As I keep saying, I don’t believe that the Duchess of Cambridge is going to give birth very soon. She’ll give birth this month, absolutely, but I’m still feeling like it will be around April 20th. One of the reasons why I still think that Kate has two weeks or more left? Because she’s not even in London, which is where all of the baby-delivering preparations are being made. Kate and the children spent last week and weekend in Bucklebury, with the Middletons. William allegedly joined them late, then he and Kate drove to Windsor for Easter church service with the Queen. After that, Kate went to Anmer Hall in Norfolk. We know that because someone (WHO?) snapped these very stalkerish photos of Kate shopping at Waitrose in Norfolk:
Heavily pregnant busy mum the Duchess of Cambridge snapped by a fellow shopper at Waitrose. https://t.co/E9D9TA3MZb
— ♔ Royal_Reporter (@Royal__Reporter) April 4, 2018
If you go that Daily Mail piece, you can see that the photos are incredibly close-range, both inside Waitrose and outside, as Kate loaded up her car with her reusable bags full of herbs and chutney. I have so many questions about these photos. Were they posed? Kate had to know that someone was snapping her, right? Where was her security? Why was she loading her car herself? Who organized this “Kate: Just Like Us” photoshoot? It’s all very odd.
As for the predictions about the sex of the baby… I’ve got nothing. I’m truly not getting any particular vibes about this one, possibly because Will and Kate made the choice to not find out too, so it’s not like they’ve been dropping hints or anything. Some of you are convinced that this one is a boy, but the betting market is convinced that she’s having another girl. The odds-on favorite name for the girl? Mary. And then Alice, Victoria and Elizabeth. If it’s a boy, the bets are all going towards Edward or Albert. I’m fine with Mary and Alice for a girl, but I hope that if it is a boy, they don’t go with Edward or Albert. Please don’t! I’m not saying the boy’s name has to be super-trendy like Prince Sebastian or Prince Jameson, but find a “normal” name that isn’t so dated, please!
Photos courtesy of Pacific Coast News.
I have a friend who’s a pro at taking those kinds of stalker photos at close range without the person noticing. She sends them to me all the time, mainly whenever she sees a funny outfit on the tram or in the grocery store. So it is possible they were just taken by a random person. Who knows.
That sounds plausible to me.
This is super close and no way her security didn’t notice. Both inside and outside? For that length of time at the same angle? No matter how good your friend is her protection has to be better.
Logic and history says this is more likely staged.
I lean towards obvious too. Criticism for being late to Easter? Oh but look, she’s such a normal mum doing the shopping all by herself.
Yeah no chance her security wouldn’t notice the same person following (?) her long enough to take photos inside and outside.
This is just another stunt to pad the we are ‘normal Bill and Kate’ just leave us along but keep paying for everything, narrative – with an added touch of ‘don’t forget about meeeeeeeeeee’ in run up to Harry and Meghan’s wedding.
Her RPO has his back to the public in the one photo which means he can’t see a threat coming from that angle…so either he is the worst RPO ever and needs to be fired or else they know who is taking the photo. No one is going to jump out of the back of the Range Rover but instead they will come from the angle where his back was currently facing.
Has *no one* ever used the zoom function on your phones camera? Mine takes fantastic shots. I don’t find this implausible at all. I grew up in Beverly Hills, and still live around the same area; you see celebs walking around, and in the stores, all the time. It’s pretty easy to snap a pic, and get a good one, with your phone cam zoomed.
Btw, just as an example: a few mos. ago I signed up for a tutorial at the Apple store in Century City, and none other than DIANA ROSS was my one and only table mate. Now, to you younger CBers, that may not be much, but some of you older ones know what a musical icon/legend she is 😊
@Imqrious2 I have died is Diana Ross was at my table!
Well prince Philip had a surgery so i guess royal pr needed some distraction. That’s my take on it. Like look, everything is normal, let’s not talk about the fact that British doctors wouldn’t lift a finger if someone close to 100 would need a hip replacement….
I vote for staged photo too. If you can point a camera at a subject you can also point a gun. The protection specifically allowed this. They are not allowing the wife of a future monarch to be a target. But someone fighting the work-shy label would want pics like this to appear.
Sure it is staged. She has tight security, but I think she is doing what she probably always does but figured hey let’s make a moment out of it. We could use some good PR after the Matthews scandal and late to Easter.
I think she does do her own shopping sometimes because I believe that is why she likes to stay away from the paps.
In LA and NYC you see very famous people doing everyday things. My husband and I were in line behind Janet Jackson once buying groceries. She was kind of kooky but polite. I had seen her out at bars and clubs before in New York, so it was weird to see her in regular clothes and this enormous key chain. It is like two different people. My husband still can’t get over the keychain and the sheer number of keys on it.
Magnolia, did she have it hooked to her clothing? I am trying to picture whether it was a run of the mill janitorial style loop of keys, or a bedazzled type.
I always have “two Janets” in my mind anyway, having grown up watching her play Penny. Then came rock star Janet.
Imquirous2….Wow! Do tell us more, what happened? What was the tutorial for? How long did it last? Did you say anything to the legend?
Full hair wiglet/curl & makeup, pearl drop earrings, smart blouse, and…. what is that, an advert for one of her patronages? I remember the way people loved how Diana would advertise for her charities whilst out and about on personal time.
This is staged. So very staged. When has Kate ever advertised for her patronages? Even when grocery shopping in Anglesey, she never went full Princess work mode in her clothes; she was dressed down in jeans and a loose top.
It’s so staged that I’m almost embarrassed for her. She’s putting so much effort into pretending to be a workhorse, seems simpler just to actually *work*.
Ah, so I was a bit confused; thinking the photos of Kate with apron were supposed to be the “candid” shots. Clearly not.
Still, I’m in agreement with others that this received approval from the Palace. At the very least, those present were not bothered that a passerby was taking photos.
This looks like a PR flex to me.
@Christin
She just had it in her large purse and pulled it out and it was crazy how big it was and all those keys. lol She had on a hat and could easily go unnoticed because she clearly wasn’t trying to be noticed but not skulking around either. If that makes sense.
I am laughing at Imqrious and Diana Ross. lol
Oh my god – so, a VP from a past workplace told me that when she was a young woman in her very early 20s, in the mid 1980s, she was out buying groceries at a big unique food store called Stew Leonard’s (sp?) in Connecticut in her parents’ hometown on a midweek afternoon. She glanced over at the sound of laughter while she was waiting to pay, and saw that behind her in line was Diana Ross, with three men. They were giggling and talking and joking around a bit, waiting to buy a bag of potato chips/crisps that a glamorously dressed Ms. Ross was already enjoying. My.VP lingered to watch, because she was a huge fan; they simply bought the chips and some packages of cookies, and went merrily on their way.
