not be crowned King and Queen in due course but this seemed unlikely given the fact that they were so publicly at odds with each other and obviously could not stand each other... There had never  been a separated king and queen before... or P and Pss of Wales... but i think the palace tried to delay the inevitable and hoped that maybe they could live apart but keep up an official marriage and work together at times... but the war of the waleses continued in the papers etc and I think the Queen knew that they had in the end ot make a clean cut and divorce.  Then Charles did his interview and made his relationship with Cam public which was committing him to marry her,..if he could do it.  But I think that by then Di had gotten cold feet about divorce.  She was afraid that being divorced would send her out of the RF and into the cold and she pulled back and said she didn't want a divorce.  But I think the public mood was now moving towards a feeling that if they wanted to, they could divorce and Charles could remarry, apart from devout Anglicans mostly people couldn't see why there would be a problem....
But it was Diana who wanted the divorce intitally... Charles I think then got to the stage where he also wanted it...

Thanks, Amabel.  That's probably what I was thinking of.

Cindy

[dianab]

I doubt Diana wanted the divorce intially. Fergie wrote how she talked to Diana about the "great escape" ca. 1992 and divorcing together. Diana did not go along with this plan.

But the separations of both (Diana and Sarah) were in 1992 and the divorces in 1996, right?
I dont think Sarah was lying about this - their "great escape" - the facts, it seems, are in favor what she says, right?

[cinrit]

I doubt Diana wanted the divorce intially. Fergie wrote how she talked to Diana about the "great escape" ca. 1992 and divorcing together. Diana did not go along with this plan.

I don't think Diana had any "tacit agreement" to be in any sort of open marriage. It was a one sided decision--on Prince Charles' part. I doubt Diana had any say in the matter as far as Charles' idea of the marraige.If Charles didn't make Camilla part of the marriage, I doubt DIana would have looked at another man. APB went along with the arrangement (with his wife and Charles and having the open marriage) so perhaps Charles thought Diana wouldn't mind or complain.

I agree that if Charles hadn't cheated first, Diana wouldn't have cheated, either.  But once she did begin cheating, they did have a tacit agreement.  It might have stayed at that, but Diana outed Camilla first, then Charles outed her, then others got outed, and nothing was discrete anymore.

Cindy

[cinrit]

I doubt Diana wanted the divorce intially. Fergie wrote how she talked to Diana about the "great escape" ca. 1992 and divorcing together. Diana did not go along with this plan.

But the separations of both (Diana and Sarah) were in 1992 and the divorces in 1996, right?
I dont think Sarah was lying about this - their "great escape" - the facts, it seems, are in favor what she says, right?

Interesting.  I just checked, and yes ... Sarah and Andrew separated in 1992, and divorced in 1996.

Cindy

[dianab]

Then Charles did his interview and made his relationship with Cam public which was committing him to marry her,..if he could do it.  But I think that by then Di had gotten cold feet about divorce.  She was afraid that being divorced would send her out of the RF and into the cold and she pulled back and said she didn't want a divorce.  But I think the public mood was now moving towards a feeling that if they wanted to, they could divorce and Charles could remarry, apart from devout Anglicans mostly people couldn't see why there would be a problem....
But it was Diana who wanted the divorce intitally... Charles I think then got to the stage where he also wanted it...

I dont think was afraided of divorce, who's the afraided of divorce would not give an interview as she gave (Panorama). This talk of Diana afraid of divorce comes from people like Patrick Jephson, who dont like of her make things without consulting him or with his agreement. He himself said wrote his book in that way because HIS bitterness

[dianab]

I doubt Diana wanted the divorce intially. Fergie wrote how she talked to Diana about the "great escape" ca. 1992 and divorcing together. Diana did not go along with this plan.

But the separations of both (Diana and Sarah) were in 1992 and the divorces in 1996, right?
I dont think Sarah was lying about this - their "great escape" - the facts, it seems, are in favor what she says, right?

Interesting.  I just checked, and yes ... Sarah and Andrew separated in 1992, and divorced in 1996.

