As Prince Harry arrived at a London court yesterday, the Daily Mail’s Richard Eden had a bizarre exclusive about how Harry skipped a good friend’s wedding over the weekend. Harry’s friend Lord Vivian confirmed to Eden that he invited the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to his wedding, but that Harry had a lot going on and couldn’t make it. Well, there’s an update – a source close to Harry told People Magazine that “Harry was unable to attend the wedding because security wasn’t provided for the Duke’s visit to the U.K., which makes attending events or moving around the country very challenging.” Ah – so Harry is in court this week, arguing that the “bespoke security arrangement” is extremely dangerous because it’s decided on a case-by-case basis… and the police did not think “Harry going to a wedding and appearing in court to fight over his security” was worthy of police protection. Here’s more from the first day of Harry’s security hearing:
Prince Harry arrived at the Court of Appeal about an hour ahead of the hearing, appearing calm and composed. He offered a brief smile and a small wave to onlookers gathered outside the court building. Just before 10:30 a.m. local time, he entered the courtroom alongside his lawyer Jenny Afia. Inside, Harry took his seat with a notepad and bottle of water in front of him, occasionally leaning in to confer with Afia during the high-profile hearing before three senior judges.
Harry’s lawyer, Shadeed Fatima KC, argued that the U.K. government’s security committee, RAVEC, failed to properly assess threats to the Duke and his family. Key to Harry’s appeal is the claim that RAVEC bypassed the Risk Management Board (RMB)—a specialist body meant to provide expert threat analysis — when deciding on his protection status. Fatima said RAVEC “diverted” from its usual process and imposed a “bespoke” arrangement on Harry not used for any other individual. Harry maintains this left him “singled out for different, unjustified and inferior treatment” and excluded him from the same protections offered to others in the so-called “Other VIP Category.”
She emphasized that Harry is not seeking the same level of protection he had as a working royal, but rather a fair, consistent process. His legal team argued that the Home Office breached its own policies by failing to carry out the required RMB review, and did not properly document or explain its decisions.
In court, Prince Harry’s lawyer Fatima emphasized the significance of not granting him an RMB (Royal and VIP Executive Committee) review, saying, “There’s nothing better than an RMB, and that’s why it is done for everyone else.” She also hinted at what might be addressed in Wednesday’s closed session, noting it would focus on Harry’s “comparison with others.”
Home Office lawyer Sir James Eadie KC countered that Harry’s protection wasn’t removed entirely, but adjusted due to his changed status. He said future security would be provided under “appropriate circumstances,” calling the decision a matter of judgment with “no right or wrong answers.” At one point, Harry appeared to shake his head and turned to his lawyer Jenny Afia, seemingly reacting to the arguments being made.
There’s a lot of nuance to Harry’s case and his legal argument, and that nuance is mostly ignored in coverage of this long-running case. The British Home Office really cannot believe that Harry keeps pressing this issue when they’ve made it as clear as they can: the purpose of the bespoke arrangement is to snub Harry as much as possible AND to control his movements around the UK. They’re like “how are you not getting this, we want you to stop visiting and we want to put you in as much danger as possible.”
Additionally, Harry’s lawyer told the court that the Sussexes “felt forced to step back from the role of full time official working members of The Royal Family as they considered they were not being protected by the institution” back in 2020. What’s left unspoken – in open court at least – is why the Windsors suddenly decided to yank the Sussexes’ security when the original arrangement was to have a “one year breather” with security. In 2023, Byline Times connected this issue with Dan Wootton and Prince William’s senior aide Christian Jones. Omid Scobie’s Endgame also had an account of what happened all around the Christian Jones situation.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.
