Celebrity News, Celebrity Pictures, Celebrities Photos , Celebrity Wallpapers , Hollywood Scandals , Celebrity Videos

Recent Comments

  • None found

Most Popular

  • None found

Checkout

Top Celebrities

This made me wince: Jeremy Renner has over 30 broken bones. [Seriously OMG]
Dakota Johnson really has a tone problem when talking/joking about Armie Hammer, a man who has been accused of abusing multiple women. [Dlisted]
The first image from Ted Lasso’s Season 3. [LaineyGossip]
Aubrey Plaza hosted SNL this weekend. [Pajiba]
Michelle Williams looked cute & fresh in London. [Go Fug Yourself]
Regal Cinemas is headed for bankruptcy?? [Gawker]
Lady Gaga is keeping a low profile because she’s hard at work. [Just Jared]
Letitia Wright wore Prada to the Beyonce concert in Dubai. [RCFA]
A new documentary (or docu-series) will expose the Duggars and other fundamentalist Christian cults. Good. They need to be exposed. [Starcasm]
It’s Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition Szn. [Egotastic]
Who should be the next CEO of Twitter? [Buzzfeed]
Sam Smith has thoughts on the BRIT Awards’ snubs. [Towleroad]

Long story short, the Daily Mail/ANL lies a lot about Prince Harry, in general, and specifically about his offer to pay for royal protection when he is in the UK. The Mail’s lies were so egregious that Harry sued them and and won – the High Court already made one ruling, last June/July, that the Mail’s reporting was defamatory. Since June, Harry’s lawyers and ANL’s lawyers have been trying to negotiate a settlement. They haven’t been able to come to an agreement, so now Harry is asking the High Court to give him a summary judgment.

The Duke of Sussex is to ask a High Court judge to rule in his favour without a trial in his libel case against the Mail on Sunday, as he aims to echo his wife’s legal success against the same newspaper. Prince Harry will apply for a strike out or summary judgment at a hearing due to be scheduled in the next two months after both sides failed to reach a settlement.

He sued Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over an article published last February that said he had tried to keep “secret” parts of his legal fight with the Home Office over his security and had attempted to “spin” the dispute in his favour by claiming he had offered to pay for police protection. The piece suggested that when news of the Duke’s legal battle with the Government was first revealed, his PR team released a statement saying that he had offered to “pay personally for UK police protection”, but that it was refused. The Duke argued that the story suggested he had lied and had “improperly and cynically tried to manipulate and confuse public opinion”.

Legal proceedings were temporarily paused last month to allow both sides to negotiate, but they failed to reach a settlement before the deadline, last Friday.

In July, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled in the Duke’s favour in the first stage of the claim, concluding that the royal was defamed by parts of the story because it suggested that his actions were “discreditable” and that he had intended to “mislead the public”.

The amount recoverable by Harry in the event that he wins the claim has been set at £341,739 – almost half the £631,035 sought by the Duke.

Prince Harry is bringing two separate legal proceedings against the Home Office after being told he would no longer be given the “same degree” of personal protective security when visiting from the US.

[From The Telegraph]

Incidentally, while Harry hasn’t addressed this in his interviews and I’ve seen zero reporting about it, I genuinely believe that QEII arranged for her security to look after the Sussexes when they visited last April and again when the whole Sussex family came to the Jubbly on the Queen’s invitation. I think that was the only reason why Harry agreed to bring his children to the UK – because he got a guarantee from his grandmother that his family’s security would be taken care of. I genuinely wonder what the situation was last September though, with QEII dying and Harry and Meghan stuck in the UK for more than ten days (they were practically being held hostage). Speaking of, Harry has spelled out his terms for reconciliation with the Windsors and what he would need to come to the coronation, but I would bet that Charles hasn’t guaranteed security for the Sussexes either, not like QEII did.

As for Harry wanting a summary judgment… it sounds like a standard legal issue and I hope the judge grants it. I can’t believe that there’s a cap on libel damages – that’s so foreign to me as an American. British Lawyer Community: does the cap on damages include legal fees? As in, can ANL be ordered to pay Harry’s legal fees PLUS the maxed-out cap on damages?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.








