Prince charles

I saw this on the news last night too… Have no idea what’s going on.
Quite an unusual Ten O’clock News last night :
“Our main headline today : It has been confirmed that Prince Charles is at the centre of the royal debacle which, under orders from the palace, we can tell you nothing about. Prince Charles has denied any truth in the matter.” - odd!

The current RUMOURS and I emphasize RUMOURS is that he ALLEDGEDLY had an affair with a servant.

As far as I can tell, some former servant who cannot be named has revealed something about some member of the Royal Family doing something that can’t be mentioned.
Prince Charles has confirmed that he is the person to whom the allegations refer, but has denied the veracity of the allegations.

Seems pretty likely the the former servant is going to be Paul Burrell (buy my book, pleeeeeease!).

It will turn out to be something rather mundane, I reckon.

Somehow I doubt the mods will leave this thread open. When the entire UK media is keeping shtum I doubt the Chicago Reader will want to risk legal action.

The most that has been broadcast in mainstream channels is that the allegation is unrelated to previous allegations about activities at the palace (not involving Charles).

…except that the UK media might actually know something factual, whereas we’re just pulling speculations out of our collective arses.

It will all come out in the wash anyway; media gags never seem to be permanent.

Are you sure that’s what was said ?

Factually speaking, this might help - no speculation, just reported cites. Strictly legal:

NYT, 4th November

“On the tape, according to news reports, George Smith, a former royal valet, accuses an unnamed male courtier of raping him and, even more explosively, says he saw a senior member of the royal family and a royal servant engaged in a compromising sexual act.”
Followed by:

Prince Charles denies ‘ludicrous’ claims:

"It said: "In recent days, there have been media reports concerning an allegation that a former Royal Household employee witnessed an incident some years ago involving a senior member of the Royal Family.

"The speculation needs to be brought to an end.

"The allegation was that the Prince of Wales was involved in the incident.

“This allegation is untrue. The incident which the former employee claims to have witnessed did not take place.”

The statement said the allegation had been made by a former Royal employee - not Mr Fawcett - “who, unfortunately, has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and has previously suffered from alcoholism following active service in the Falklands”."

Probably more comfortable for the Chicago Reader if little more is said, at least at this point. I don’t think it would be a problem in this particular case, but that’s easy for me to say.
Fwiw, I think this was the right forum as we’re, at this stage, only interested in published facts.

That was published facts :slight_smile:

Sorry, make all of that published information, it makes more sense . . .

As London_Calling says, there is already some newpaper reporting to cite.

On a BBC TV discussion programme, there was a claim that this and other allegations would, if proven, lead to the collapse of the Monarchy.

On a related note, Paul Burrell (Princess Diana’s former butler) has justified his publishing a dramatic book on the Royals (for an advance of around £250,000) by saying that he deeply respects Diana and wants to honour her memory.
:confused:
:smack:

Maybe this is nothing more than proof of my own lack of imagination, but I can’t think of anything he could have done that would have that kind of effect; it’s almost a foregone conclusion that he will be leapfrogged for the throne anyway;

Um, AFAIK the British “Official Secrets Act” does not apply to citizens of other countries, so the mods can leave this thread open with impunity, and we can all speculate to our heart’s content on the House of Windsor’s latest flap without fear of drawing reprisals from British jackbooted thugs upon the head of either the Chicago Reader or the participants in this thread.

Myself, I like the “he’s going to announce that he’d rather be queen” theory. :smiley:

Oh, and, this just came up on CNN.com.

My money’s on the dirt being all over the Internet by lunchtime.

I’m pretty sure though, that Due to the international nature of the board, the powers that be might (in certain circumstances) consider it unwise to leave threads open that detail activities illegal only outside the USA.
Not saying that this is a qualifying thread, but I’m reasonably certain that I’ve heard some statement to this effect before.

Official Secrets Act has nothing to do with it. We’re talking plain old libel laws.

You must be thinking of British libel law. Under American libel law there is practically no way the Chicago Reader could be held liable on the basis of publishing salacious rumours about Prince Charles. And there is little chance, given recent court decisions, that an American court would enforce such a British judgment.

I’m betting Charles was caught in bed with a male servant. That seems to be the popular belief.

OP was a returning spammer. Therefore OP banned and thread closed. Nothing to do with the contents of this thread.

Just clarifying.

-xash
General Questions Moderator