Prince Harry ‘Cut Off’ From Royals After Naming Aide in Legal Papers

Welcome to this week’s edition of Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday.

Was Harry cut off because of aide-naming furore?

Prince Harry was cut off financially by his father after he accused the partner of Christian Jones, a key aide to Prince William, of telling the scandal-hit Sun journalist Dan Wootton about his departure from the royal family, and refused to withdraw the allegation, it was explosively alleged this week.

Why Is Prince Harry a Bigger Royal Pariah Than Prince Andrew?

Byline Times alleges that in April 2020, Harry sent a legal letter to the Sun alleging that Jones’ partner had been paid £4,000 after they revealed a number of stories to the Sun, including his and wife Meghan Markle’s plan to depart the royal family. Byline Times says Jones denies any wrongdoing. Jones’ partner, a professional publicist, says they received the payments for other stories, Byline Times says. Harry was, at that stage, living in Canada with his family and as a result of the so-called Sandringham Summit was receiving £700,000 ($860,000) funding for a trial year.

Harry was pressured to remove Jones’ name but when he refused, saw his funding dramatically withdrawn, marking the effective collapse of the Sandringham Agreement, Byline Times says.

It is understood this is what Harry was referring to in his interview with Oprah Winfrey when he said he was cut off financially by his father and therefore forced to sign a range of commercial deals.Jones and his partner have previously denied being friends with Wootton, but Byline has published a damning photo of them both at the journalist’s 35th birthday party.

Byline cited a “well-placed source with knowledge of the matter” as saying: “They threatened the removal of the funding to try and protect the royal household from a potential courtroom scandal with Jones and Wootton very publicly at the centre. The actual removal of the funding weeks later was about control, and designed to force Harry and Meghan to come back to the senior royal family in the U.K. where their security would be assured.”

The source added: “The greater truth is that Harry and Meghan make better headlines than the King and Camilla or William and Kate. The idea of them still being in public service but abroad and out of the control of the institution and dominating the media narrative just couldn’t happen.” Another source is quoted as saying: “The removal of the transition funding, which Prince Charles knew was his son’s only lifeline to keeping safe, was considered a very effective way of trying to bring Harry and Meghan to heel in the UK. But it didn’t work.”

Wootton has been dropped from key media roles after he was accused of tricking people, including work colleagues, into sending him explicit photographs.

In his memoir, Spare, Harry alleged that royal insiders leaked material to the papers.

Charles must apologize for Mau Mau, academic says

During his upcoming Kenya tour, King Charles needs to apologize for the bloody destruction perpetrated by British overlords as they crushed the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya between 1952 and 1960—one of the bloodiest episodes in colonial history, a Harvard academic has told the Telegraph.

Caroline Elkins, a Harvard professor of history whose book about the brutal suppression of the Mau Mau uprising, Imperial Reckoning: The Untold Story of Britain’s Gulag in Kenya, won a Pulitzer Prize, said it was “a start” that the King—according to Buckingham Palace—would acknowledge the “more painful aspects” of the UK’s shared history with Kenya. “But there is one word that he really needs to say—sorry. We are sorry. That is what needs to come, he needs to do that. This happened on his mother’s watch.”

King Charles Prepares to Confront ‘Painful’ Colonial Legacy in Kenya

As The Daily Beast reported Friday, many influential Kenyans also want a full apology. Dominic Kirui, a Kenyan athlete and double Olympian turned writer, told The Daily Beast: “A royal visit in itself is not something that many Kenyans would have wanted or needed, because it awakens thoughts and feelings about the colonial past that many people have buried and never want exhumed.”

Kirui comes from a region in the Rif Valley where, he says, “the scars of colonialism can still be felt and seen. The people in Kericho were driven out of their homes and their ancestral lands and forcibly resettled in Nyanza, on lands that were infested with the tsetse fly, which it was hoped would kill them. A royal visit only serves to remind people about the injustices that were committed and the pain they suffered, so I cannot believe it is something Kenyans would be eager to see or witness.”

