Jump to content
Forums forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

53.9k Excellent
  1. doodlebug

    College Basketball

    Looks like he returns for the season finale and is then available for the postseason.
  2. I think you saw the same photos I did. They looked like the same pics that you see on AirBnB. One of them had a dark dog in it that I thought might be one of the Sussexes pups, but it is quite possible that those photos predate their arrival in Canada and it's not their dog. Obviously, photos permitted by the homeowners for commercial use are not illegal and there seem to be a lot of those out there. Excellent article discussing how the move to Canada may actually lead to less privacy in their personal lives. Harry and Meghan have been firm on their stance that they will continue to support their various charities. They have to be out and about publicly making appearances in order to do so. They can never retire completely from public life and it appears that perhaps they intend to use their names and images to sell products, too. That won't work unless they are out there promoting themselves which is only going to make the paparazzi more eager to get pics of them.
  3. I'm aware that the Privacy Acts do prevent you from being photographed in your private home. However, the only photos we've seen of the house where the royals are staying are from a distance away and do not include any people, though I think the dogs were seen in one. I don't think Harry has any recourse against the photographers for taking exterior shots of the house from a public street. I have not heard that anyone actually entered the property to get photos. If so, you are correct, they can and should be prosecuted for trespass immediately and for invasion of privacy should any photos of the Sussexes or their guests be published. That's how William and Kate were able to sue for the topless photos of her sunbathing. I believe the photographer had a long lens and was just off the property when he took them. The photos of Meghan and the baby with the dogs were taken in a public park. There is no expectation of privacy there and there is no way to prevent photographers from following and snapping photos. It is clear from the pictures that they were accompanied by at least 2 strapping bodyguards. Those kinds or photos can and will be published and I don't think Harry or Meghan can do anything about it and there's no point in Harry threatening legal action in that case.
  4. doodlebug

    MLB Thread

    It's all about the Yankees, doncha know? I was sad for all Rockies fans when, after all the major news shows devoted entire segments to drooling over Jeter, they couldn't even bother to mention Larry Walker as an afterthought. I think we should just award both titles to the Indians. Just because we've waited the longest. And, at the rate we're going, I'm not going to live long enough to see them win one outright.
  5. I think this is coming from Harry and he's probably going to be a bit surprised that he has far less control of the press outside of Britain. While the British tabloids print lies all the time, in the wake of Diana's death, the British press were legally restrained from pursuing the royals, especially their kids, as they went about their daily lives. They still are. There are laws restricting how close they can get and what sorts of long distance photos they can take. Those laws are nonexistent in the US and Canada and so, it is unlikely he can do much about the pack of photographers outside their rented home or those that will pursue them in the car or on foot. It is only if they create a hazard like causing a collision while following them that they can be stopped. I think he is incensed that photos of his wife and child walking in a public park were sold and published, but he has no grounds for a lawsuit. If the photographers work for a British publication, he can try to get them on the grounds of violating the British laws concerning photographing royals in private moments, but I'm not sure anyone has tested that outside of Britain. And, every time he and Meghan and the baby leave their home, there are going to be civilians with cell phones snapping away too, and some of those will be published. To me, it has become increasingly clear that Harry has been really triggered by all the press coverage, especially since Archie's birth and he's reliving all his own childhood trauma as well as the death of his mother because of it. I hope he's getting counseling because it seems to me that, if anything, his actions over the past few weeks have intensified the scrutiny and it isn't going to let up anytime soon. It seems that Harry wants to be a public figure only when it benefits himself and his causes but not when it doesn't. It doesn't work that way, and no matter how many threats he makes, it never will.
  6. The men, especially, are very limited in options. Practically everyone was named George or Edward for years and years right down to the youngest generation.
  7. Ask and ye shall receive. This just goes back to the establishment of the House of Windsor in 1917 https://www.britroyals.com/windsortree.asp
  8. Thanks! The numbers are remarkably similar to 2018 and confirm that the Wessexes, Gloucesters and Kents are definitely not part time royals and their workload, especially the Wessexes, is far larger than the Cambridges or Sussexes. For Kate, 2019 contained no maternity leave, but she made fewer appearances than anyone but the Duchess of Gloucester and Meghan who was on leave. But, here in the US, things like the White House press pool doesn't allow tabloids to participate. Daily Mail is on a level with the News of the World or National Enquirer, IMO, and there is no reason to include them in the regular pool. In fact, it implies that Daily Mail is a legitimate news organization adhering to the strictest standards of journalistic integrity which is definitely not the case.
  9. Oops, sorry! Wrong Kent. In any event, the Duke's wife doesn't perform royal duties, so she didn't make the list. I'll fix my post so as not to further tarnish the image of the actual Kents. And nobody wants Princess Michael supporting their charitable event. I stand by that opinion.
  10. Michelle probably did have ultrasounds, most people did back then. Twins can move in the uterus, but they do tend to stay in the same position relative to one another. So, I supposed if she always felt movement in one place, then, at her ultrasound, they could look and see what kid's extremities were there and identify it. I have certainly had moms of multiples tell me they felt one baby moving more than the other(s).
  11. Actually, all of them are full-time royals who make more appearances than either the Cambridges or the Sussexes. The last year for which statistics are available is 2018. Prince Edward was third behind his brother Charles and sister Anne in number of appearances, Sophie was 6th. Meanwhile, William ranked 8th and Harry 10th. Overall, Edward made about twice as many appearances as either one of them. Now, in 2018, Meghan didn't join the family until May and Kate had maternity leave after Louis' birth; so they're a little more difficult to assess. They ranked 12th and 14th on the list. The Gloucesters, both in their 70's, were also busy. The Duke came in 7th, ahead of both Harry and William while the Duchess was 13th, right between Meghan and Kate. The Duke of Kent, at age 82, made just about as many appearances as Harry. His wife has health problems and doesn't make royal appearances these days. So, if the Wessexes, Gloucesters and Kents are part-time; then Harry and William are even more so. https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/2018-royal-work-statistics-whos-been-busy-whos-been-busier-congrats-your-maj/
  12. Jinx!! It looks like a goodly number of us are well versed in royal trivia.
  13. Wasn't it that Anne got married in Scotland at Balmoral because the Church of Scotland had no restrictions against remarriage after divorce? I think that was done because the Church of England still had that rule in place, and, as head of the Church of England, it would've been unseemly for the Queen to attend otherwise.
  14. Prince Philip arrived with Anne and Zara and you can see him entering the church with them around the 10 minute mark.
  15. William and Kate were also given a several years of living in relative obscurity when they first married and they lived far away from the press and London. They had a relatively small cottage in Wales and William did search and rescue piloting for the RAF. That gave them a lot of time to 'settle in' to their marriage without intense scrutiny. They also did only a very select number of official royal appearances and overseas tours during that time as the Palace cited William's RAF commitment as his first responsibility. Unfortunately, Harry and Meghan weren't granted that luxury. He was already a full time working royal, his military days far behind him. Due to Meghan's age, waiting to start a family was not an option. I think that, had they met sooner, had they had the luxury of time and distance from the press and the Palace; they might've been better able to handle what was to come for them and maybe they'd have been able to figure out a better path to continue as working royals. Ain't that the truth? And, for a 93 year old lady, I think the Queen has done a fairly admirable job of keeping up with the changing times. I also think she is already 'semi-retired' and the actual day-to-day work of the monarchy is being handled on her behalf by Prince Charles as a sort of pseudo-regent. I don't blame her; I think her sense of duty is admirable; but I sorta think she wishes she could just retire and hang out in her housecoat and comfy slippers with the dogs at home.
  • Create New...

Customize font-size