For months now, Fox News, Tucker Carlson and the “anti-woke activists” have been very upset about… M&Ms. The candy. Specifically, M&M’s corporate “spokescandies,” the anthropomorphized M&Ms with individual personalities, the candies who appear in the print and television ads. As we were discussing one year ago, Mars did a makeover on the “lentils” and they specified that they were trying to make the anthropomorphized M&Ms more “inclusive.” Buh-bye trampy green M&M with her go-go boots. Green M&M got sensible sneakers and some of the M&Ms were slimmer or something. I don’t know. The point is, Fox News made this into yet another massive culture war. I swear, just last week, I saw a clip of Tucker Carlson frothing at the mouth about the M&Ms again!!! In any case, it looks like Mars was worried about the year-long Fox News backlash, so they made another change:

What’s bizarre is… well, everything, but specifically – no one really had a problem with Green’s go-go boots in the first place!! We were like “yay, there’s the sexy green M&M, get yours!” Conservatives and liberals were actually on the same page of “why are you trying to de-sexify Green?” The difference was, liberals made some jokes and they moved on because, again, these are motherf–king M&Ms. It was the Fox News side of things that turned this into a culture war.

Now, do I feel sorry for Mars? Not really. This was stupid decision-making from start to finish, and abandoning their spokescandies will be seen as a victory for the lunatic right-wing. You can’t apply a Maya Rudolph band-aid to the larger problem. Although I do like Maya.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instagram.



Princess Anne is still the only person in the immediate royal family to ever face criminal charges. I know, it’s wild that it’s Anne and not, say, Prince Andrew. Anne had to pay a £500 fine in 2001 after her dog bit two children in Windsor. Unlike her mother, Anne never had corgis – she has always favored English bull terriers, and she seems to get the most high-strung and poorly trained terriers out there. Her dogs are always attacking people and other animals. Well, it happened again, this time at a Christmas shooting party at Sandringham.

There’s nothing quite as shameful in British country circles as being the owner of an ill-trained hound that disrupts a day’s hunting or shooting. So one imagines Princess Anne will be appropriately mortified after one of her English bull terriers allegedly attacked a gamekeeper’s dog during a Royal Family pheasant shoot.

According to a report in the Sun, the royal dog fight happened during the Boxing Day shoot on Christmas Day at Sandringham, when Anne’s dog “sank its teeth” into the ear of a dog belonging to a gamekeeper, resulting in “a lot of blood and screaming.”

The Sun’s source said: “The Boxing Day shoot’s a huge family affair so Anne took along her dog. It ran across the field straight at the gamekeeper’s dog and latched on to its ear.”

Anne famously eschewed her mother’s preferred breed, corgis, in favor of bull terriers, which were originally bred for bull baiting and have a powerful bite. The princess, at the time of her first acquisition, declared: “This will give the palace corgis a run for their money.”

The latest episode appears to have been prolonged and traumatic. The source told the Sun: “It took a while to get the dog off the ear because it had really sunk its teeth in. Everyone was OK in the end but the atmosphere was extremely tense afterwards for some time. A good few people questioned what if it had been Charlotte or George or any of the children instead of another dog?”

Anne has form when it comes to her dogs running wild: she was the first royal to be convicted in court (under the dangerous dogs act) when she admitted in 2001 that her bull terrier Dotty bit two children while off the leash in Windsor Great Park. The older child, aged 12, was bitten on the collar bone and twice on the leg, while his 7-year-old brother was scratched on the arm and bitten on the leg. Both went to hospital but did not need stitches. She was fined £500 and a judge warned the dog would be destroyed if it reoffended.

A year later another of Anne’s terriers, called Florence, attacked one of the Queen’s corgis at Christmas. The corgi had to be put down.

Norfolk Police and the RSPCA have received no reports or complaints about the latest alleged dog incident, the Sun reported.

