Prince Harry has sparked controversy by selecting the same date as his eviction from Frogmore Cottage to mark his official US residency, four years after he resigned from his role as a senior working royal. This decision has been interpreted by some as an act of vengeance, reflecting unresolved feelings about his royal past.
During a discussion with Ben Leo on GB News, Royal Editor Charlotte Griffiths characterized the Duke of Sussex’s actions as indicative of a vengeful nature. Griffiths suggested that Harry’s choice of this particular date for such a significant personal milestone might be a deliberate attempt to send a message or settle old scores, highlighting his inability to move beyond his royal affiliations and past grievances.
She even accused him of taking a dig at his father King Charles, who has recently been diagnosed with cancer, claiming the Duke has “trolled” him with his latest move. Harry was incensed by this move. Nothing is by chance with Harry. He’s kind of spiteful and he can’t let go of the past,” she said.
“Why is he so hung up on Frogmore? This is the country he was desperate to get away from. This is a house he didn’t particularly want to live in and in fact, didn’t live in.” Responding to her rant, the host said, “The thing that gets me is that Harry and Meghan left the UK. They said we’re going to focus on a new life away from the hellhole in England and all the trauma they’d been through with the Royal Family.”
“All they seem to have done since then is look back and complain about the way they were treated?” he added. “And if this is right, that he chose this date to have a dig at the King, it’s just another act of his really quite vengeful nature.”
The date in question holds significant emotional weight for Prince Harry, as it marks a pivotal moment in his and Meghan’s departure from their roles within the Royal Family, including their physical move away from the UK. By aligning this date with his new life in the United States, Harry may be signaling a form of closure or making a poignant statement about his ongoing journey away from royal life.
Griffiths elaborated on this perspective, suggesting that Harry’s decision could be seen as an attempt to reclaim the narrative of his life post-royalty. By choosing a date that coincides with such a fraught moment in his royal history, Harry might be trying to underscore his autonomy and the start of a new chapter on his own terms, despite the seemingly spiteful undertones as perceived by royal commentators.
The discussion on GB News also touched upon the broader implications of such a move, considering the public and media reaction to Harry’s ongoing adjustments to life outside the royal sphere. The choice of such a symbolically charged date does not just reflect personal sentiment but also invites scrutiny and interpretation regarding his feelings towards the Royal Family and the circumstances under which he left.
Observers note that this move might further complicate Harry’s relationship with the Royal Family, as actions deemed vengeful or spiteful could hinder the healing of past rifts. Moreover, this decision is likely to fuel continued media speculation about the nature of his departure and his feelings toward the institution he left behind.
In conclusion, Prince Harry’s choice of date to mark his official US residency continues to attract attention and debate, highlighting the complex interplay of personal decisions within public life, especially for figures like Harry, who remain under intense public and media scrutiny even years after stepping away from official royal duties.
