Prince William upset over Princess Diana topless picture scandal | Daily Mail Online (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7465723/Prince-William-upset-Princess-Diana-topless-picture-scandal.html)
A chairman for Conde Nast has told/written about a time when PD told him that PW was upset because of some topless photos of her.
I find this article to be classless, and unlikely to be true. What (british) newspaper would publish topless pics of a royal in the 90s? They don't even do that now. And Diana would have sued.
Silly article.
I can't remember which newspaper it was or even if it was a foreign one but I do remember topless photos of Diana being published. She was on holiday and sun baking at the time. It was probably after the divorce when the British media, in their usual charming way, decided it was open slather on her after she was no longer an HRH.
Aha. Got it. But I don't think that UK newspapers would publish something like that. Correct me if i'm wrong.
Diana would've perhaps sued had they done so, considering that she also sued when that gym owner took photos of her.
It's very creepy the way paparazzi insists on not only intruding but to take photos of extremely private moments. Surely that can be considered sexual harassment?
Anyway IF she did indeed have this conversation she was probably making light of the incident. Most people make "off color" joke. There was no need to bring it up, IMO.
It seems like it's still open season on Diana, IMO.
Well, tabloids did regard it as open season on Diana. Take the Sun newspaper. Would the Sun have published the following 'joke' in an article about Dodi and Diana on the yacht if she had still been considered part of the BRF?
Dodi to Diana on the deck of the holiday yacht 'How about a dip, darling?'
Diana answering him 'No, not here, darling. The staff will see us. Let's go for a swim instead.'
Is that crude and tasteless? Yes! Had the Press turned on Diana? A thousand times, Yes! Are they capable of almost anything when they're in that mood? Yes! And it's a very small step from that sort of thing to publishing photos of Diana topless. I do think the tabloids were capable of doing that.
What a crass joke that was. It seems like they were intent on portraying her in a certain way. I wonder how their private lives are when looked into. Hypocrites.
One difference is that had they actually published the photos Diana, I think, would have had a right to sue because of britains serious libel laws (correct me if i'm wrong).
This is why, IMO, the tabloids went for the jokes and innuendos in order to try to smear Diana's name. Had they gone over the line Diana would've probably responded in a severe manner, and thus they settled for toeing it, IMO.
I think the laws should be revised so that when a a nude photo is taken without a persons permission it should be considered sexual harassment.
It seems as if they're still at it with the smearing.
The photo was published in the Daily Mirror.
Prince William Upset About Topless Photos of Princess Diana | Al Bawaba (https://www.albawaba.com/editors-choice/prince-william-upset-about-topless-photo-scandal-princess-diana-1308816)
The Me Too movement is going on now. This sort of thing would not have been tolerated today and Coleridge trying to make money about Diana being harassed and gossip about how William reacted.
William and Kate had the same thing happen to them and sued. ANd won.
Diana was in a secluded place sunbathing, it was that she had her straps down and it was a grainy photo. It is a reflection on the paparazzi and Coleridge for dredging it up.
I hope the Me Too movement causes him to get much flak for this.
Diana is not around to refute what Coleridge claims.
Quote from: Curryong on September 15, 2019, 09:37:23 PM
I can't remember which newspaper it was or even if it was a foreign one but I do remember topless photos of Diana being published. She was on holiday and sun baking at the time. It was probably after the divorce when the British media, in their usual charming way, decided it was open slather on her after she was no longer an HRH.
I do believe that it was mostly featured in foreign media and not too long before her death in 1997. Diana was no longer receiving the positive press that she once could rely upon with the British newspapers and tabloids.
It's awful to see how her privacy was grossly invaded much like her daughter-in-law's. :no:
Quote
I think the laws should be revised so that when a a nude photo is taken without a persons permission it should be considered sexual harassment.
:thumbsup:
France has very strict privacy laws dating back decades, so even if one is topless on a beach (not uncommon in France) you still cannot take someone's photo without their permission. This is how the Cambridges were able to sue in French courts and win their lawsuit against Closer magazine.
Quote from: oak_and_cedar on September 15, 2019, 09:11:24 PM
Prince William upset over Princess Diana topless picture scandal | Daily Mail Online (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7465723/Prince-William-upset-Princess-Diana-topless-picture-scandal.html)
A chairman for Conde Nast has told/written about a time when PD told him that PW was upset because of some topless photos of her.