Cindy

I read that Sarah knew about Panorama interview and supported Diana in this move.
I read this in more than a bio.
I think they IN FACT were together in thing "great escape"

[sandy]

I knew nobody who swore that Harry was Hewitt's. Nobody. Just noticed that people who wrote this in the press because they had nothing better to do. I wonder how these wrters would feel if it were their kid who was being called illegitimate in the press. Disgusting

Sarah's marriage was in effect over when those topless pics of her appeared n 1992. After that there was no turning back.

I don't think there was any "tacit agreement" about cheating. Diana was no Andrew Parker Bowles. She wanted a real marriage. Hewitt even wrote that if Charles wanted her or indicated he wanted to try again, Diana would have tried to salvage the marriage.

I don't htink Charles thought about the ramifications of his confession of adultery. I think a lot of it was to hurt Diana even saying he never loved her. He didn't have any clear cut idea of what was going to happen.  He was surprised and angry when tod it was a mistake to make the confessin and eventauy blamed some courtier for it

[dianab]

I knew nobody who swore that Harry was Hewitt's. Nobody. Just noticed that people who wrote this in the press because they had nothing better to do. I wonder how these wrters would feel if it were their kid who was being called illegitimate in the press. Disgusting

100% AGREED

Sarah's marriage was in effect over when those topless pics of her appeared n 1992. After that there was no turning back.

I really think the facts back up what Sarah said in autobio.

I don't think there was any "tacit agreement" about cheating. Diana was no Andrew Parker Bowles. She wanted a real marriage. Hewitt even wrote that if Charles wanted her or indicated he wanted to try again, Diana would have tried to salvage the marriage.

Agreed.
Diana went to the Queen ask HELP. But HER son is "HOPELESS". Diana dont held some few chance in this whole mess.

I don't htink Charles thought about the ramifications of his confession of adultery. I think a lot of it was to hurt Diana even saying he never loved her. He didn't have any clear cut idea of what was going to happen.  He was surprised and angry when tod it was a mistake to make the confessin and eventauy blamed some courtier for it

I said this in topic 1, if Charles was 2nd son or average man, he NEVER would have married in this life. He would be a fufilled man sleeping with his close female friends uglier than him and more secure than him and put his ego in HIGHS.

[amabel]

I don't think there was any "tacit agreement" about cheating. Diana was no Andrew Parker Bowles. She wanted a real marriage. Hewitt even wrote that if Charles wanted her or indicated he wanted to try again, Diana would have tried to salvage the marriage.

I

Possibly, but if there was no tacit agreemetn that they had separate lives, how did she come to take a lover?  How did they work out hte logisitics of spedning differnet weekends at Highgrove?

[amabel]

I did.

I

Diana's and Charles' marriage didn't end 20 years ago legally.

I never said it did.  :)

PLUS they did make joint appearances with their sons. In Summer 1986 the family group went to visit the King and Queen of Spain. Plus recently there were pictures of the Christmas cards. I believe Diana's and Charles' lasted until ca. 1991, pre separation. For all intents and purposes most of the public thought they were still a united couple--it was ca. 1991 that the "separate lives" rumors came out and the separation came in 1992. There was even a "togetherness" cruise on a yacht for their 10th anniversary (that the Queen decreed). It wasn't as if they were splitsville for the world to see back then.  They were still TRH the Prince and Princess of Wales.

On December 9th (I think), 1992, Prime Minister John Major made a public announcement that "regrettably", Charles and Diana had decided to an amicable formal separation.  They continued to carry out their duties, at times together, but were living separately all the same.  This is fact.

Cindy

that was their official separation but in point of fact they were leading separate lives privately long before that.  There was talk in the media from long before that as well, that it seemed they were getting on badly, that they'd only spent a certain amount of nights together at Highgrove during periods of time in the late 80s.  I'm not sure how well informed the press was, as to HOW far apart the couple were, but it was no secret that the marriage was to say the least rocky and that they had plenty of chances to write "are they Happy" stories...

yes there were plenty of things like Christmas cards and "togetherness tours" that were billed as second honeymoons but the reality was very differnet.

[amabel]

But it was Diana who wanted the divorce intitally... Charles I think then got to the stage where he also wanted it...