I don’t think it was planned out like the person taking the photos was getting paid off like some are suggesting – I do think it probably was a fellow shopper being sneaky and getting lucky BUT I also think that the protection officer was told to allow it to happen rather than stop it as they sometimes/usually do. My theory is they went shopping knowing there was a good chance someone would probably sneak a picture that would end up public so they could have some good press.
This is plausible. And I think it’s a diversion from the Pippa in law news.
This makes good common sense,if she’s photographed (and she will be)fine-If not that’s okay too
I think you’re right. Some good publicity for “Normal Bill and Cathy”.
No way it was totally staged. I would believe that if she wasn’t followed outside too. I mean is this person following them around the store and outside and the security hasn’t noticed. Not buying it. Good PR though, look i do things.
This was staged. The RPOs are not that careless AND they are super aggressive about people taking pics / video of the royals. To extent that they delete pictures and move people along.
Further, even if this was surreptitiously taken without her knowledge, it would have been pulled from the media. The fact that it’s been allowed to stand and to be circulated world wide speaks to official approval / sanction of the pictures AND an agenda being pushed. That’s how they roll.
There is no way they wouldn’t have recognized the same person following her.
Also this is not the first time she has had her picture taken with a shopping trolley. She also looks dressed up. I am sure she could have worn something more low key than that bright coat and probably would not have been recognised.
Why are you friends with such a stalker freak? Seriously, being a “pro” means nothing. A hitman gets paid for it, does it make him any less a murderer?
Oh Wow,
I just reread that and realized your friend isn’t even being paid for it, she’s just some random bisssch on the street sending photos of people she’s judging… again, why are you friends with this person?
Because she’s awesome and she’s a good friend, that’s why. She sends me pics of funny shoes or a great bag or a hilarious outfit. Never faces. So keep your jugement to yourself, you know nothing about the person or the situation
Ah, I get it she’s a good person to you. I’m sure every subject of an unflattering photo of a pair of shoes, a bag, or outfit (and I will call you out if you claim shes NEVER taken and sent an unflattering photo) would argue. But hey, as long as she’s nice and respectful to the people she likes she must be delightful, right?
Her friend sounds fun, you sound like a bitch.
And the fact that you are so judgie here tells me you are a total judgie bitch when your out walking around Walmart too
I’m plussing one on Va Va. Taking judgemental pics of people who are wearing “funny outfits” (wtf?) doesn’t sound nice to me, either.
everyone needs to look at the photos on the daily mail. it is clearly not kate at the grocery store or loading her car. it’s unbelievable that anyone would think that is kate. seriously.
I see leggings and buttons on her coat. That’s proof enough for me 😉
I had lunch a few years back with my mom at Nobu in Malibu. Kelly Martin was at the next table. My mom pretended to take a pic of me and my son as I posed. Then she just tilted her phone a bit and took her picture.
Mary and Alice seem dated to me as well. Victoria could make a nice comeback, or another Georgian-era name, such as Sophia, Amelia, or Caroline.
IMO Mary is drab, drab, drab…apologies to any CBers who are named Mary lol. Alice is only slightly better but nearly as drab.
My mom is an Alice, so i’ve always thought it was the most beautiful name. I’m hoping it makes a comeback. My closest Grandma was a Mary, so I like that one too.
My mom is an Alice too! Named after her grandmother. My name is pretty close to Alice and people always think my mom did that on purpose, but there was a whole other meaning attached to it 🙂
My grandparents’ first child was stillborn, and she was Mary Alice. Named for their mothers. I like both names, probably due to the sentiment of the aunt I never met.
My mum’s name was an Alice too (as was HER mother), and I’ve always loved that name! My first daughter’s middle name is Elise as a nod to my mum and grandmother. I’ve met a few little Alices lately (I’m a librarian, so I meet tons of children everyday), so I’m hoping it’s making a comeback.
Mary is a lovely name and making a comeback. I love the name.
I agree Alice is a dated name.
I love Mary with a second name attached-Mary Kate(Catherine),Mary Grace,et al;Simple but very proper sounding as the same time
My 6 month old is named Mary. I love how classic and simple it is. I understand people thinking it is old fashioned though. These are royals though. They have a son named George. Old fashioned is kind of the point.
I think Alice is making a comeback. I have a 6 year old and a 3 year old and I think between the two of them there are three Alices they know (between daycare, school, soccer, etc.) so that’s not a ton relatively compared to others but it’s definitely more than I knew growing up.
I think for the UK these names are not THAT out of the ordinary. I have two small children and they have friends called Albie (Albert), Eddie (Edward), and Fred. Lots of Alices running around. Not as rampant as Finn, Leo, Olivia and Sophie, but still. It’s such a different measuring stick, royal vs regular people names.
No Victoria. Please. No. It doesn’t seem old fashioned enough and there are plenty of little Tory/is running around.
Her outfit is just like an official outing outfit?! Not really casual (cap glassed hoodie )
That’s what I was thinking. Who goes on a casual grocery store run with hair done, heels, and one of the best outfits we’ve seen on Kate in ages? Seems suspect.
Prehaps she went somewhere nice beforehand which required her to be in something other than sweatpants then she picked up a few food things on the way home?
I know it’s a shocking, unusual theory but it’s plausible lol. 🙂
They look like her wedge boots and leggings to me. And I think her hair looks rather flat and uncurled.
I just will never understand the glee some people feel in tearing her down, by clothes and looks. SMH.
You’d be surprised. My mother NEVER leaves the house, even if it’s to go get the mail, if her hair is not done, make-up on, looking perfect. It’s just how she is. My grandmother was the same. I, much to their disappointment, have no aversion to going out in sweats. Plus, I imagine she expects (and even hopes?) to be photographed on these occasions so is ready.
I don’t find her outfit at all unusual for shopping. Here in Sydney, I see plenty of women “dressed up” while shopping. They might have been to work, a lunch, a lecture, visiting – any number of places – before doing some shopping. I even know women who do go out all tarted up just to do their shopping. It’s just how they are. Come to think of it, I’ve been all dressed up, on my way to a party or something, and gone in to a supermarket to buy flowers or chocolates for the hostess, ice, nappies, milk…
If you had paparazzi constantly following you and outfits like the Daily Mail constantly trying to make you look bad, you might try to always look your best even when running a casual errand. That being said, I doubt she needs to do her own grocery shopping or that she does so often.
The bigger issue is that she is wearing clothes she has worn for official engagements, including the jeggings, and Prince Charles gets a tax write off for all her clothing purchased for official engagements. When she is on her personal time she should not be wearing clothing essentially purchased by the tax payer. This is where better audits need to happen about just how much the BRF spends and her clothing for official engagements should be properly tracked and not used for non official engagements unless it is shown that she or William personally paid for the item. No one else in a government capacity could get away with this kind of thing. The BRF should not be above the law.