I find this article to be classless, and unlikely to be true. What (british) newspaper would publish topless pics of a royal in the 90s? They don't even do that now. And Diana would have sued.
Silly article.
[/quoteQuote from: Curryong on September 15, 2019, 10:11:47 PM
Well, tabloids did regard it as open season on Diana. Take the Sun newspaper. Would the Sun have published the following 'joke' in an article about Dodi and Diana on the yacht if she had still been considered part of the BRF?
Dodi to Diana on the deck of the holiday yacht 'How about a dip, darling?'
Diana answering him 'No, not here, darling. The staff will see us. Let's go for a swim instead.'
Is that crude and tasteless? Yes! Had the Press turned on Diana? A thousand times, Yes! Are they capable of almost anything when they're in that mood? Yes! And it's a very small step from that sort of thing to publishing photos of Diana topless. I do think the tabloids were capable of doing that.
As I recall the pics appeared in some foreign magazines.. ten a friend of Di's bought them up before they had time to circulate?
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 10:48:37 AM
Quote from: oak_and_cedar on September 15, 2019, 09:11:24 PM
Prince William upset over Princess Diana topless picture scandal | Daily Mail Online (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7465723/Prince-William-upset-Princess-Diana-topless-picture-scandal.html)
A chairman for Conde Nast has told/written about a time when PD told him that PW was upset because of some topless photos of her.
I find this article to be classless, and unlikely to be true. What (british) newspaper would publish topless pics of a royal in the 90s? They don't even do that now. And Diana would have sued.
Silly article.
Sarah was photographed topless and spread all over the newspapers. There is also a photo of Sophie Rys Jones with a TV presenter pulling up her top, in a picture taken a few years before.
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 10:50:47 AM
Quote from: oak_and_cedar on September 15, 2019, 10:39:33 PM
What a crass joke that was. It seems like they were intent on portraying her in a certain way. I wonder how their private lives are when looked into. Hypocrites.
One difference is that had they actually published the photos Diana, I think, would have had a right to sue because of britains serious libel laws (correct me if i'm wrong).
I
what would Libel laws have to do with a topless photo? If they said soemthig about her which was proved to be untrue she could sue for libel.. but that has nothing to do with photos of semi nudity.
Coleridge claims Diana "said" something. She's dead and can't refute it.
The odd thing is some of the DM comments blame Meghan for "spreading t his PR."
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 01:40:13 PM
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2019, 02:27:55 AM
I do believe that it was mostly featured in foreign media and not too long before her death in 1997. Diana was no longer receiving the positive press that she once could rely upon with the British newspapers and tabloids.
It's awful to see how her privacy was grossly invaded much like her daughter-in-law's. :no:
:thumbsup:
France has very strict privacy laws dating back decades, so even if one is topless on a beach (not uncommon in France) you still cannot take someone's photo without their permission. This is how the Cambridges were able to sue in French courts and win their lawsuit against Closer magazine.
The paparazzi treated Diana like dirt because she would not pose for pictures.
As I recall, Diana was receiving positive press at the time.
QuoteOne difference is that had they actually published the photos Diana, I think, would have had a right to sue because of britains serious libel laws (correct me if i'm wrong).
I don't believe that you can sue for libel due to the photos as it has to be something written or said. (This is what brought on the Legge-Bourke's family's letter to Diana after her remark to Tiggy.) She could have presumably sued for invasion of privacy though.
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2019, 02:36:01 PM
I don't believe that you can sue for libel due to the photos as it has to be something written or said. (This is what brought on the Legge-Bourke's family's letter to Diana after her remark to Tiggy.) She could have presumably sued for invasion of privacy though.
If she was on a public beach though?
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 02:51:51 PM
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2019, 01:39:08 PM
Coleridge claims Diana "said" something. She's dead and can't refute it.
The odd thing is some of the DM comments blame Meghan for "spreading t his PR."
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 01:40:13 PM
The paparazzi treated Diana like dirt because she would not pose for pictures.
As I recall, Diana was receiving positive press at the time.
how could both these statements be correct? If diana was "being treated like dirt" by the paparazzi, she was harldy receveing positive press...And yes generally she wasn't receiving positive press. Photographers saw her as fair game, chased her and treated her like a commodity. She got more jokes and unkind stories.. and her relationship with Dodi was not looked on favourably
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2019, 02:36:01 PM
I don't believe that you can sue for libel due to the photos as it has to be something written or said. (This is what brought on the Legge-Bourke's family's letter to Diana after her remark to Tiggy.) She could have presumably sued for invasion of privacy though.
