mjr wrote:Psamathe wrote:Claims his security was withdrawn "I then got told, short notice, that security was going to be removed" - except now it's transpiredhttps://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/harry-and-meghan-were-warned-security-would-go-56ksj3lp7 wrote:The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were given ample warning that they risked losing their security if they stepped down from their royal roles, a police source has said.
The source, who was involved in deciding which royals should receive taxpayer-funded protection, directly contradicted Harry’s claims about the withdrawal of security he made in his interview with Oprah Winfrey.
Hi. I'm not a subscriber to The Times, so cannot see the full article. Does it actually say anywhere what "ample warning" is?
How long do we feel would be ample warning for someone to recruit new bodyguards? Do we expect retiring royals to just phone Rent-a-cop and take whoever turns out?
I have no "inside detail" but Independent says "The source said: “They had already been told that and they were told in advance that if you stopped being royals you can’t be assured that you’ll have automatic protection for the rest of your lives." (https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/meghan-harry-news-live-piers-latest-oprah-b1815657.html) - which says "if you stopped being a Royal" which means before they quit so if security was an issue they could have delayed quitting until they had whoever from wherever they needed in place. And if it's a big thing then you'd expect the person affected to have clarified and taken appropriate steps/adjusted the plan/whatever.
Ian