I agree she carries a bit more weight on top naturally.
I don’t think age of consent is the issue? It’s whether Andrew knowingly slept with a trafficked girl.At the time, in New York the age of consent was 14 and in the UK 16.
Too many people have taken the opportunity to spill on their interactions with him as well as the terrible tone-deaf interview, added to the actual friendship with a convicted paedophile. It's been open season him as people have seized the opportunity to have their say. He's alienated people all his life from aristos, to colleagues, to servants. His siblings and nephew don't seem to be particularly fond of him either. He's completely tone deaf- look at the reports that he was demanding to be allowed to wear an admiral's uniform at his father's funeral which tipped the balance to no uniforms for all when it started as only Harry not being allowed uniform. There's now a movement to get him kicked out of Royal Lodge given that there's only him and his ex-wife there and he can't claim that he needs the space for royal duty meetings and entertainment. The Gloucesters have downsized to a small cottage at Kensington; I'd love to see Andrew and Fergie stuck into Harry's old two bedroom cottage or similar.Agree with everything you said Great_Kate
I think this is why Andrew is taking it to court - to discredit VG - he is so arrogant that he thinks if she loses her case, he will be free to do as he pleases as he will be "innocent".
He is far from innocent and he will never live the life he desires again.
They're great pictures, she looks like she's really enjoying herself.Kate looks quite happy in these photos - I think she has a real passion for sport.Kate Middleton at Twickenham in first outing as England Rugby patron
Dressed in England Rugby drill pants and an official jumper, Kate, 40, appeared in excellent spirits as she arrived at the west London stadium to meet England players, coaches and referees.www.dailymail.co.uk
I loved the picture of Harry captioned "Kate Middleton".They're great pictures, she looks like she's really enjoying herself.
I think Princess Anne and Zara and Mike Tindell might just have something to say at the Mail describing Kate as 'one of the sportiest members of the Royal Family' though!
He’s not a royalWouldn't Mike Tindall have been a better fit as patron of the rugby? Or is he not senior enough?
Surely he’s as royal as Kate is? Didn’t they both marry in?He’s not a royal
Zara has no title so he hasn’t inherited a title. Only titled people are Royals. He’s married *in* to the Royal Family but he himself isn’t Royal.Surely he’s as royal as Kate is? Didn’t they both marry in?
And he has the huge advantage of having been an actual rugby player.
Zara is technically not royal either, only her mother is. As Princess Margaret said of her children, the children of an earl, "they're not royal but their aunt is the Queen" (paraphrased). As it stands at the moment, unlike other royal houses such as the Swedish, grandchildren of the monarch take their status from their father and wives from their husbands. So Kate, Sophie, Katharine, Marie-Christine and Birgitte are royal but Timothy Laurence is not, just as Mark Phillips, Angus Ogilvie, and Anthony Snowdon were not, as are their children.Surely he’s as royal as Kate is? Didn’t they both marry in?
And he has the huge advantage of having been an actual rugby player.
Shame as he would be a very clued up patron although Kate seems very enthusiastic and seemed to really enjoy herself on the pitch. Naturally the players were "gentle " with her no one would tackle her really hard or grab her by the crotch.He’s not a royal
As the children of the daughter of the monarch. any titles for Zara and Peter would have to have come from their father and as Anne and Mark declined him being ennobled when they married, the children technically are commoners (Anthony Armstrong-Jones was created Lord Snowdon on his marriage to Princess Margaret which is why their children are Lord and Lady at least).Zara is technically not royal either, only her mother is. As Princess Margaret said of her children, the children of an earl, "they're not royal but their aunt is the Queen" (paraphrased). As it stands at the moment, unlike other royal houses such as the Swedish, grandchildren of the monarch take their status from their father and wives from their husbands. So Kate, Sophie, Katharine, Marie-Christine and Birgitte are royal but Timothy Laurence is not, just as Mark Phillips, Angus Ogilvie, and Anthony Snowdon were not, as are their children.
You see it in the peerage too. Marry Lord Whatever and you become Lady Whatever and your joint children get whatever his rank entitles them to. A peeress in her own right (eg the late Patricia Countess Mountbatten) doesn't give any title to her husband; children's titles appear to depend on whether the husband is a peer (cf Countess Mountbatten and Lord Brabourne) or not (eg the Countess of Mar whose daughter from an untitled husband is Lady Susan [Wylie - husband's surname] Mistress of Mar - the Lady as daughter of an earldom plus the Master/Mistress title of an heir to a Scottish title where there is no subsidiary title).
I know!Zara has no title so he hasn’t inherited a title. Only titled people are Royals. He’s married *in* to the Royal Family but he himself isn’t Royal.
YeAh it is rather naff.I know!
I just find it ludicrous that the daughter of a princess/granddaughter of the queen is seriously considered as being not as royal as the daughter of the owners of a naff party planning company.
What I find even more ludicrous is the idea that anyone would bow and scrape to any of them.
I think Princess Anne declined titles for her children.How is Zara not a princess but Andy’s two are?