Thanks for the correction. She could have of course sued for invasion of privacy.
It makes it sound like Diana caused it she didn't. It was the paparazzi the same type who took the pictures of Kate.
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 07:20:17 PM
Quote from: amabel on September 16, 2019, 02:37:11 PM
If she was on a public beach though?
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 02:51:51 PM
how could both these statements be correct? If diana was "being treated like dirt" by the paparazzi, she was harldy receveing positive press...And yes generally she wasn't receiving positive press. Photographers saw her as fair game, chased her and treated her like a commodity. She got more jokes and unkind stories.. and her relationship with Dodi was not looked on favourably
The paparazzi wanted $$$$$, Diana could bring them the money shots. If she were not popular nobody would care about Diana pics. I recall she DID receive positive press except from Penny Junor and her ilk. So yes, amabel both statements are correct. the paparazzi were hungry for $$$ which Diana pics could bring she was frustrating them and they did not like it.
Quote from: sandy on September 16, 2019, 07:19:17 PM
It makes it sound like Diana caused it she didn't. It was the paparazzi the same type who took the pictures of Kate.
Diana did not cause anything IMO. She was harassed by paparazzi who acted shamelessly.
QuoteIf she was on a public beach though?
@amabel-In France this would apply even if you're on a public beach. The privacy issue might vary from country to country.
QuoteDiana did not cause anything IMO. She was harassed by paparazzi who acted shamelessly.
Yes and the same thing happened to the Duchesses of York and Cambridge. Each had an expectation of privacy which was violated.
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 10:47:10 PM
QuotePhotographers saw her as fair game, chased her and treated her like a commodity. She got more jokes and unkind stories.. and her relationship with Dodi was not looked on favourably
It is a shame that she chose to give up her Royal Protection Officers after the divorce. :(
She gave up the royal protection but that does not of course give "permission" for her to be harassed that way.
Jackie Kennedy was pursued by the paparazzi and ended up taking her main paparazzi stalker to Court.
Double post auto-merged: September 16, 2019, 11:12:49 PM
Jackie pursued by Galella.
The Story Behind the Most Famous Paparazzi Photo | Time (https://time.com/4458511/paparazzi-jackie-kennedy-ron-galella/)
QuoteShe gave up the royal protection but that does not of course give "permission" for her to be harassed that way.
Giving up royal protection meant that she no longer had the support or power of officials and BRF to keep the harassment at bay. Sadly this was a very poor decision on Diana's part IMO.
She was bothered by the paps before the divorce.
And it escalated after the divorce when she gave up royal protection. Sadly a very poor decision that Diana made.
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2019, 09:53:41 PM
Yes and the same thing happened to the Duchesses of York and Cambridge. Each had an expectation of privacy which was violated.
Yes, but with Diana it was more fierce and for longer periods. I've seen videos and it really looked awful. Granted, i've seen videos of the DOC being hounded and it looked awful!
If you've ever seen the BBC doc inventing the royals, Penny Junor described DOC being called some really foul names. How they can get away with this, I don't know.
The difference, I feel, is that Kate is of course married to PW. This gives her the backing of the institution that she married into.
Diana was divorced from PC and had to provide that kind of support all on her own. That can be very difficult and expensive.
Overall I think that Diana suffered the most from this problem, IMO.
Quote from: TLLK on September 16, 2019, 11:50:45 PM
Giving up royal protection meant that she no longer had the support or power of officials and BRF to keep the harassment at bay. Sadly this was a very poor decision on Diana's part IMO.
And protection officers were good at keeping photographers to a safe distance.. and had contacts with other police officers and officials..
Double post auto-merged: September 17, 2019, 07:24:20 AM
Quote from: oak_and_cedar on September 17, 2019, 06:06:43 AM
Yes, but with Diana it was more fierce and for longer periods. I've seen videos and it really looked awful. Granted, i've seen videos of the DOC being hounded and it looked awful!
If you've ever seen the BBC doc inventing the royals, Penny Junor described DOC being called some really foul names. How they can get away with this, I don't know.
The difference, I feel, is that Kate is of course married to PW. This gives her the backing of the institution that she married into.
Diana was divorced from PC and had to provide that kind of support all on her own. That can be very difficult and expensive.
