Royal Gossip
April 22, 2019, 05:41:33 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Did Diana and Charles had a daughter?  (Read 6685 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Byechoc
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1388


Nothing happens by accident. everything was a ....


« on: April 10, 2015, 07:55:36 pm »

http://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/2015/globe-princess-diana-secret-daughter-alleges-prince-charles-responsible-for-mothers-death/
Logged

In life nothing happens by accident. we must remember that there are no good that lasts forever. And evil that never ends. God works in mysterious ways. So I just have to accept what happens because we do not know what we gain by things go this way. Not always what initially seems an award is the. This happens when we fall in love, when we found out a new job when a friend disappears or when someone leaves for ever.
FortressODaveBarry
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2187



« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2015, 11:54:46 pm »

"when Kate Middleton and Prince William traveled to NYC, Kate reportedly met with the woman"

Now you know that ain't true, because Kate would pee her pants about "Someone prettier than me, nooo! Now I'll lose my 'next People's Princess' nickname!" easter-lol
Logged
Byechoc
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1388


Nothing happens by accident. everything was a ....


« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2015, 07:19:00 am »

I think is just BS.... anyway if true, Diana and Charles didn't knew anything... and it was not their fault
Logged

In life nothing happens by accident. we must remember that there are no good that lasts forever. And evil that never ends. God works in mysterious ways. So I just have to accept what happens because we do not know what we gain by things go this way. Not always what initially seems an award is the. This happens when we fall in love, when we found out a new job when a friend disappears or when someone leaves for ever.
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11176


« Reply #3 on: April 13, 2015, 02:01:17 am »

Some years ago the tab claimed Charles and Camilla had a secret daughter. Camilla got pregnant in 1980 and the baby was placed for adoption.
Logged
kolkomilko
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3197



« Reply #4 on: April 13, 2015, 06:56:21 am »

^ Yes, I remember it. But why would Diana and Charles have concealed their daughter?
Logged

meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2661



« Reply #5 on: April 13, 2015, 09:34:17 am »

They wouldn't have hidden a daughter. Diana might have tried to hide a child IF she had a child after they marriage ended i.e. any time after Harry's birth as Charles would have very quickly disowned that child but a child born to Charles and Diana would have been accepted and loved by both of them, particularly a daughter.

I would like to add that given how rarely Diana was out of the public eye from her engagement onwards and the type of dresses she wore there is no way she had a child other than William and Harry.

If Camilla had a child by anyone after her marriage to Andrew there is no reason to think that Andrew wouldn't do the standard practice amongst the aristocracy and accept that child as his, even if he knew it wasn't.

The difference between Charles and Andrew accepting such a child is that Andrew wasn't in the line of succession to the throne and all his wife would have done was cheat on him while a wife of Charles having a child that wasn't his, while still married to him, was committing treason (aiding and abetting the commission of treason is still treason and Hewitt etc did commit treason when they slept with Diana and she didn't cry violent physical attack making her an accomplice in that crime.)
Logged
AnaBolena
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3594


We Read To Know We Are Not Alone - C.S Lewis


« Reply #6 on: April 13, 2015, 05:06:04 pm »

^ I agree Meememe.  One thing I was led to believe was that not only did anyone she slept with commit treason, but she actually committed treason herself.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Logged

“Without music, life would be a mistake.”
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11176


« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2015, 07:08:33 pm »

There were no treason charges or any remote possibility. If there were, I think the Royal Family would be doomed and the UK would have been a republic. It would bring out charges of hypocrisy also.
Logged
AnaBolena
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3594


We Read To Know We Are Not Alone - C.S Lewis


« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2015, 08:47:00 pm »

^ Who said there were treason charges? Charges? Where? Where did that get said?
Logged

“Without music, life would be a mistake.”
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11176


« Reply #9 on: April 13, 2015, 08:49:31 pm »

^" I agree Meememe.  One thing I was led to believe was that not only did anyone she slept with commit treason, but she actually committed treason herself.  Please correct me if I'm wrong. "

what does this mean then? Why was treason brought up?>
Logged
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4621


« Reply #10 on: April 13, 2015, 11:54:19 pm »

There have been amendments to the Treason Act through the centuries. As we know (Anne Boleyn) Queen's have been accused of treason. In the twentieth century there would merely be a huge scandal and divorce. The Treason Act was amended majorly in 1842. The Treason Act of 1945, under which it was proposed in 1996 that James Hewitt be prosecuted, had inadvertently kept a three year time limit from the former Act. Therefore James could not be prosecuted because it could not have been proven that he and Diana had slept together in the previous three years.
Logged
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11176


« Reply #11 on: April 14, 2015, 01:13:19 am »