-
- Prince Harry arrives at The Royal Courts Of Justice in London, England, UK on Tuesday 8 April, 2025 for the start of a two day hearing to appeal the decision over his security access at the Appeals Court.,Image: 985031284, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: Please credit photographer and agency when publishing as Justin Ng/UPPA/Avalon., Model Release: no, Credit line: Justin Ng/Avalon
-
- Prince Harry arrives at The Royal Courts Of Justice in London, England, UK on Tuesday 8 April, 2025 for the start of a two day hearing to appeal the decision over his security access at the Appeals Court.,Image: 985031318, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: Please credit photographer and agency when publishing as Justin Ng/UPPA/Avalon., Model Release: no, Credit line: Justin Ng/Avalon
-
- Prince Harry arrives at The Royal Courts Of Justice in London, England, UK on Tuesday 8 April, 2025 for the start of a two day hearing to appeal the decision over his security access at the Appeals Court.,Image: 985031329, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: Please credit photographer and agency when publishing as Justin Ng/UPPA/Avalon., Model Release: no, Credit line: Justin Ng/Avalon
-
- Prince Harry arrives at The Royal Courts Of Justice in London, England, UK on Tuesday 8 April, 2025 for the start of a two day hearing to appeal the decision over his security access at the Appeals Court.,Image: 985031333, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: Please credit photographer and agency when publishing as Justin Ng/UPPA/Avalon., Model Release: no, Credit line: Justin Ng/Avalon
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, was seen leaving the Royal Courts of Justice after the start of his legal appeal against a High Court ruling on his security arrangements in the UK. Pictured: Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex BACKGRID USA 8 APRIL 2025 BYLINE MUST READ: Zak Hussein / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, was seen leaving the Royal Courts of Justice after the start of his legal appeal against a High Court ruling on his security arrangements in the UK. Pictured: Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex BACKGRID USA 8 APRIL 2025 BYLINE MUST READ: Zak Hussein / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, was seen leaving the Royal Courts of Justice after the start of his legal appeal against a High Court ruling on his security arrangements in the UK. Pictured: Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex BACKGRID USA 8 APRIL 2025 BYLINE MUST READ: Zak Hussein / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Prince Harry arrived at the High Court in London to begin legal proceedings against the British government, challenging the decision to reduce his taxpayer-funded security while visiting the UK. The Duke of Sussex is disputing the ruling made by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC) after he and Meghan stepped down as working royals in 2020. Pictured: Prince Harry BACKGRID USA 8 APRIL 2025 BYLINE MUST READ: Mattpapz / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Prince Harry arrived at the High Court in London to begin legal proceedings against the British government, challenging the decision to reduce his taxpayer-funded security while visiting the UK. The Duke of Sussex is disputing the ruling made by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC) after he and Meghan stepped down as working royals in 2020. Pictured: Prince Harry BACKGRID USA 8 APRIL 2025 BYLINE MUST READ: Mattpapz / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
They wanted him and his family to be killed. That’s what was going on with that BS security arrangement.
Yes they did.
So. Harry is going to walk from his car into the court room and there is a massive crowd.
William does a walk about in Scotland (?) and no one shows up. Nobody. Not to greet him. Not in the street to “interact” with him.
But Harry has fans willing to drive in/ walk in/ line up/ spend time in a crowd to see him walk into a building. That’s it. Walk. Into. A. Building.
Exactly. the media shows every day that the interest in h and m demand security. The sheer number of articles they write for years are proving Harry’s case too. I used a comparison in another comment of – put all the royals in one room, and h and m are in another room. The protection would need to be primarily on h and m. All the reporters would be in that room too. That is the interest each group whips up.
Maybe if the palace didn’t report sociopathically on h and m, interest in them would have waned after they left . Then maybe the ‘ belief they could have bespoke’ / aka be punished could have been easier to prove by charles. Either way harry was born in Meghan married in and needs protection no matter the argument just like every other royal gets.
The security being pulled was definitely to endanger or unalive the Sussex family and I do believe that’s still their goal with all of this hate they create and spew.
High time the Invictus Games 2027 reconsider Birmingham, UK as their venue. Way too dangerous for Harry, the founder of the Invictus Games, to attend. Given all the shenanigans related to security that’s still ongoing.
I hear that the Games is looking for a new CEO. Perhaps whoever gets the job should prioritize the search for a new venue. Or maybe it can be postponed to 2028.
Genuine question here: Do the other members of the family that are not “working” get security of any kind? If so, shouldn’t H’s be of the same level?
Yes, Andrew being the most notable example. The fact that Charles said yes to Andrew’s security (tabloid press coverage of Charles ‘ empty threats to remove it notwithstanding) and no to Harry’ s proves beyond a doubt that the monarch controls security for the BRF, full stop and I would think that the closed hearing is to hide the specifics of Andrew’s security and its cost. They’re not having a closed hearing about Taylor Swift, Kate Moss and others who have full Met VIP security… It’s got to be about Andrew.