She doesn’t seem very dressed up to me at all?! I have no idea if it was planned or not, but it’s actually quite easy to sneak photos now, without anybody noticing. Kate really can’t win on this site. I do understand the criticism about her not working, but some of it is so otp.
@Nic —that’s quite the reach. Taxpayer funded clothing seen in local grocer. Man the guillotine!! Especially given we have no idea where she may or may not have been and what she was doing.
I know there must always be some egregious fault but this is a stretch.
@Nic919 I don’t get this at all. Shouldn’t people prefer that it actually gets worn more than once? Besides, despite any tax write-offs, Charles pays for her clothing, not the taxpayer. A write-off is not the same as funding from taxes.
Here is where the Royal Family’s money comes from: http://uk.businessinsider.com/where-does-the-royal-family-get-money-2017-1
Now, please note that whilst they get a Sovereign Grant which ostensibly comes from the treasury which is overall funded by taxpayers, in actual fact they get this because they have surrendered all profits from the Crown Estate (the Royal family’s massive portfolio of properties) to the government. Therefore the amount of money the Queen is given is about 15% of the profits of the Crown Estate two years ago.
So your taxes are not actually paying for the Royal Family most of the time – with the exception of security and royal ceremonies (I assume investitures, etc) or for Kate’s outfits.
She’s not dressed up by British upper/middle class standards. Most women you see in Waitrose are dressed like that. It’s not so common to see women in sweatpants, because Waitrose has a reputation for being very posh. Last time I was in Waitrose I overheard a woman telling the man she was with, “Look, I told you there’d be other women in here wearing jeans.”
@Nic919
She’s had the coat for something like 10 years, the taxpayer didn’t pay for that. Considering she mostly wears dresses, coatdresses and high heels for work events its highly likely the boots, jeans, and top she is wearing were bought through private funds and worn regularly privately before they made an appearance at a casual work event.
SK: once again, and with the help of a misinformed article, you are repeating establishment talking points that are deliberately obsfucating what belongs to the royals vs what belongs to the people.
That obsfucation has allowed the fan fiction that the royals gave up / surrendered their personal wealth / portfolio to the govt and only receive a tiny portion (the Sovereign grant). This fanfiction has been repeated so often that most people believe it. It has allowed the obsfucation of the fact that this family is supported by taxpayers via several funds and govt depts. The Sovereign Grant is only ONE of many funding streams.
And clearly the public, journalists included, don’t bother to dig deeper anymore OR they don’t read the small print of these organisations’ charters that reveal the truth eg The Crown Estates clearly point out that they were created to pay for the instrument of govt. They are not nor have they ever belonged to the royals. The royals simply had management of them. In ‘giving them up’ they merely gave up management responsibilities whilst keeping the salary and perks.
Here is a hint, just because it has duchy or royal or crown or state in it’s name, it doesn’t make it their property, historically or otherwise. It’s akin to saying the white house belongs to the POTUS.
So if Kait purchased the jagging‘s herself and wore them to an official event are you going to give Charles a refund? Are you going to scrutinize Harry, William and Charles’ suits? These complaints are hilarious.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s planned, but given her station, it’s entirely possible she is required to present a certain level of dress in the public eye regardless of what’s she doing. It’s pretty rare to see the boys out and about without their shirts tucked in, properly fitted pants, etc., as well.
Shotcaller: The answer to your mocking question is yes. HMRC are pedantic that way.
All of the clothing worn by all royals for public events is subject to tax deductions if not outright write off. Ditto grooming and glam squad.
This applies to all of them. Queen included.
If you don’t want to be pedantic, you work out a % budget with HMRC and simply submit that amount as the write off.
If you think it’s ridiculous, let me set you some homework…..namely what set off the investigation that brought down Conrad Black.
It’s not just Kate who should be scrutinized on this issue either. There are already many who were commenting on the cost of Meghan’s engagement dress, which was confirmed to be paid by private funds. The guys should be scrutinized too, although with them it is harder to tell because they don’t show up in different outfits almost every time they step out. All the BRF should be accountable regarding how much they spend because they all use money that is provided to them in some form or another by the UK taxpayers. If Boris Johnson was doing the same thing he would be raked over the coals and he was elected into office, so he could be turfed eventually. The BRF can never be turfed. It simply makes no sense that the accountability standards for unelected family members who can never be removed from their position are lower than elected members of government, who don’t even get near the allowance the BRF does.
@nic919 is exactly right, as is LAK.
Think of it this way: when the BRF does engagements aka work, they wear uniforms. Granted, very expensive uniforms and many of them, but they are dressed as per expectations of their job. Personal clothing beyond work is another thing altogether and should be paid for privately. Unfortunately, successive governments have failed to set up proper audits of public funds given to the BRF to the point where Charles and Queen successfully lobbied to be exempt from Freedom of Information inquiries.
LAK is correct when she claims the BRF has several income streams from the public but only one is publicised. I’m still waiting for a fearless journalist and media outlet to publish full facts about monies given to the BRF. A very dangerous assignment.
LAK is also correct about the staged nature of the image; ‘candid’ pics are approved, they are part of the PR. If you think you are being played, you are right. Nothing is left to chance with this lot in preserving their position.
Heels? They are low wedges! You must not wear heels at all…
Her hair isn’t done properly and I don’t see a lot of makeup. In London, I get dressed up in a casual outfit to shop for groceries, that’s what many people do.
What on earth do you guys wear when you go shopping? She’s wearing regular, normal clothes! Sweatpants are for indoors/lazy days.
And her hair looks did.
Yep, and I bet her nails are, too. 😉
I noticed that pink coat looks like the one she wore when she carried George and had the buttons moved. So, she gets 2 claps from me for recycling.
https://fashionmagazine.com/culture/kate-middleton-continues-to-hide-baby-bump/
The wiglet’s certainly on.
Is there something wrong with having your nails done? Not being snarky, but some of these comments are weird to me. I get my nails done regularly. I guess it’s an age thing, most of the commenters here seem to be older.
It looked like she was buying gift type items – so perhaps she was on her way to a private party/function
I work at a hardware store and regularly see women in shopping, dressed to the nines. Which I think is ridiculous (We have 10,000 square feet, I can’t imagine shopping that in heels)
I think it makes sense if it’s later in the day or very early – i.e. women in business professional heading off to work and getting things before heading home. Less if it’s the sole reason for going out. That’s just too much work. I enjoy fashion, but not that much, lol.
It was probably another shopper in the store!! It’s probably creepy to admit this but if I was grocery shopping and saw her (or a handful of other celebs) I would 100% take a picture.
This would be it, the article notes that it was another shopper who took the photos.
I work in central London and see celebs a lot. Have seen Bill Nighy (he was very very tanned), Kit Harrington (he’s short), Charles Dance, Stephen Fry, David Tennant, Benedict Cumberbatch (at a gig in Camden) – these are the ones off the top of my head.