[From The Daily Beast]

Dogs are dogs and I’m of the opinion that sometimes, there are just dogs who shouldn’t be around other people and dogs who shouldn’t be put in excitable situations. Like, it’s a very modern thing to believe that your dog is supposed to be perfectly behaved all the time around everyone, just like it’s a modern thing to believe that your dogs should be welcome everywhere, around everyone. Anne should have learned her lesson years ago, decades ago, when her f–king dog attacked two children: leave the dogs at home. She owns a huge property, Gatcombe, where her dogs can play and be badly behaved and ill-tempered all they want.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Backgrid.







One of the things I loved about Prince Harry’s Spare is that he showed, repeatedly, that he didn’t give a f–k about the trappings of the monarchy. He was neglected and abused and brought up to believe that he was merely backup, so he was never in awe of the pageantry of the monarchy. He saw the other side of it, the micro-rooms, the shabby patched sheets, the lack of care for historic buildings. In Spare, he also showed that he really doesn’t know the history of his own family or the history of the monarchy. So… it’s funny that anyone would think that Prince Harry would be a good coronation commentator. Sure, he could probably sit down and do the research, but he’s not a historian. That’s not the way his mind works. Still, the Express is convinced that Harry has been “offered” special guest commentary positions at two American networks:

It is understood the monarch, 74, is keen for his younger son Harry to be on the guest list, but it is still not clear whether this will be possible. But two major US TV networks are said to be trying to lure Harry away with a mega-bucks deal to host their coverage of the event. They are preparing multi-million dollar offers for him to join their commentary teams if he decides not to attend the Coronation, according to highly placed studio sources.

The three days of events being planned for Saturday May 6 to Monday May 8 will be on a par with the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee weekend last June. Charles and Camilla will be crowned King and Queen Consort during a service at Westminster Abbey on the Saturday morning, followed by a procession to Buckingham Palace where they will appear on the balcony with family members.

If the Duke of Sussex takes the TV role it is tipped to be a guaranteed “ratings blockbuster” and “one of the biggest royal coups of all time”. CBS and NBC are expected to lead the chase to persuade him to join their live coverage teams. CBS – the network that aired his and Meghan’s infamous interview with Oprah – is in pole position. NBC interviewed Harry two weeks ago before his memoir Spare was published in a headline-grabbing edition of its flagship show 60 Minutes.

The insider told this newspaper: “Network bosses are hoping he doesn’t go – and are ready to pay a hefty, seven-figure sum to land one of the biggest royal coups of all time. One very senior executive told me it would be worth US $5million for the bragging rights alone.

“Watching a new King being crowned while his son is on the couch talking viewers through it would be ratings dynamite – even if Harry steers completely clear of controversy and the rift that exists between them.”

Our source added: “There is now a massive appetite in America for Britain’s Royal Family, with enormous audiences for recent coverage of the deaths and funerals of Prince Philip and the Queen, as well as her Platinum Jubilee celebrations. Whichever network manages to land Harry will be guaranteed a ratings blockbuster, with an advance advertising blitz that will draw millions more viewers who might otherwise have tuned-in elsewhere.”

[From The Daily Express]

The background for this is QEII’s coronation, when her Uncle David (aka King Edward VIII/the Duke of Windsor) was banned from the coronation so he picked up a paid commentary position with one of the overseas networks. The thing is, David actually knew a lot about the history of the monarchy and he could actually explain the background on all of the ceremonies, etc. What would Harry do as a commentator? Say sh-t like “yeah, that’s my father, we haven’t spoken in nine months, he was horrible to my wife?” It doesn’t make any sense. Now, I believe that there are probably various networks pitching this idea and offering money. But if Harry doesn’t go to the coronation, I suspect he’ll just stay home and throw a birthday party for Archie. This is more about the monarchy trying to make Harry sound like the Duke of Windsor, because they have zero historical precedent for what Harry is doing with his life now.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.