I don’t believe other non-working members of the BRF have had envelopes with white powder sent to them, or have had death threats to the magnitude we’ve seen for the Sussexes. The other non-working members of the BRF have not had columns written expressing the need to parade the royal through the street naked and pelted with excrement, or that they should be thrown off the balcony. So no, Harry’s level of security should not be at the same level as other non-working members of the BRF.
Not just threats. Recall that there are two white nationalists sitting in prison for an actual plot to kill H&M. They are neither paranoid nor narcissistic but are responding to a real threat that has already been acted out at least once. The British press and pundits have been playing with dynamite on this one for years, as they are when writing that Harry is asking for taxpayer funding for this to stoke public outrage.
Sophie had a full police detail when that woman was killed and she was not scheduled to attend an engagement when it happened.
Harry is the son of the King. In USA, the children of the President get security, just because of their proximity to the country leader. It is so weird to put someone in his status in this situation. He isn’t some distant cousin. When Charles pulled back Andrew’s security, he still gave him security paid by him. I am sure, Andrew’s security is getting intelligence reports about threats against him.
Can they publish the minutes of this bullshit committee?
What?!? The Crown be transparent with the people they are meant to serve and represent?!? No. No. That’s simply not done.
We won’t even know about Prince Phillip’s or the Queens wills for another hundred years. Not to mention the Queen excluded the Crown from a number of laws and taxes back in the 60’s and we just found out about it.
What’s really bonkers here is that Harry wants to PAY FOR HIS OWN SECURITY and they don’t want him to!
The end goal is what happened to Diana and that’s that Harry and his family no longer walk the earth.
The fiends! Charles would be relieved. Pegs would be ecstatic.
Okay, so this is what we discussed yesterday. Harry asked for protection for the wedding and the court case and was denied. Why? Do they give a reason for a denial? Bc there’s no way the threat level had decreased. This is truly insane. I can believe that Charles had something to do with RAVEC’s denial and that’s why they’re so surprised that Harry showed up anyways and effed up his Italian trip. It’s clear Harry should get security but I don’t know if I trust the king’s courts on this.
Sidenote- that police officer is grinning hugely next to Harry, lol, I get it.
Had they wanted to cancel RPO protection overseas but keep it for the UK, that would have been the reasonable solution. But Charles is petty and William will be worse.
It is insane that Taylor Swift gets better treatment over a UK veteran like Harry.
You’re right of course, but as all of us have been saying all along it’s not about being reasonable, it’s about the BRF punishing Harry and controlling his movements in and out of the UK. Harry’s only recourse is to sue them and hope that at least some of what comes out of the case persuades judges to see the BRF’s actions as unreasonable.
This isn’t a case that will be decided on the merits or even on principle because the personal animus against Harry is so clear. Therefore it’s down to the individual judge and his/her conscience, and how much they want a gong or a title when they retire
Therefore it’s down to the individual judge and his/her conscience. So true. There might be 3 judges in this case but I’m not certain. Either way, yeah. And it’s huge. Bc at the end of the day, it’s being decided if Harry and his family will essentially ever visit the uk. Archie and Lili are half-British and they should be able to visit, jeez. It’s unbelievable really.
There was also report that the risk assessment was done and showed no need for that kind of security for Taylor, but her mother requested it if they wanted her to do the show, since there was a serious threat on the previous concert. So, they gave her the security in spite of the risk assessment report. It is obvious all their procedures need to be reviewed if they are gonna do preferential treatments as they wish.
The British press has made it seem like Harry wants the same security detail that the working royals get but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
They keep saying that Harry’s status does not warrant the level of security he wants, but it is blatantly obvious that security risk and royal status are not directly correlated. Harry is at risk, therefore Harry needs security. Same for Taylor Swift or any other public figure. The problem is the Brits have their heads so far up their asses with their societal hierarchy, that they ignore common sense. And they want to use the status nonsense as a cudgel to bludgeon Harry into submission. And it’s not going to work. Hence him showing up to court in spite of the current security situation. Harry is a soldier, a warrior, who is willing to fight the good fight to protect himself and his wife and children. They still keep believing they can play with this man even though he has shown he is not afraid to go up against the biggest and worst of them.
I believe paragraph 4 should read —
‘In court, Prince Harry’s lawyer Fatima emphasized the significance of not granting him an RMB (Risk Management Board) review,’
— rather than referring to “RMB” as RAVEC “Royal and VIP Executive Committee).” I realize the wording is a direct copy from the People original (which I also believe to be in error).