Have often seen crews shooting scenes around the city – its fun sometimes.
Yeah, isn’t it fun!! I live in Brooklyn in a nice neighborhood with a handful of celebs (Maggie Gyllenhal and her husband, and Michelle Williams used to live around here but I haven’t seen her in a while, plus a bunch of broadway stars!) I’ve been here nearly a decade and still geek out when I see them.
I don’t have much to add here except Bill Nighy is so nice – used to spot him a lot around Hampstead.
Heh, same. David Tennant is a neighbour of mine. We also see Stanley Tucci in the farmers market all the time.
Love love love Bill Nighy.
With regard to Kate, who knows?…maybe she just wanted a little time to herself in Norfolk and she’s planning a home birth there? Those royals, they always keep us guessing. But one thing is for sure: Kate feels well enough to travel. And she should have traveled her butt before HM’s arrival on Easter Sunday.
David Tennant is my dream boat guy! #I’dHitThat as we say!
The article seems to indicate that’s exactly who it was. And what are they going to do? Say “don’t hold your phone up in the general direction of the duchess?” They were in a public space. The running theories about this woman make people seem batsh*t.
For years their RPOs have demanded the public remove any cell phone pics of them taken in public places. Switzerland, photo ban for all others staying in Mustique, etc. Far more likely these were “allowed” for good PR.
And how, pray tell, would they enforce such a demand? Nonsense.
The RPO walks up, intimidates them, and stands there watching while they remove the pics. Yes, ridiculous that people delete the photos, but far more ridiculous that taxpayer-paid security are being used as goons to enforce W&K’s demand for privacy in a public place.
They go up to the person and grab the phone. It’s not just RPOs that do this but bodyguards for other celebrities. While it may not be legal, how many people are going to stop an armed RPO coming at them.
And again if Kate didn’t want the photos published then KP would get the DM to pull them from their site. They have done that many times in the past. These photos are still there.
RPOs are policemen, not just bodyguards.
Further, they are legally empowered to use all means necessary to protect their charge including harrassment from members of the public.
The fact that they are armed and licenced to use their guns is another reason to intimidate a person into following a directive from them.
Of course, this is staged. With the threats in the world right now there is no way they would let anyone this close to her. She isn’t like a celebrity she has an entirely different role.
I have no idea why anyone is defensive about it.
Their lives aren’t normal, and people aren’t allowed to take private pictures of them, or they would never get a moment’s peace.
I live in Brooklyn too and running into celebs is still shocking. I don’t take photos but I’ll nod.
But I know a few people that are so good at taking sneaky photos of celebs even with security. It’s actually not that hard. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
yes! It’s what I was saying above. I have a friend who’s an absolute pro!
I live in a place where seeing celebs is very unusual. Nevertheless, an elderly retired semi-famous person just moved here and I saw him in public. Told a family member about it and she immediately asked if I took a surreptitious photo and was very disappointed that I hadn’t. I was like, come on, he was like ten feet away from me, i wasn’t going to take a sneak pic and i wasn’t going to bother him for a selfie with me either, i’m just trying to let a person live their life and not hassle them.
Exactly. This Waitrose is near where I live (I know this because I live about 10 mins from them). When they’re spotted out and about, everyone around here knows where and when. It’s a small community. She’s not regularly shopping there and if she were, people would be taking photos on their phones.
Its been a long time since public pap shots of her shopping have made it into the press. Its part of the RPO’s job to make sure no one takes photo’s of them in a private situation and hers was no where to be seen inside.
Just like the nanny is magically out of the frame in the shots when KM takes their son to a museum/farm and *those pictures don’t get criticized or yanked by the palace*.
That is not Kate on these photos, it is somebody looking similar but not Kate.
of course it’s Kate. the DM wouldn’t publish them – or keep them up for this long – if it weren’t her.
It’s Kate.
I don’t think it’s her either. Her security guy wouldn’t have his back to the person taking the photos.
It’s Kate. She’s had that coat since her royal GF days.
I am sure they didn’t make just one such coat – and if you were a Kate impersonator, the coat would be very simple to replicate (or should I say repliKATE)
I’m with you too – isn’t the hair too long in these photos.
Kate is no stranger to extensions.
Her hair is usually curled somewhat. I know when I curl my hair it looks 3 – 4 inches shorter. Her hair is straight her so it’s not surprising that it looks longer.
Is there a picture of this coat during the gf days?
This is not the first time Kate has been papped while grocery shopping. In fact, it’s happened a lot. I think it’s been less since she got married, but I get the feeling that Kate and Will really do genuinely enjoy being away from the limelight and being in the country where they have more privacy, and that Kate does actually like to shop for herself when she has an opportunity. I know many here like to imply otherwise, but that’s my take.
Yes and no.
Kate gets papped a lot, but is it prompted by professionals for pr pr is it some random with a camera. Her security has actively and forcefully stopped pics and destroyed property. And those unwanted photos include a security presence. If the RPOs are seen as a casual dressed friend or not at all it’s likely staged. That’s the trend. And we only ever see kate in this just like us mode when a narrative needs to be pushed. Short of that this is incredibly rare.
My take. I think kate enjoys a life of leisure. She will perform a task for the novelty or simplicity of it. Otherwise we would see her shopping at least once a month for food.
Her security destroyed property? You mean like someone’s phone? When was this?
But they live more high profile now, so it’s understandable that she wouldn’t do her own food shopping being in London. But when she’s away from London, like she was here, it seems she goes out and about a bit more. Also, weren’t these pictures taken by a shopper who sold them to make some quick money?
Wowsers
1 incident was a ski trip. A RPO went over to a civilian who was a safe distance away and snatched their camera/phone. It was covered here and other places. Seen as a very OTT and aggressive act. Especially, since the idea of privacy at a very public location was absurd. There was no threat.
L84tea
At her most wanted post wedding kate did her food shopping with paps. Arguably highest profile. And even then it was a handful of times. Those photos were pushed hard. During this time of cottage/newlywed life kate was also seen living at her parents home often and there was a battle to avoid that news reaching mainstream news. Possibly why the food shop photos got so much attention.
Point being if we see these photos she either has a terrible security team or this was allowed.
If some security officer came up to me and demanded my phone, I’d tell him to take a hike. So would anybody else.
Some people freeze when they face threatening people. No one can really know how they would react if a person with quasi authority intimidates them.
@Lady D
You would think you would want to, but these guys are no joke. They might even have you arrested.
They are supposed to do that, and it is their job. It is for her own safety and privacy. Even celebrities have been known to go off on people taking their photo. It feels intrusive, and they will have their bodyguards snatch cameras too.
Lady d
Authority figures can be aggressive. You’d like to think you’d say no, but many social tests show we bend often when surprised and become submissive.