Overall I think that Diana suffered the most from this problem, IMO.
no Diana could have retained her ROyal Protection officers but chose not to do so... She did not want security men around her esp RPOs
Even so Diana did not "ask for" this treatment.
Quote from: sandy on September 17, 2019, 12:32:07 PM
Even so Diana did not "ask for" this treatment.
No, it would be very odd if she did. But by not having RPO's she was certainly making it easier for photographers to harass her...
No Diana never "asked for" this treatment but I agree that having the RPOs would have made it more difficult to be harassed like she was after the divorce.
Quote from: amabel on September 17, 2019, 07:07:50 AM
And protection officers were good at keeping photographers to a safe distance.. and had contacts with other police officers and officials..
that's not true.
Quote from: amabel on September 17, 2019, 07:07:50 AM
no Diana could have retained her ROyal Protection officers but chose not to do so... She did not want security men around her esp RPOs
It's not that she minded security men. I don't think she wanted them to report back her whereabouts to PC.
Quote from: oak_and_cedar on September 17, 2019, 06:08:15 PM
It's not that she minded security men. I don't think she wanted them to report back her whereabouts to PC.
Do you think that Charles was interested in her once they had separated and divorced? Not a bit of it. She nevr was that comfortable with security men.. but to get rid of them was vry foolish
Well CHarles probably was interested. After Diana died, he and Camilla cooperated with Junor who wrote scathing stories about the late Diana.
Quote from: sandy on September 18, 2019, 10:21:54 AM
Well CHarles probably was interested. After Diana died, he and Camilla cooperated with Junor who wrote scathing stories about the late Diana.
why wodl he be interested? He was completely moved on, emotionally and as far as he was concerned the marriage was over and he did not care what Diana did.
Apparently he has not moved on. He (and Camilla) cooperated with books by Junor which derided Diana. Junor said they cooperated.
Quote from: amabel on September 18, 2019, 10:38:51 AM
why wodl he be interested? He was completely moved on, emotionally and as far as he was concerned the marriage was over and he did not care what Diana did.
I don't believe that Charles was too interested in Diana's personally life at that point though I'm sure he was curious as to if she'd introduced any of her lovers to the boys. I believe that Charles and Diana reached a point of civility towards the end so that they could try and parent together. They each had their own personal lives so as long as their sons were safe, it wasn't really of their ex's business. However Charles could likely understand her frustration of having her privacy invaded when the topless photographs were taken and later released. :no:
Diana was said to still be wary of Charles and Charles apparently still had issues with Diana since he cooperated with Junor on her books. Diana did not have many "lovers." I am not even sure if the boys met Hasnet Khan who was her boyfriend.
Quote from: sandy on September 18, 2019, 02:35:32 PM
Diana was said to still be wary of Charles and Charles apparently still had issues with Diana since he cooperated with Junor on her books. Diana did not have many "lovers." I am not even sure if the boys met Hasnet Khan who was her boyfriend.
yes they did. I believe that William talked to him about his education and future. And they knew James Hewitt pretty well....
Double post auto-merged: September 18, 2019, 02:55:26 PM
Quote from: TLLK on September 18, 2019, 02:11:33 PM
I don't believe that Charles was too interested in Diana's personally life at that point though I'm sure he was curious as to if she'd introduced any of her lovers to the boys. I believe that Charles and Diana reached a point of civility towards the end so that they could try and parent together. They each had their own personal lives so as long as their sons were safe, it wasn't really of their ex's business. However Charles could likely understand her frustration of having her privacy invaded when the topless photographs were taken and later released. :no:
Im not sure if they had really reached that point of civility.. I think they tried and "acted polite" but under it Diana was still emotional and resentful.. and Charles just wanted to move on and get on with his life...I think he didn't care what she did other than if it affected the boys...
James Hewitt was out of their lives after a few years and still is. How well they knew him is subject to speculation. They probably realize that he was not particularly nice selling the story of his involvement with their mother.
I don't see Diana as "emotional" and "resentful" she was moving on as well.
I don't think Diana entirely trusted Charles.
Quote from: sandy on September 18, 2019, 03:00:19 PM
James Hewitt was out of their lives after a few years and still is. How well they knew him is subject to speculation. They probably realize that he was not particularly nice selling the story of his involvement with their mother.
I don't see Diana as "emotional" and "resentful" she was moving on as well.
I don't think Diana entirely trusted Charles.
