Prince Harry Faces Dual Backlash in UK and US over Allegations
In his recent legal battles, Prince Harry encountered a dual onslaught of criticism on both sides of the Atlantic, failing to substantiate his claims amidst mounting scrutiny.
Challenging a 2020 decision by Ravec to revoke his automatic police protection upon returning to the UK, the Duke of Sussex found himself entangled in a legal quagmire.
Despite his fervent assertions, Harry's case crumbled under the weight of what GB News labeled as "inaccuracies" during his High Court ordeal.
The Duke alleged that the decision to strip him of taxpayer-funded security was executed without his consent. However, the court pointed to a document from the royal household, dating back to January 2020, cautioning him about the impending transition to private security.
Lord Sedwill, the cabinet secretary at the time, explicitly communicated to Fiona McIlwham, Harry’s private secretary, that the Duke should not expect his security arrangements to remain static.
While Prince Harry asserted his status as an "exceptional member" within the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec), the court rebuffed this interpretation as a misinterpretation of Ravec's procedures.
Moreover, the court upheld the legitimacy of the bespoke security measures outlined for Harry in the Ravec decision of February 28, 2020.
Despite his objections, Prince Harry's offer to finance his own protective detail failed to sway the court, which emphasized the binary nature of entitlement to Ravec protection.
In another setback, Prince Harry's memoir 'Spare' failed to substantiate its claims in a US court, where assertions regarding his personal conduct were dismissed as unsubstantiated.
John Bardo, representing the DHS, underscored the distinction between literary narrative and sworn testimony during proceedings at the E Barrett Prettyman Courthouse, highlighting the book's inability to serve as conclusive proof of allegations.
As legal battles continue to unfold, Prince Harry finds himself grappling with the fallout of his assertions on both sides of the Atlantic, navigating a tempest of scrutiny and skepticism.