I would do whatever a police officer, no matter the country, told me to do. A non-officer security guard would not get my immediate obedience.
I’ve learned something about myself as an adult. I grew up in an incredibly terrifying home. My childhood was horrific, but as it turns out I can’t be intimidated. The way I see it, I was intimidated and tortured by the best, and everyone else pales in comparison to my mother. So, so far I haven’t been intimidated by anyone in a very long time. I’m not saying it won’t happen, but it would take extraordinary circumstances before I bow to intimidation.
I only remember a couple of times before in 8 years, which were shots in Wales after talk of her living in London.
I can’t find any link to stories about phones ring destroyed in Wales or skiing, can someone help?
slow clap
Come on, if you’re famous, you have to consider that in these days, people can absolutely take many photos of you.
Anyway, she looks cute pregnant with her hands on her hip. It’s just me? Ok.
I dare them to name the kid Charming if it’s a boy or Consuella Bananahammock if it’s a girl. Kthxbye.
She does look cute and casual.
Weird. I guess she wanted to get out of the house….? It’s weird that she had no friend or kids or security with her, but then again she is a duchess… But then why go to the store at all? So odd!!!!
If you go to the Fail’s site, you’ll see pictures of her with her security guard.
Yeah her security is right there
Her security team is with her. https://twitter.com/KateMCambridge/status/981223176423264257
This is not a “Kate is just like us photo shoot”. A professional paparazzi photographer isn’t going to take low quality photos with half her face obscured which leads to people questioning if it was really her. These were sneakily taken on a camera phone by a fellow shopper and sold to DM for a quick buck.
Pretty much.
But everything nefarious is always attached to Middleton.
I still think her RPO should not have had his back turned to the others. He was watching her not potential threats. Maybe he didn’t want his picture taken? I think they knew.
Maybe there was another RPO off to the side observing the situation and not perceiving any threat. And I agree that they had to know.
The fact this photo was allowed to ran in the media and or not pulled by the palace is a very good indication that this was staged OR approved after the fact. Either way, the agenda being pushed is satisfied.
Agenda is:
1. Just like us! (as a counter narrative to HM wedding costs)
2. Don’t forget about me (as counter to MM getting lots of attention)
3. Distraction from Pippa’s father-in-law arrest. The middleton’s have form in creating distractions when their own are under the gun.
I doubt Kate would be buying half price herbs when she Anmer would have its own garden of such stock items as parsley and coriander. Nor would the CHutney Queen be buying chutney. Maybe that’s her little joke on us.
If it’s her, then the photographer was known to her and her RPO. Or it’s not her, which is what I truly believe.
I think the RPO found the photographer non-threatening & turned his back so as not to be photographed.
Another likely scenario but it was known she was being photographed.
There is nothing nefarious about this photoshoot. A woman in the shop saw her, took a pic, said hello, Kate replied “hi” and that’s it.
I know that the subtext of this article is “Kate and the Middletons are so worried about Pippa’s pervert in law and Meghan’s star power” that they are staging photoshoots in the middle of a supermarket but those pics are not the evidence you’re looking for.
As for her due date, I feel like it’s soon because she looks bigger than during her previous pregnancies but it’s the first time we actually saw her this late, and it’s also her third so … lot of words to say I don’t know.
Hope it’s a girl and wish her a speedy labor.
+1
The conspiracy theories are hilarious. The most likely scenario is exactly as reported: a woman sees Kate shopping, follows her outside to take a picture. Then shops it to the DM.
Meanwhile the bodyguard of the nine month pregnant future queen keenly watches her loading her own groceries in the car with his back firmly facing away from all potential threats? Was he afraid an attacker would leap out of one of the bags? Since he is already facing the wrong direction, would it kill him to help the pregnant lady load the car?
Then her RPO needs to be fired because he let some unknown person follow Kate. Or perhaps he knew Kate was ok with the photos being taken. Why is his back to the photographer in that one photo? Was there a threat from the inside of the Range Rover? He should have been scanning in the opposite direction to check for potential threats. It’s his job to do that.
Yeah, I want to believe the most mundane explanation – but if that is what happened then I’m with the guys questioning what the hell her ‘bodyguard’ was doing. He’s not even standing side on to talk to her where he could have spotted potential threats coming from three directions and still had a pleasant chat. Nope, he’s facing squarely into the back of the car.
I even thought ‘perhaps he’s letting the pregnant lady heave all her own shopping into the car because he has to keep his hands free’. Then I saw he had them shoved in his pockets….
and also followed her out to the car park and then took more photos of her loading her shopping in her car??
I kind of wondered if the outside photos weren’t by someone different, i.e. real paparazzi. I could see this fellow shopper lady trying to sell her crap cell phone pics and Daily Mail wanting to run them but anticipating readers falling into exactly what has happened on this forum, questioning if it is really Kate. They know that there are actual paparazzi following her all the time, so they get in touch with the usual suspects and buy some pics they took of her loading the groceries to accompany the other pics from in the market. (OK now i have officially spent too much time thinking about this…)
@Chaine
Paps don’t follow her all the time. She is seen in stores with her RPOs and there aren’t photos of her. The royals are under threats normal celebrities aren’t so they have to be on their toes all the time. There is nothing wrong with that.
Why do people think staged photos are nefarious? Or even a bad thing? I don’t get that explanation when it comes to famous people. It is part of their job to project a certain image.
Why do stans and fans become so defensive about it when it is clear there are protocols for HER OWN SAFETY. She deserves privacy so why not stage a couple of photos doing normal things she probably already does and call it day.
Geez I would do it. Diana was a pro at doing it. Everybody does it.
Sure she probably would like the Matthews story to go away. Who in the world wouldn’t want that? I would be doing exactly what she did here and assuring the public all is well. I am fine. Carry on.
*shrug*
The boy names bandied about all sound ok to me and “match” Charles but the girl names? Ugh to Mary or Alice. So drab compared to Charlotte.
Royal names are generally so dull. I would love it if they went for something silly and contemporary like Dakota or Brayden.
I actually don’t like Charlotte. I had a neighbor growing up who was the meanest named Charlotte. Ironically she looked like QE2 lol.
Alice is lovely. My mom is an Alice. But we all have strong opinions on names. I get it!
I meant to say George. As to girls I’m sure my opinion will waiver once a name is attached to an actual little sweetheart.
To me, it doesn’t look like her.
It’s totally her lol.
I’m on the fence with this one…I mean no one else noticed her? Only this one lady? Does Norfolk generaly give the royals their space?
It’s odd that the RPO is no where to be seen in the store pics, but right there at the car and is apparently oblivious to picture takers.
Hey, good for her though. I dispise food shopping and usually wait until the weekend when my husband and I can divide and conquer!