It would be a waste of time and effort to try to press charges against Hewitt and the height of hypocrisy. IT could be said that in ages past wronged husband challenged wives lovers to a duel but that did not happen with Charles and Andrew Parker Bowles or for that matter Dale's husband. I never heard any talk of prosecuting Hewitt. It would be actually ridiculous considering the ethos of Charles life--Camilla and Charles could spend time together while her husband sought comfort elsewhere. With all the terrorism and horrible things going pursuing Hewitt is absolutely silly. Hewitt is a cad and people know it. But ironically Hewitt was isolated and shunned by his fellow officers while Charles could have at a fellow officer's wife with no repercussions. So I think Charles would even have shuddered at the idea of his playing the moral  high road.
Logged
india
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6867


« Reply #12 on: April 14, 2015, 01:24:15 am »

Charles liked her having Hewitt. With that, he could have a free for all with the Wrinkly Hairy One.
Logged
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4621


« Reply #13 on: April 14, 2015, 01:49:42 am »

It would be a waste of time and effort to try to press charges against Hewitt and the height of hypocrisy. IT could be said that in ages past wronged husband challenged wives lovers to a duel but that did not happen with Charles and Andrew Parker Bowles or for that matter Dale's husband. I never heard any talk of prosecuting Hewitt. It would be actually ridiculous considering the ethos of Charles life--Camilla and Charles could spend time together while her husband sought comfort elsewhere. With all the terrorism and horrible things going pursuing Hewitt is absolutely silly. Hewitt is a cad and people know it. But ironically Hewitt was isolated and shunned by his fellow officers while Charles could have at a fellow officer's wife with no repercussions. So I think Charles would even have shuddered at the idea of his playing the moral  high road.

It had nothing to do with Charles. From memory I believe the 1996 campaign to have Hewitt arrested for Treason came from a half-jokey attempt by the Daily Mirror. A reporter and photographer approached him supposedly to serve him with legal papers, but Hewitt just brushed them aside. These people obviously didn't know the law, because, as I stated in my previous post, how could they prove who James Hewitt was sleeping with between 1993 and 1996. The paper's journalists appealed to its readers to force an arrest, but of course, nothing happened.
Logged
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11176


« Reply #14 on: April 14, 2015, 01:56:33 am »

Hewitt should have gotten a real job and not sold his story for $$$. But it still is a joke about Hewitt being arrested for treason. Then APB could see if the statute of limitations was over for challenging Charles to a duel over Charles sleeping with his wife. That would be a true farce.
Logged
AnaBolena
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3594


We Read To Know We Are Not Alone - C.S Lewis


« Reply #15 on: April 14, 2015, 02:46:53 am »

^" I agree Meememe.  One thing I was led to believe was that not only did anyone she slept with commit treason, but she actually committed treason herself.  Please correct me if I'm wrong. "

what does this mean then? Why was treason brought up?>

I wasn't the one who mentioned the word.  Besides, what is so wrong with asking a question to another poster, namely Meememe?!?!
Logged

“Without music, life would be a mistake.”
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11176


« Reply #16 on: April 14, 2015, 04:22:42 pm »

Because I went through Diana/treason posts before at various times and in different boards. And knew where it was going. I can respond to posts. It is a rather extreme post to talk about treason. Charles because of who he is did not get punished for bedding a brother officer's wife.  He also abandoned his wife for Camilla and it was thought "OK" for the PBs to have a sort of open marriage according to some.
Logged
AnaBolena
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3594


We Read To Know We Are Not Alone - C.S Lewis


« Reply #17 on: April 14, 2015, 06:55:51 pm »

^ IMO you have every right to address a post, but IMO its ridiculous to question me about a question I asked another poster about what they wrote.---------------

I truly do understand how you understand di so well.  Finally.
Logged

“Without music, life would be a mistake.”
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11176


« Reply #18 on: April 14, 2015, 07:11:32 pm »

Can we not get personal? I was asking a question as to why treason was brought into it. It was not interfering with a personal message but I was on an open board. I would rather understand Diana than Camilla any day.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2015, 07:15:30 pm by sandy » Logged
AnaBolena
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3594


We Read To Know We Are Not Alone - C.S Lewis


« Reply #19 on: April 15, 2015, 06:15:04 am »

Sandy, you got personal with me by asking "why treason was brought up" when it wasn't even me who first mentioned it, but you addressed  me by way of quoting my post.  That's unfair - and you wouldn't do that to di.  tehe

Besides, you already understand di enough to try chasing everyone away around the net who sees inconsistencies in what she said versus what she did. easter-lol

To the heart of the matter - you never ask me what I think of camilla.  Would I like her as a friend? No way!  Would I thus far want di as a friend?  No way.

 
Logged

“Without music, life would be a mistake.”
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!