Thanks, Amabel.  That's probably what I was thinking of.

Cindy

In fact Cindy, don't know if you saw the actual footage of the announcement - I can remember it - but IIRC when Major said that there was no reason why Di should not be queen in due course, there were gasps from the MPs because I think that nobody could really envisage this happening, of this couple who were so obviously at odds with each other, being together and being crowned as king and queen.
The announcemet said there were no plans for divorce but that's standard in royal separations... denying what's pretty obvious...
a Little later, the Archbishop of Cant said that the C of E had no problem with them being crowned as king and Queen but that they would have to basically behave well during the separation, putting their children first and refraining form any illicit relationships...so I think that while the Queen might have HOPED for a sort of separate but working together scenario, which might at least result in their being king and queen and staying ofificlally married, that wasn't going to fly....

[sandy]

I don't think there was any "tacit agreement" about cheating. Diana was no Andrew Parker Bowles. She wanted a real marriage. Hewitt even wrote that if Charles wanted her or indicated he wanted to try again, Diana would have tried to salvage the marriage.

I

Possibly, but if there was no tacit agreemetn that they had separate lives, how did she come to take a lover?  How did they work out hte logisitics of spedning differnet weekends at Highgrove?

I don't think they sat down and set up a schedule or she said I'll take a lover too. As a royal prince Charles did have an official schedule as did Diana. She knew when he'd be away and vice versa.

Charles was said to be relieved that Diana had someone else since it (in his mind) took the "heat" off him. I think he hoped she'd be a female Andrew Parker Bowles and "play nice" and "be civilised". I doubt though they did anything "formal" or "tacit". It developed that way.

[cinrit]

I don't think they sat down and set up a schedule or she said I'll take a lover too. As a royal prince Charles did have an official schedule as did Diana. She knew when he'd be away and vice versa.

They had to come home sometime.  :teehee:  So, yes, they'd have to know who was going to be home when.

Charles was said to be relieved that Diana had someone else since it (in his mind) took the "heat" off him. I think he hoped she'd be a female Andrew Parker Bowles and "play nice" and "be civilised". I doubt though they did anything "formal" or "tacit". It developed that way.

That's tacit agreement.  He knew about it and didn't care.  They both knew the other was cheating and yet stayed together.

Tacit:  Not spoken
Tacit agreement:  Implied or inferred without direct expression; understood

Cindy

[sandy]

They had no agreement-Charles probably made many "agreements" with himself on how he wanted the marriage and didn't share them with Diana.. Honestly did Diana have any sort of a choice about the way the marriage played out?  When Charles left her bed, she really had not the option of being with Charles and having more children. It's like saying Catherine of Aragon had a "tacit" agreement with Henry to let him abandon her and for him to take up with Anne. IMO Diana would not have  looked at another man if Charles ditched his mistress after he got engaged to Diana.

Diana even tried to take care of Charles at Highgrove after he broke his arm but Charles made it clear he wanted Camila there. Diana had a say in this? I very much doubt it.

Charles was more being self centered and wanted things HIS way.

[cinrit]

They had no agreement-Charles probably made many "agreements" with himself on how he wanted the marriage and didn't share them with Diana.. Honestly did Diana have any sort of a choice about the way the marriage played out?  When Charles left her bed, she really had not the option of being with Charles and having more children. It's like saying Catherine of Aragon had a "tacit" agreement with Henry to let him abandon her and for him to take up with Anne. IMO Diana would not have  looked at another man if Charles ditched his mistress after he got engaged to Diana.

Catherine of Aragon certainly had a tacit agreement with Henry that he could cheat on her (though not necessarily throw her over).  You know, we're going around and around in a circle.  You seem to either not understand the meanings of "tacit agreement" or "for all intents and purposes".  So I'd say this discussion has pretty much run it's course since my words get twisted, words get put in my mouth that I never said, and you don't understand or you ignore the premise of "tacit" and "intents and purposes".  The same things keep being said over and over and over about Charles.  Nothing new is being presented, so I think I'm over.  If something new comes up, I'm more than happy to continue the discussion.  But we're honestly beating a dead horse now.  :flower:

Cindy