“The people whose land was stolen... still live among the farms,” Kirui said, adding, “I see the visit by the royals as a way of the colonists saying to Kenyans, ‘We are still around. You are not as sovereign as you think you are.’”

Kirui dismissed the generalized expressions of contrition made by Charles’ office saying that what was needed was “reparations to ensure people are compensated.”

Asked about the prospect of an apology, a spokesperson for Buckingham Palace said that as the king is traveling to Kenya “at the request of the British Government” questions about an apology “would be a matter for them.” They directed the Daily Beast towards the text of the 2013 apology. (The Foreign Office did not respond to a request for comment.)

An official source in the king’s office said: “The visit will acknowledge the more painful aspects of the U.K. and Kenya’s shared history. His Majesty is fully aware of the context and will take time during his visit to hear from Kenyans who experienced, or whose loved ones experienced, the wrongs of this period first hand, to deepen his understanding. As well as acknowledging the wrongs of the past, the visit will look to the future, celebrating the strong and dynamic partnership which exists between Kenya and the U.K.”

OnlyFans model is (latest) anti-Middleton poster placer

There seems to be more than one anti-Carole and Michael Middleton poster-placer on the prowl, the Mail reports.

After posters insulting the Middletons were first put up around their home village of Bucklebury in Berkshire a few weeks ago, another series, featuring “a scantily clad model,” were stuck up this week outside a farm the Middletons own, and on nearby trees, claiming Party Pieces—the firm they owned that went bust—didn’t pay its creditors and as a result the person behind the posters lost their job.

The posters feature an OnlyFans model called Molly, who revealed her identity in the Sun, saying that she had asked friends to put up the posters on her behalf. She would not name the company which allegedly let her go.

Molly said: “The point needs to be made that if you don’t pay your creditors, it doesn’t just affect one person, it affects all employees of the company. Hence why I say I was made redundant because of this. It’s not part of a promo, but as you can see by the photo, it would be a great publicity stunt for me. Don’t you think I deserve something back after being made redundant? I think I do.”

Asked if the Middletons were being unfairly ­targeted, she said: “Do you think being unfairly treated is not paying millions owed, or being made redundant? I think I was the one that was wronged and others.”

Molly told the Sun she had been told she had been let go because of Party Pieces going bust. “After seeing the first posters online, I then wanted to vent my frustration and let everyone know how I feel. I’m sure many others do too. I understand how this looks to the public and how the public feels about OnlyFans creators, but I was at rock bottom.”

James Middleton and Alizee Thevenet celebrate first child

James Middleton, Kate’s brother, and wife Alizee Thevenet were spotted by the Daily Mail taking their first child for a walk in London’s Notting Hill this week. The baby’s name and sex remain unknown for now, as does when and where the child was born. James had announced the pregnancy on Instagram on July 5.

This week in royal history

On October 31, 1955, Princess Margaret announced she would not marry divorcé Group Captain Peter Townsend. In a statement, she said: “I would like it to be known that I have decided not to marry Group Captain Peter Townsend. I have been aware that, subject to my renouncing my rights of succession, it might have been possible for me to contract a civil marriage. But mindful of the Church's teachings that Christian marriage is indissoluble, and conscious of my duty to the Commonwealth, I have resolved to put these considerations before any others. I have reached this decision entirely alone, and in doing so I have been strengthened by the unfailing support and devotion of Group Captain Townsend. I am deeply grateful for concern of all those who have constantly prayed for my happiness.” It was signed “Margaret.”

Unanswered questions

How far, or not far will Charles go in his apologizing to Kenya over Mau Mau, and colonialism? Will Carole and Michael Middleton face any more poison-pen posters?

Read more at The Daily Beast.

Get the Daily Beast's biggest scoops and scandals delivered right to your inbox. Sign up now.

Stay informed and gain unlimited access to the Daily Beast's unmatched reporting. Subscribe now.