Lord, I am so tired of Prince Andrew’s neverending melodrama. Can you even imagine being this useless yet so convinced of your importance? For years, everyone has made it perfectly clear: dude, no one wants you around, please go away. Andrew remains convinced that he can launch some kind of comeback, that he can be useful, that he will never go away because he’s needed and wanted. So, here’s one of the latest bizarre f–king stories about Andrew and his dumb “His Royal Highness” status. He supposedly stopped using his HRH in 2019 and then again in 2022 (because these people are idiots) and guess what? QEII gave him permission to keep using it anyway:

The late Queen gave the Duke of York her blessing to use his HRH title, The Telegraph understands. Prince Andrew was permitted to use the title “in a private capacity” after it was announced that his military titles and royal patronages would be returned to the monarch at the height of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. He is now said to be determined to resurrect the privilege after the King allowed him to start pursuing certain business interests.

The Duke remains contrite about his perceived misdemeanours and has long considered himself hard done by for being effectively sacked as a working royal, despite having not been found guilty of any crime. Throughout the Epstein scandal and ensuing civil court case, when he stood accused of raping and sexually abusing a teenager on three separate occasions, the late Queen proved one of her youngest son’s most loyal and unwavering supporters.

The Duke is said to have asked her if he could use his HRH title and after many tete-a-tetes at Windsor Castle, she conceded.

“She was always in his corner and he had her ear, of that there was never any doubt,” a source said. “He was not stripped of the title and was still able to use it privately. He talked her around and she agreed.”

The prospect was not welcomed by palace aides, aware that any use of the title would raise eyebrows, not least after the Duke had paid millions to settle the case out of court and was meant to be keeping a low profile. A tentative plan to test the waters in public was thwarted, however, and the Duke was never afforded the opportunity to use the title before his mother died last September.

King ‘highly unlikely’ to support move. While personally supportive of his errant younger brother, Charles is considered highly unlikely to support such a bold move, not least one that might indicate a return to the royal fold or risk jeopardising the reputation of the monarchy. The King is thought to have held talks with the Duke in recent weeks, aware that his ostracisation posed a problem that was going nowhere and that the 62-year-old Duke needed some purpose. He is said to have agreed to allow him to pursue some business interests, which would serve the dual purpose of keeping him occupied and allowing him to make some money.

[From The Telegraph]

So… basically, Andrew was never formally stripped of his HRH and QEII and King Charles gave him permission to use his royal status for private business ventures… I thought no one could ever use their HRH for business? It’s weird how all of these rules were different for the Sussexes! Anyway, beyond the unhinged hypocrisy, I don’t really give a sh-t. Andrew is a buffoon and his buffoonery perfectly encapsulates the stupidity of the entire royal system. Speaking of, Andrew also wants to “overturn” his settlement with Virginia Giuffre:

Prince Andrew is to launch a dramatic bid to overturn the multi-million-pound settlement he struck with the woman who accused him of sexual assault. The Duke of York has consulted lawyers in an attempt to get Virginia Roberts to retract her allegations and possibly secure an apology, The Mail on Sunday understands. He was inspired to act after Ms Roberts dropped her lawsuit against another man she accused of sexual assault, admitting that she ‘may have made a mistake’ in identifying him.

And sources suggest the King will not oppose any legal action Andrew might take to clear his name – even though Charles previously told his brother he would be permanently exiled from Royal life. Ms Roberts – who now goes by her married name Giuffre – claimed she was forced to have sex with the Prince when she was 17, having been trafficked by convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

In the out-of-court settlement, Andrew accepted no blame, and continues to strenuously deny any wrongdoing. But the scandal damaged his reputation and made him an outcast from the Royal Family. He was stripped of his military titles and asked not to use his HRH title. However, those close to Andrew claim he always wanted to fight the allegations in court, and was ‘bounced’ into agreeing a deal by Palace forces who feared the negative publicity of the case would overshadow the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee.

‘Andrew felt as if he was in a pressure-cooker, as if he was given no option but to settle,’ a source said. ‘But he never wanted to settle and has always insisted he was innocent. He wants to see what legal routes might be available to him. This isn’t about the money. He wants a route back to some sort of normality after a deeply trying period. I can tell you with confidence that Prince Andrew’s team is now considering legal options.’

