'I Would Like That Person’s Name': Prince Harry Is Hot and Heavy to Know the Specific Person Who Stripped Him of U.K. Security
Prince Harry 'would like' to know the 'person's name' who stripped him of his taxpayer-funded British security, even though said individual was following policy.
Harry, Duke of Sussex, lost a High Court bid to retain his taxpayer-funded security in Britain for himself and his family. In documents released from the case, which was decided on Wednesday, February 28, the fifth in line to the throne even demanded the name of the specific person who signed off on stripping Sussex protection four years ago.
Harry and Meghan Markle decided to leave the United Kingdom ("Megxit") in early 2020 for reasons that have been disputed by both analysts and the couple themselves ever since. No matter the reason behind the parting, government-funded royal security is something that is only granted to senior royals who actively work for or from the annual Sovereign Grant of public money.
It is understood, "obviously," that such monarchy members will reside full-time in Britain and will continue their public and private duties as representatives of the reigning monarch. Both of these principles were abandoned when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to leave.
The fiery-haired prince filed a claim against the British Home Office after they decided to remove such security in February 2020, and released a statement defending his decision last December.
Harry let it be known that he and the Duchess of Sussex "felt forced" to leave the monarchy nearly four years ago.
"It was with great sadness for the both of us that my wife and I felt forced to step back from this role and leave the country in 2020. "The U.K. is my home. The U.K. is central to the heritage of my children and a place I want them to feel at home as much as where they live at the moment in the United States," the fifth in line to the throne's recent witness statement read.
He continued: "That cannot happen if it is not possible to keep them safe when they are on U.K. soil. I cannot put my wife in danger like that, and, given my experiences in life, I am reluctant to unnecessarily put myself in harm’s way too."
Shortly after his statement was revealed, Lady Colin Campbell took a more pointed approach when observing the court proceedings and shared: "Harry has an addiction to litigation. That is a legal category called vexatious litigant. Harry needs to go into treatment and realize it’s one thing if the press defames you, it’s quite another thing to scratch around looking for all sorts of things trying to attack a free press when you are supporting the right to a press to be free."
She continued: "Harry is anti-free speech. He called the First Amendment 'bonkers.' Harry needs to grow up and realize if he is going to behave as a prince and claim to be one, he needs to start to act as one."
The Duke and Duchess will now have to fund their protection when in Britain.
Powered by RedCircle
The New York Post reported on Harry's court case.
