Harry and Megan: How long will it last?

How long


  • Total voters
    169
  • Poll closed .

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Remember that Churchill got through WW2 with just Inspector Thomson and his Colt 45. And there were a lot of people who would liked to kill him. Who would want to assassinate H & M?
Primark
 
Just why are those of us who genuinly served and paid taxes now having to pay for the secuirit of this mega rich family ?
Why should this be of particular interest to those who served?
 
Apparently not...
Harry and Meghan issue media warning over photos

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have issued a legal warning to the media after photographs of Meghan in Canada were published in newspapers and on websites.

Lawyers say the photos of the duchess walking her dogs and carrying her son were taken by photographers hiding in bushes and spying on her."

They say she did not consent and accuse the photographers of harassment."

Is there right to privacy in a public place in Canada?
If they're in a public place and the photos are for press use, they're going to risk wasting a lot of money on legal fees
 

Sammer

War Hero
The photographs where she is clearly looking at and smiling for the camera - those photos? ;)
The photo that appears on the hallowed pages of ArRSe with a ‘SPLASHNEWS’ caption?

Genuine question, where were her security when these journalists/photographers/paparazzi jumped out of the bushes? Did her dogs not react to their presence?
 
Is there right to privacy in a public place in Canada?
Nope, if you’re in public on Canadian soil, anyone can take as many pictures of you as they wish as long as no other laws are broken in the process. You have no right to stop anyone taking photos of you once you are off private property, it’s been tried and tested in court and it always lands on the side of the photographer.
 
If they're in a public place and the photos are for press use, they're going to risk wasting a lot of money on legal fees
Press use means nothing here on public land, anyone can take photos of whoever they like, let them put on a show about how hard done by they are while pïssing away money.

Edit; For a couple who claims to wish to be out of the spotlight, releasing a threat to take legal action against photographers in a country where it is perfectly legal to take pics in public isn’t exactly attempting to keep a low profile. If they decide to follow the route of trying to impede the rights of Canadians, Harry and co’s welcome will be short lived. If they want to live here, they have to live by the same rules we do, if they don’t like it, they can fcukoff to whatever country that suits their agenda.
 
Last edited:
Apparently not...
Harry and Meghan issue media warning over photos

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have issued a legal warning to the media after photographs of Meghan in Canada were published in newspapers and on websites.

Lawyers say the photos of the duchess walking her dogs and carrying her son were taken by photographers hiding in bushes and spying on her."

They say she did not consent and accuse the photographers of harassment."

Is there right to privacy in a public place in Canada?
If he was in a place defined as a Public Place in the eye's of the law then she has no recourse unless there is the equivalent of a local bye law restricting such actions.

It is basically the same in the USA: If you are stood in a public place; if you can see it then you can photograph it, or film it.

Thoughts on Canada:

Subject to certain very limited constraints, it is not a crime in Canada for anyone to do any of the following things, and it is a violation of their Charter rights to prevent anyone from doing so:
  • photographing or filming in any public place, or in any private place to which the public is admitted, and publishing those pictures and films,
  • taking pictures of or filming in any government site other than “restricted access areas”*
  • photographing or filming police officers in public, as long as the photographer/filmmaker does not obstruct or interfere with the execution of police duties. While everyone has a reasonable expectation of privacy in certain circumstances, police officers have no reasonable expectation of privacy as they go about their duties.
A police officer does not have the right to confiscate cameras or recording equipment (including phones), unless the person in possession of such equipment is under arrest and such equipment is necessarily relevant to the alleged offence. A police officer cannot force anyone to show, unlock or decrypt cameras or recording equipment, or to delete images, even when that person is under arrest, unless the police officer has a warrant or a court order permitting him to do so.

At no time, and under no circumstances, is anyone in Canada subject to arrest for the simple act of taking a photograph or filming, although he or she can be arrested if he or she is breaking another law in the process, such as, for example, trespassing or breaking or entering.


From here: ===> Public Photography is No Crime
 
Last edited:
If he was in a place defined as a Public Place in the eye's of the law then she has no recourse unless there is the equivalent of a local bye law restricting such actions.

It is basically the same in the USA: If you are stood in a public place then if you can see it then you can photograph it, or film it.

Thoughts on Canada:

Subject to certain very limited constraints, it is not a crime in Canada for anyone to do any of the following things, and it is a violation of their Charter rights to prevent anyone from doing so:
  • photographing or filming in any public place, or in any private place to which the public is admitted, and publishing those pictures and films,
  • taking pictures of or filming in any government site other than “restricted access areas”*
  • photographing or filming police officers in public, as long as the photographer/filmmaker does not obstruct or interfere with the execution of police duties. While everyone has a reasonable expectation of privacy in certain circumstances, police officers have no reasonable expectation of privacy as they go about their duties.
A police officer does not have the right to confiscate cameras or recording equipment (including phones), unless the person in possession of such equipment is under arrest and such equipment is necessarily relevant to the alleged offence. A police officer cannot force anyone to show, unlock or decrypt cameras or recording equipment, or to delete images, even when that person is under arrest, unless the police officer has a warrant or a court order permitting him to do so.

At no time, and under no circumstances, is anyone in Canada subject to arrest for the simple act of taking a photograph or filming, although he or she can be arrested if he or she is breaking another law in the process, such as, for example, trespassing or breaking or entering.


From here: ===> Public Photography is No Crime

Harry and Meghan didn’t think this through, did they.....
 
Apparently not...
Harry and Meghan issue media warning over photos

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have issued a legal warning to the media after photographs of Meghan in Canada were published in newspapers and on websites.

Lawyers say the photos of the duchess walking her dogs and carrying her son were taken by photographers hiding in bushes and spying on her."

They say she did not consent and accuse the photographers of harassment."

Is there right to privacy in a public place in Canada?
It would be great if the press took a group decision to never give them any publicity ever again. Watch them act out after a while and still give them nothing. Watch them wither and die from an absolute lack of attention.
 
So the Thompson Twins got it wrong then? Saw them at Crystal Palace while a previous royal mismarriage was going on elsewhere.
I saw them at a CND thing at Kelvingrove Bandstand in 1982 when they were a large collective just before they slimmed down and got famous, Scheme were far better that day though.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I've just looked at the "Official Website Sussex Royal" The Official Website of The Duke & Duchess of Sussex
It's bloody awful! Floaty text and fiddly to navigate

I then looked at Prince Charles. Easy to navigate and straightforward.
It underlines what was being chased - to be a prince and princess without actually having to be a prince and princess.

Something about cake and eating it.
 
It underlines what was being chased - to be a prince and princess without actually having to be a prince and princess.

Something about cake and eating it.
Looks like its back to the web developers drawing board


"…Important update… Please read

Update: 18th of January 2020

In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of Their Royal Highnesses.…"
 
Looks like its back to the web developers drawing board


"…Important update… Please read

Update: 18th of January 2020

In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of Their Royal Highnesses.…"
Whoever posted that, is already been disingenuous, as one of the main items/conditions mentioned over the w/e, was that the pair were NO LONGER to use "His/Her Royal Highness" (HRH) . . . :( !!
 

Latest Threads

Top