[From The Daily Mail]

The rest of the Mail’s piece quotes convicted human trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell at length about HER recollections of one of the children she trafficked to Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. So, that should tell you a lot about this entire situation. Virginia’s gag order reportedly expires next month, so it’s possible that two things are happening concurrently: Andrew goes to court to overturn the settlement he made to Virginia AND Virginia goes on another interview spree where she speaks in graphic terms about how Maxwell trafficked her to His Royal Highness Prince Andrew the Duke of York.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid and Cover Images.







When Prince Harry began his promotion for Spare, the British media promptly began crying about how he needs to shut up and go away, no one cares about him, no one will read his stupid memoir! Now that Harry has given all of those interviews and Spare is a raging success in the US, UK and around the world, the same British media began asking: where’s Meghan, why isn’t she at Harry’s side, doesn’t she support him, why can’t we see her, why is she out of sight and shutting up?? The memoir and the promotion has been too uncomfortable for too many people over there and they’re flat-out desperate to return to their biggest moneymaker: blaming Meghan for everything. Well, now the Telegraph is getting into the “where’s Meghan” game, and they bizarrely have “sources” talking about Meghan’s current state of mind and whether she supports her husband.

…Since Christmas, Prince Harry has been left to soak up the limelight alone. As he embarked on an unprecedented publicity blitz to promote his memoir, Spare, this month, Meghan has remained below the radar – and sent a clear message: This is Harry’s project, not mine.

As with anything to do with the Sussexes, there has been much sniping and speculation online about the Duchess’s perceived influence. The book has Meghan’s fingerprints all over it, some have claimed, her voice throughout is unmistakable, she is the puppetmaster pulling the strings. But in fact, such claims could not be further from the truth. While the Duchess has backed her husband to the hilt over this deeply personal outpouring, she was not quite the driving force behind the project that many have assumed.

Sources suggest that media-savvy Meghan was slightly more circumspect about the concept of a memoir and may have raised gentle concerns about whether it was the right move. No stranger to taking on her enemies, she is understood to have been more wary than the Duke about this particular project.

Prince Harry, burning with resentment towards his father, his brother and the press, was fuelled by a bitter determination to right the wrongs of his past, but his wife took a broader view. That said, once Harry had made up his mind and embarked on the two-year process with ghostwriter JR Moehringer, the Duchess is said to have offered her full support and is immensely proud of his achievements.

“Is this the way she would have approached things? Possibly not,” said one source. “But she will always back him and would never have got involved in promoting such a personal project. This was about his own life, his own journey and his own perspective.”

Throughout the many agonised television appearances, the Duchess has remained holed up at their Montecito home. One source close to the Sussexes noted that if she had been involved in any aspect of promoting the book, she would have been accused of trying to steal the limelight. Perhaps, some suggest, she feels she has nothing to gain.

While the Duke has reason to reconcile with his family, his own flesh and blood, the Duchess is not bound by such ties. She may back her husband in seeking peace with his family and with it, peace of mind, but for her, they represent a miserable chapter of a life now left far behind. As such, royal sources have indicated that they think it unlikely she will attend the King’s coronation at Westminster Abbey on May 6.

[From The Telegraph]

These people, I swear to God. “…Burning with resentment towards his father, his brother and the press, was fuelled by a bitter determination…” He literally wanted his side out there. Everyone has been lying about him for decades. He wanted to put his own story out there as a historical document in his own voice. He’s made that perfectly clear. “Sources suggest that media-savvy Meghan was slightly more circumspect about the concept of a memoir and may have raised gentle concerns about whether it was the right move” – so, the thing that kills me about Meghan is that she was actually perfect for the Windsors. She was discreet, she was perfectly willing to dedicate her life to public service, and most of all, she understood the power of silence and maintaining magic and mystery through not participating in Confessional Culture. That being said, I hope these “sources” are full of sh-t and Meghan has quietly been working on her own memoir, because I would totally read it.