THey did know James Hewitt well.. He was around in Di's life for a few years when they were still young enough to spend a lot of time with her. And they were friendly with Hasnat Khan.. Also Will Carling...
They were children then. What is the meaning of "knowing well". I doubt they spent all that much time with him anyway. He got them uniforms to wear but Diana was through with him in the early nineties.
Burrell never talked of the boys meeting hasnet Khan at KP. Diana would cook dinner for Khan but no mention of the boys being around.
Carling said he was not Diana's Lover. So he should not be on the list. He was a sports star so the boys met him as fans. He was not Diana's lover.
Quote from: sandy on September 18, 2019, 03:05:20 PM
They were children then. What is the meaning of "knowing well". I doubt they spent all that much time with him anyway. He got them uniforms to wear but Diana was through with him in the early nineties.
Burrell never talked of the boys meeting hasnet Khan at KP. Diana would cook dinner for Khan but no mention of the boys being around.
Carling said he was not Diana's Lover. So he should not be on the list. He was a sports star so the boys met him as fans. He was not Diana's lover.
I'd say they knew him pretty well for a time.. They spent weekends with Diana and Hewitt was there. They looked up to him as they were keen to be soldiers. and Diana did introduce her boys to Khan....
The relationship with Hewitt did not stand the test of time. He was persona non grata after he cooperated with that writer. I don't recall Burrell talking about the boys being there when Khan visited KP.
Quote from: amabel on September 18, 2019, 07:53:05 AM
Do you think that Charles was interested in her once they had separated and divorced? Not a bit of it. She nevr was that comfortable with security men.. but to get rid of them was vry foolish
Diana should have still been offered to chose her own security and be compensated for it. She was the mother of the future king after all and should have been adequately cared for, which she was not IMO.
Quote from: oak_and_cedar on September 18, 2019, 06:58:29 PM
Diana should have still been offered to chose her own security and be compensated for it. She was the mother of the future king after all and should have been adequately cared for, which she was not IMO.
She was offered security, the best POs are the Royal squad.. but she did not want them and would not have them. It was her choice...
Double post auto-merged: September 18, 2019, 07:10:56 PM
Quote from: sandy on September 18, 2019, 03:37:11 PM
The relationship with Hewitt did not stand the test of time. He was persona non grata after he cooperated with that writer. I don't recall Burrell talking about the boys being there when Khan visited KP.
So? What has Burrell got to do with anyting. I dotn know what you mean since its indisputable that the boys were freidnly with James Hewitt during his affair with Diana.
Diana had security when her children were with her.
Burrell has everything to do with it, he recorded his recollections of Diana's romance with Khan.
They were children and Hewitt was no "friend" to them as it turned out. I see nothing indisputable since the boys never commented on how they felt about hewitt.
Quote from: sandy on September 18, 2019, 07:56:04 PM
Diana had security when her children were with her.
Burrell has everything to do with it, he recorded his recollections of Diana's romance with Khan.
They were children and Hewitt was no "friend" to them as it turned out. I see nothing indisputable since the boys never commented on how they felt about hewitt.
Since they knew him well, and he took them to see tanks and brought them lilte army uniforms I shodl say they were very fond of him..
I don't think they spent that much time with him. I think they don't think back on him fondly considering...
Quote from: sandy on September 18, 2019, 08:05:51 PM
I don't think they spent that much time with him. I think they don't think back on him fondly considering...
Diana met him most weekends for some time.. and she had the boys with her..
Considering that he was their riding instructor and both boys looked up to him as he was an active duty soldier, I believe they did become fond of him. He'd bring his dog to play with the brothers too.
Prince William and Prince Harry Were Close To Princess Diana's Ex-Lover James Hewitt (https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/princess-diana-lover-james-hewitt-prince-william-prince-harry.html/)
QuoteAround the same time Prince Charles began seeing Camilla Parker Bowles again, Princess Diana struck up a romantic relationship with her riding instruction James Hewitt. Their romance began in 1986. The princess first met Hewitt because she wanted to polish her riding skills. In her book, William and Harry, royal biographer Katie Nicholl explained, ?[Diana] had never been a horsewoman but, after seeing how much pleasure it brought her sons, decided to have a go. The handsome Hewitt became her instructor and soon became a regular visitor to Highgrove, where he would help William and Harry improve their trotting and cantering.?