What’s interesting to me isn’t that she was photographed (although getting that close and taking pictures of that sharpness in two different locations is impressive if you’re trying to be sneaky), but that the pictures were in the Daily Fail and that the article hasn’t been taken down yet. Given William’s attitude to the press, that says to me that it’s approved, if not posed from the start.
@Beluga exactly! clearly kate and clearly approved. it’s very rare to see pap shots of her on the DM.
+1 It’s so rare that it when pap shots do appear, it’s because they’ve been taken or approved for a reason. They’d be better off allowing a steady trickle of staged candid shots, otherwise there’s just a blaring horn of ‘We are trying to push a story or distract you from something! We’re using this to control a narrative!’ and it draws attention to the machinations underneath.
Yep, like the photos the pap “just happened” to catch when she took their son solo to Mustique while William was hunting in Spain with Jecca. Ridiculous story about how this wasn’t a privacy intrusion so the Palace allowed the photos to be published, etc.
Where’s LAK? I always love her take on these subjects!!
This was either staged or approved after the fact.
In the first instance, no way the RPOs let a random stranger get close enough to take a photo without reacting. They are very aggressive about this sort of thing.
Secondly, even if this was hapstance and the pictures were sent to the media, they are usually approved by the palace before they are ran. If not, they are pulled down very quickly.
The Palace is quite aggressive about this sort of thing, and William has been especially aggressive and litigious and controlling about this sort of thing.
We can speculate about the agenda being pushed because that’s usually the reason they allow pictures to ran, but if it isn’t evident now, it soon will be.
There is historic precedent with the Cambridge / Middletons ie distracting pictures when a scandal in the family is brewing eg when Uncle Gary was caught out cue pictures / video of William and Kate snogging ‘caught’ by hapstance and dimly lit.
Or it could be Kate sending a very public message eg picture of first solo holiday with George on Mustique when William was in Spain with Jecca.
Thanks for your input, LAK! That’s my take on the situation too.
As for the agenda, there definitely is one and there are so many it could be, just based on what we already know and assuming nothing major comes out soon, but it’s fun to speculate (warning: tipsy hyperbole incoming).
– The usual ‘We’re so normal and just like you, so praise us and pay us oodles for it but don’t expect us to work!’
– ‘Praises be to Saint Kate for shopping while pregnant. So noble and heroic!’
– Distracting from the Matthews case
– Distracting from the fact that they were late to Easter (although that story was suppressed somewhat by the press and didn’t gain much traction)
– A deliberate counter to the press speculation about H&M’s wedding, especially the cost element (‘So humble to do her own shopping! Unlike that jumped-up pretender who’s spending lavishly!’)
– Promoting the last pre-birth images of Kate as doing something normal to justify a long maternity leave (‘Leave her alone! She went shopping while pregnant, let her rest! She’s earned it!’)
– ‘Don’t forget about me!’
The royals must get a sweet deal on range rovers ! They used to travel by car – audi, aston martin, rolls royce, etc. but these days they seem to use range rovers exclusively
It was completely staged, Boy, the magic of Ms, Meghan!!
You do know she has a limited range of names she’s allowed to choose from….
No I didn’t know that, first I’ve heard. Is there an actual law about naming royal heirs similar to the law that states heirs belong to the Crown? Ann named her daughter Zara, not exactly a royal name, and Ann’s granddaughter’s name is Mia. Is it just heirs or does heir-adjacent Harry have to follow this rule also?
Heirs and heir adjacent.
Also, Victoria decreed that her descendants have a ‘Victoria’ or ‘Albert’ or both in each generation. So far we don’t have either name in the Mountbatten-Windsor great-grandchildren generation.
LAK can you tell me how that would benenforced? Would someone’s name be have to be changed if suddenly an entire generation was past the baby making age and there was no Victoria or Albert?
Brandy Alexander: i think the idea of tradition is so strongly adhered to by the family that they comply regardless of their personal feelings and preferences. The pressure is on the heirs and heir-adjacents. Those further down the line are free to give their children any name they like.
Personally i think it’s so strange that Victoria continues to dictate what the family does even in such a small way. You’d think that after all this time they’d give her the boot.
It’s not as if she held her family in affection. This dictat is one more example of her bullying her family.
I don’t think that’s her. Something is off about the face in the loading into the trunk photos. The hair is too dark and it almost looks like a wig. She also only has one man with her. I don’t think they would allow her to go out at this point in her pregnancy with one RPO as she is a huge target for kidnapping and other awful things.
That was my first impression too. Doesn’t look like her face. I know things can get distorted in the later stages of pregnancy though so who knows.
How does it not look like her?? The photos clearly show her face. She has been regularly photographed doing her own shopping, this is nothing new. As for the fact that she looks cute…why wouldn’t she, an adult woman, look nice to go out? I find this whole thread utterly bizarre!
I’m laughing that people don’t think it’s Kate. It’s definitely her.
I am with those who find these pictures odd. Not necessarily staged but just….odd. We did used to see pictures of her shopping- the few famous ones of her at the Waitrose in Wales (the one a few days after the wedding, and then a later set in a purple sweater and scarf) – and then the pictures seemed to have stopped. I wonder if her protection stepped up and was more intense about stopping pictures, especially if she had one of the kids with her, or if she just stopped doing basic errands like grocery shopping as much. So its weird to me to see this set of pictures when she looks very nice, and to have pictures from inside and outside (from the same person?) Again I don’t think “staged,” just….odd.
It’s absolutely not her. Doesn’t look like her at all.
There was security with her, in one of the images by her car, she is talking to him. This is ridiculous, the woman is not staging photo-ops, leave her alone.
Maybe I missed something, but why is she wearing an apron?
That is from her last event before maternity leave lol. Not the grocery store pictures.
OH! LOL! I thought maybe it was a European thing! LOL!
You know how she likes to theme dress, so one must wear an apron to the grocery store, lol! 😉
Yeah it’s definitely her. I’m confused why some of y’all think it’s someone else.
People who would name their kid George are likely to go with some other stodgy boys name such as Edward or Albert. Both are boring. How about Liam? Prince Liam! That would be a first I think.
I agree about the photos being odd. Maybe she just wanted an hour of normalcy before the birth and the three ring circus that will accompany it.
Liam! That’s the Irish version of William for heavens sake. They’re not going to give their kid an Irish name.
I love the name Edward – with the nickname of Ned! Never can understand why people say a name is “dated” – Mary and Alice are not dated, they are classic. Mary is a lovely name (a “grand old name as George M. Cohan put it!) It has the advantage of not being terribly popular now, but will never seem “of a period”.
Oops! Didn’t know Liam is Irish. You learn something new every day! I don’t dislike all old fashioned names. My daughter is named Emma.
Two of the Lux royals did that for their son. Guillaume is the family name that is used often all over that line, but they went with Liam.
The closeness of the shots and the fact they were taken in two locations is strange. Usually when photos like that of celebrities it’s a staged advertisement for granola or mascara or something, so my response is a head tilt and ???
Amused at the conspiracy theories though. Why would they fake photos of her? Lol I’m sure enough people here have made derisive comments about her legs and how she likes to show them off to recognize them and her preferred fit of denim. Also, that outfit looks pretty standard. Not everyone looks busted at the grocery store.
That part is strange to me. Her clothing choices aren’t why I think they are staged (ish). There are too many possibilities of why she is dressed that way.
But like I said So what? It isn’t a crime or wrong in any way.
In the car loading pic, it looks more like Meghan than Kate.
Just FYI, Kevin Costner is freaky about being able to tell when his pic is being taken. Don’t ask how I know this.
So, how do you know this? 😊
@justjen I think she liked like Meg too in that pic! They all look alike to me… Meg, Kate, and Pip. Unlike most on this site, I think Henry really looks up to his older brother and admires him and his choice of wife. I think he purposefully chose a girl with a more subtly glam look, like Kate, who was a social virgin. Someone he can mold. Although I doubt she’ll be as easily molded as Kate.
On another note, is the RPO hot? I thought the were supposed to be unattractive women so that no one got any ideas? If my petulant, balding husband was gone as much as hers while some hot dude helped me with groceries and gardening, I’d be all over him!
Kevin Costner is freaky period. lol
I love how she claimed her free coffee. Even I can’t be arsed to do that, and I’m guessing hse’s about a million times better off than me.
I do not understand “normal” people who take photos of celebrities in grocery stores/restaurants/etc… If I saw Kate in the grocery store, I would of course text my mom freaking out, but I would still leave her the hell alone. I certainly wouldn’t take a picture of her! How creepy! They might be famous, but they aren’t zoo animals, people!
Generally I agree, but in this case I would have to snap a couple pics for my celebitches!!!
It is polite to ask. It can typically drive even lovely people to get angry. They are protective of their image, and it is their image and likeness that makes them money. They already feel isolated, and that just adds to it. Especially if they are slightly paranoid.
Don’t forget about meeeeee!!!!!
I’m just a normal gal just like you who does her own shopping, and who one day WILL BE YOUR QUEEN! Don’t you forget it!
If the photos were taken by paps William would have complained.
I realize everyone carries differently, but I’m amazed at how she looks as a pregnant woman — I wouldn’t necessarily be able to tell she looks pregnant at a very brief first glance.
I’m calling a girl because no idea why. Lol. I love the name Alice but it is everywhere right now! I would have named my baby daughter that if I didn’t know so many. Beautiful name. Oh also, we have so so many ‘Al’ nicknames in our family.
I dont understand taking famous people’s photos either. Like, why? So you can say you shared some space with a famous person? Cell phones in someone’s face is rude, and does make them seem like zoo animals.
I lived in NYC most of my life and have seen a number of famous people and I never took their picture. I would nod and keep walking.
Good for her! Must be boring to live in a protected bubble all of the time. Guess the simple pleasures of browsing aisles win.
Suggestions for name of third child:
– Phillip / Phillippa
– Carolus / Carole
– Elsbert, Bertie / Elisabeth
Of course Kate knew she was photographed in that waitrose store. Because her bodyguard made sure he wasn’t in the pic. And in that pic in which Kate puts her shopping in the car her bodyguard makes sure he is pictured from behind only.
And this is a really pathetic line from the Daily mail:
“Kate is claimed to have said ‘Hi, hello’ to a woman who greeted her in the car park of the Waitrose supermarket in Norfolk”
Duh, brother, “is claimed to have said hi”??? For real???? Kate is just like us, ain’t she? Pathetic Cambridge PR. PCPR. I like the Pee’s in this: PeeCePeeR. ;-D
I’ve always loved this site, and agree with most stuff, opinions, goss, funny stuff etc, but I have to say, I’ve never really gotten the absolute vitriol for Kate Middleton. What if she had nothing to do with these photos? What if it’s not all part of some big master plan.
Because her bodyguards are super aggressive about anyone taking random pictures of her and have been known to stop, delete pictures.
Further, even this was a sneak picture taking that the bodyguards didn’t catch, there is zero chance any UK media would ran the pictures without palace approval because they are walking a tight rope that prevents a law being put into place curbing press freedom which the royals have threatened to support if the press print anything they do not approve of.
William in particular has been both very aggressive about this as well as being super litigious where his family’s privacy is concerned. He goes after any outlet that prints pictures of his family even if they are taken by the public rather than paps. He makes no distinction between private and public spaces which have different definitions in law as far as photography is concerned. If a media outlet printed regardless, the pictures would be pulled down within hours on the threat of litigation. It’s happened every time.
Link to story about them making people delete pictures?
Love this comment – so valid!!! It’s one thing for them/their bodyguards to go after someone who has taken a photo of them when they are on private property sunbathing topless, but when they are out and about in public, what is the bfg with someone taking a photo??!! The royal protection officers should be devoted 100% of their attention to potential security threats — i.e. someone brandishing a weapon or any other “suspicious” behaviour.
As for the press, the royals need the media as much as if not more than the media needs them! Seriously, they have a very poor image and need all the positive press they can get to improve this.
meant to say “bfd” – not “bfg”!!!
Wowser: there is a video taken from a swiss ski trip in 2013-ish. I think it’s on royaldish if it’s been removed elsewhere from the internet. i don’t want to dive into that forum, but you are welcome to do the research.
Video is of RPO aggressively approaching a bystander, yelling at them as the RPO reaches for camera. You can hear clearly what they are saying which is not a request and very rudely put. You can just about make out Kate walking along the street behind the RPO.
There are numerous first hand accounts of their aggressive behaviour as they guard various royals and have to deal with the public whom they regard as harassing their charges.
But if none of that convinces you, how about you read Ken Wharfe’s own words in his biography of guarding the royals. He was Diana’s personal RPO for over 10yrs. He describes some of the ways he discouraged people (and paps) from taking photos.
Pointing out that the photos were likely staged isn’t vitriol. There is a difference between being critical of the PR that a certain group is trying to push, be it government actors, celebrities or royals and making personal attacks. There is nothing wrong with being a critical thinker and not just blindly accepting everything that is served up to the public. And as pointed out many times, the BRF has the power to remove certain things from the UK media, as the Queen did with the Epstein story about Andrew, William does with all photos of his family and even Harry, when Meghan would visit the UK prior to the engagement being announced. Pretending that everything published is simply a coincidence is incredibly naive because all public people manipulate the media as much as they can, even the so called “good” people.