QuoteHewitt
Since Hewitt was around for so many years, Princess Diana?s sons? Prince William and Prince Harry were very close to him. In her 2007 book The Diana Chronicles, Tina Brown wrote, ?He became such a familiar private guest whenever the prince was away that William and Harry developed a fondness for him. Hewitt had little Army uniforms made for them for their visits to Windsor Barracks. They loved playing on the Highgrove lawn with the Army captain and his black labrador.?
As I said, I doubt they were close to him since he cooperated with that writer.
I saw the photos of the army uniforms but they were just children then.
Quote from: amabel on September 18, 2019, 08:14:28 PM
Diana met him most weekends for some time.. and she had the boys with her..
So it seems that they were used to seeing James throughout the timeframe of the affair.
Quote from: TLLK on September 18, 2019, 11:45:07 PM
So it seems that they were used to seeing James throughout the timeframe of the affair.
Of course they were. Her relationship with Hewitt lasted quite a long time, wit her meeiting regularly on weekends either at Highgrove or his mother's house.. And the boys were still very young and spent most of their time with her so they were around too. and they enjoyed riding and playing games with him. And I understand she also introduced them to Hasnat Khan, who chatted to William abuot his schooling and future.
It lasted from 1986-1989; then briefly in 1991 and then they were friends only until Diana called a halt to seeing him. Then he went to Pasternack and told all. Not very nice.
Quote from: sandy on September 19, 2019, 01:46:16 PM
It lasted from 1986-1989; then briefly in 1991 and then they were friends only until Diana called a halt to seeing him. Then he went to Pasternack and told all. Not very nice.
They were lovers for over 3 years. Diana saw a lot of him, and the boys did too...whether he is "nice" or not, is irrelevants
I think it is very relevant he proved to be a false friend.
Quote from: sandy on September 19, 2019, 02:16:51 PM
I think it is very relevant he proved to be a false friend.
not really. Tthe issue was, did Diana introduce her boys to him. She did, and they got to be quite friendly with him for some years.
From what I've read, the brothers really enjoyed their time with him while Hewitt and Diana were together, but I wouldn't be surprised when he turned out to be another man who betrayed Diana.
What is James Hewitt doing these days, anyway? I know his bar business in Spain went bankrupt years ago and then he had a health scare. The last I heard, he was still living with his elderly mother, but wonder whether he's actually employed.
Quote from: Curryong on September 19, 2019, 03:16:46 PM
What is James Hewitt doing these days, anyway? I know his bar business in Spain went bankrupt years ago and then he had a health scare. The last I heard, he was still living with his elderly mother, but wonder whether he's actually employed.
He had a stroke and a heart attack I tihink a year ago. Sounds like he might well be in very poor health...
Quote from: oak_and_cedar on September 17, 2019, 06:08:15 PM
It's not that she minded security men. I don't think she wanted them to report back her whereabouts to PC.
i read she felt discomfortable and her friends too. and ken wharphe wasnt aware of professional boundaries and liked join conversations of her friends. and he also leaked info of where diana was to the paparazzi
Double post auto-merged: September 19, 2019, 03:34:23 PM
Quote from: amabel on September 19, 2019, 03:18:00 PM
He had a stroke and a heart attack I tihink a year ago. Sounds like he might well be in very poor health...
from the pictures that i saw of him last time at dm, after this health scare, he looked very well and not someone who went through those healthy issues.
Double post auto-merged: September 19, 2019, 03:39:04 PM
Quote from: amabel on September 18, 2019, 08:14:28 PM
Diana met him most weekends for some time.. and she had the boys with her..
he and her mother said in 'diana story of a princess' doc and book as diana, the boys and bodyguards stayed at his mother home during weekends. and hewitt stayed with them at highgrove and kp. his mother sometimes them visited there too.
Yes, security guards can spread gossip. And sometimes it gets to the media.
Quote from: dianab on September 19, 2019, 03:31:16 PM
i read she felt discomfortable and her friends too. and ken wharphe wasnt aware of professional boundaries and liked join conversations of her friends. and he also leaked info of where diana was to the paparazzi
Yes, he wasn't very trustworthy IMO. Diana was right in not trusting him because look at what he did afterwards. He wrote a book (with Jobson of all people) where basically he made Diana out to be erratic, irrational and he was the wise one (much like Burrell, Simmons, Jephson, etc. IMO) and had silly, unnecessary details that reflected badly on Diana. The guy was/is a snake IMO. Even his former employers complained about his retelling of stories. Says alot about him.