And yet when it was pointed out that those pics of Meghan outside the spa last year where she was posing/ taking a phone call in full view of the paparazzi guy were staged and approved people were jumped on. Meghan (and possibly Harry & KP) approved those photo’s for publication which is why we saw them. Meanwhile at the same time, Harry allegedly had a court order in place (or something similar to that) that prevented anyone publishing paparazzi pics of her to protect her privacy and safety . A tad hypocritical don’t ya think?
Whatever: IIRC, most royal watchers pointed out that those MM pictures were staged.
Further, another forum detailed the lengths Harry and Meghan went to ensure unapproved pictures of them were not published by the UK media which implied that any and all pictures that did appear no matter how random were approved by them therefore those spa pictures were definitely staged. Ditto the 2 of them wandering about in soho, her in Toronto, in Botswana and in Jamaica.
The enforcement of this was achieved via a threat from the royal lawyers to the IPSO. The site that has the details has turned into a pay per view since they posted the story, but if you are willing to pay to read the legal wrangling that ensured their privacy, here you go: http://popbitch.com/2016/12/part-iii-battle-royal/
The vitriol for Kate Middleton explained:
She enjoyed an expensive quasi Ivy-League Education financed by her Uncle Gary. But she didn’t do anything with that and yes, that is suspicious in today’s meritocracy. As a matter of fact she didn’t do anything at all in that decade between graduating and marrying Prince William except that she did do chase Prince William. She hasn’t developed professionally nor career-wise nor personally nor artistically nor academically nor in any way at all. Nevertheless this person will one day be queen or king’s consort and that does rub many people the wrong way. Nowadays even Royals are expected to work and Kate still avoids work very much. The Middelton’s pretend to be upper class while they are middle middle class at best which makes them disliked fake pretenders. Their multimillionaire status is likely a lie because their wealth comes from Uncle Gary who later got discriminated against.
Social climbing is the only thing the Middletons are good at and their particular style doesn’t even involve the pretense of merits or charity which is disgusting. Kate even pretends to be better than middle class by faking an upper class accent nowadays and that is plain rude to everybody who listens to it. Because she gives the impression that being middle class is somewhat faulty which is an insult to most people in Britain and Europe.
Nowadays Kate has an army of staff taking care of everything and she keeps spending middle six figures on clothes if not more. That money does come from Prince Charles Duchy of Cornwall and that means Charles’ money comes from the taxpayer. The taxpayer owns the Duchy and Charles’ is just entitled to a certain share of that money. The remaining profits of the Duchy go to the general taxpayer’s purse. So Kate wastes a lot of taxpayer’s money while the numbers of the homeless are increasing and there are more and more british children living below the poverty line and while wages for the bottom 50% aren’t rising but shrinking due to inflation.
And yes, such a hapless clueless wasteful social no-contributions climber (in the near future) at the top of government does make people angry and rightfully so.
I’m legit freaked out by the number of people claiming that the shopping pics are a of a look alike!
I am hoping for an Alexander/Alexandra (for Queen Alexandra). I’d like to see a Prince or Princess Alex.
If William wants a second daughter, then it’s a girl. William gets what he wants. Hello sperm sorting. But if baby #3 is a natural like the first then it’s another boy I’m guessing. I’m starting to change my mind with regard to name. I feel, as much as HM dearly misses her father Albert, W&K may choose Arthur. Or perhaps Arthur or Albert will likely be a middle name? If a girl then Victoria!!!
That’s clearly not her. 🤦🏽♀️ Americans 🙄
Why is she loading her groceries directly into her shopping bags? Don’t they have to go through checkout? Does she not pay for her groceries?
Haven’t you ever seen the self-scanners that allow you to check out on your own? I think it’s even mentioned in the story here or in the DM that she’s using one of those. You gather your stuff, scan the bar codes, put them in your own bags and you’re outta there. Really cuts down on a lot of hassle in checkout lines when you only have a few things and don’t want to stand in line behind someone who is stocking up for the month or using a bazillion coupons, etc.
That makes sense. I’ve yet to go to a self-scanner grocery, just the self-checkout, so I still put my stuff in the cart, then put them in the bags as I check out. The self-scanner stores are way too crowded, there’s usually a line to get in, which is what I’m trying to avoid.
That’s how I shop, too. It makes it easier for me to gauge how much I’m buying, and keeps my produce, etc. from being contaminated by the non-sterilized shopping carts. *shrug*
That’s clearly not Kate in those photos. I think there is only one photo where you can see the person’s face and if you do a close up it is not Kate. Security man would not be standing like that either. If it was Kate I doubt if British press would publish due to privacy.
The Queen interfered with the names of Lady Louise Windsor. Originally she did not have Elizabeth in her name but Elizabeth Ii wanted it in for QM who had died earlier that year.
This makes me think that the photos regularly in the DM of Mia Tindall and her cousins are paid for. They are only little kids. Press would not get away with this unless parents authorised.
They have a housekeeper and extensive staff are each of their properties but Kate does the grocery shopping. Sure, of course. Not staged at all.
This. Also, she brought her hairdresser to Norfolk to attach her wiglet.
The comments on this article are off-the-rails batsh*t crazy! This is flat-earther levels of absolute insanity. I have not been this entertained in weeks! You all sure know how to throw that shade!
Haha! Don’t I know it. All the finger wagging and pearl clutching here about Kate, I also amuse myself by imagining the voices when I read the comments.
I imagine that people who say “batsh*t crazy” and “pearl clutching” don’t sound like Lady Mary of Downton Abbey.
Given that NO UK print media or TV news published these pictures – or the ones of Kate and the children at Windsor (DM Online showed the supermarket ones but not the kids) although I assume they’re on social media and royal forums), it wouldn’t seem to be a very successful PR strategy. The continuation of the royal family depends ONLY on UK citizens and I guarantee most of them aren’t trawling royal forums and cooking up conspiracy theories.)
At first glance it looks like kate, but then i saw her profile and the pitch black scraggly wig at least 3 inchs longer than it was from the previous week when she was last photographed. She isn’t even getting into a Range Rover. Is a cheaper Land Rover. The whole thing feels like a lookalike shoot for april fools.
I disagree with everything that you said except for the part where you noticed that her wig looks scraggly.
But I hope that we can both agree that the Protection Officer looks super hunky. I wonder if he’s the same good-looking guy who opened the car door for Kate when she wore that short blue coat with the super short dress to open the treatment center for Action on Addiction.
Whoa still waiting for her to have this baby indication something was being prepared a bit of activity around hospital with delivery of barriers. Anyway three weeks Easter holidays obviously decamped at Norfolk home for the hols and spent Easter religious days with Mummy Mid as it was not far to drive to Easter Sunday with Queen at Windsor. I do wonder when does Charles actually get to see them. No sign of Harry mind or MM. anyway Easter hols ending so it will back to London. Waitrose shop she probably likes to be normal as is at all possible and Norfolk shopping no one takes any notice of her ad the locals don’t care.