Also: it’s perfectly clear that Harry wrote this memoir FOR Meghan. This was a love letter to Meghan, his defense of her, his shield to protect her, this was Harry saying in his own voice: this is why we left, these are the decisions I made, this is not on my wife, this has never been her fault at all.

Last thing: “royal sources” are trying to convince themselves that Meghan is done with that godforsaken island. I hope she is too, but y’all know that if Harry goes to his father’s coronation, the only way he’ll go is if Meghan goes with him.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Backgrid.










Tracee Ellis Ross has an interview that came out a couple of weeks ago on Glennon Doyle’s We can Do Hard Things podcast. I’m reporting on it now as I saw some excerpts on Yahoo! and wanted to wait until I could listen to the whole thing. It’s an hour long and is well worth it. Glennon runs the podcast with her sister, Amanda Doyle, and her wife, Abby Wombach. It was my first time listening and honestly it wasn’t clear to me who was speaking other than Tracee and Glennon. The episode was so crazy deep and interesting that I found myself both fascinated by the work Tracee has done and annoyed by having to face hard truths about myself. I’m about the same age as Tracee and have been able to relate to her interviews for years. She said so many interesting things that it’s hard to know what to excerpt. I wanted to talk about how she’s come to love and appreciate herself after realizing who she is and what she wants out of life.

She’s grateful people came out for her 50th birthday party
I am one of those people that am like ‘yeah I would love to go, but do I really want to leave the house?’

On intentionally creating your life
We go back to this model that we’re sold. It’s everywhere and if you’re not careful you actually think it’s true, which is that ‘my job as a woman is to learn to be choosable,’ having nothing to do with who I am, what makes my heart sing, floats my boat, makes me feel safe, makes me feel comfortable, powerful, smart… but really is more about how I might be seen so that I might be chosen so that my life could mean something as a chosen woman who then gets to have a child and then be a mother and then do that for a child. Our culture sells us this … there’s nothing wrong with that journey, but it’s a chosen journey as opposed to one that you think is going to make you worth anything. There’s so many different versions of that.

On how she’s learned who she is and what she wants
I’ve been grateful enough to have found places where there are eons of tools in different ways to unpack that crazy messaging, make sense of it in a way that actually gives me a shot at genuine happiness and a robust life that’s actually mine. It’s like a daily reprieve, some days are better than others, some days the old messaging comes in and I’ve got a really nice matching story that goes with it of my unlovability. If I’m not careful and go into that thinking alone, I get stuck there.

I’m one of these people that I don’t get scared of stuff until after. I’m a girl that jumps off a cliff. Then I land and I’m like ‘what the f’ck did I just do?’ ‘Who would do that?’ ‘Why would you do that?’ ‘Oh my God you’re so dumb, this is actually evidence.’ ‘Put that in the fire of unlovability, that shit is going to roar.’ The next day, it’s out of control. It’s a risk hangover.

On being herself
So many of the things that I like about myself are the things that are difficult for people. I’m not afraid to say when I dont think something feels right. I’m not afraid to say when something doesn’t feel right for me no matter how far and deeply into that thing I am. That I have a really loud laugh. All these different things that make me maybe not everyone’s cup of tea. That really changed my relationship to those aspects of me that I think I was trying to hide in order to be chosen, to be lovable. I don’t know if my discomfort with not being everyone’s cup of tea, the unlovability and self loathing that comes up, I don’t know if those are ever going to go away. I think I have a different relationship to them. I can do hard things, I can also be comfortable when I’m uncomfortable, I can also be happy when I don’t like how everything is going. I have a larger container to hold myself and I know myself really well. It’s taken a lot of time to have the courage to actually live my life as that person.

My big fear was ‘am I going to ruin the course of my destiny if I make the wrong choice?’ My spiritual awakening has been ‘I’m OK, you can’t ruin it babe.’

[From We Can Do Hard Things]

There’s also section where Tracee talks about realizing her fertility is waning and that she owes a debt to the transgender community for helping expand the concept of gender. Yahoo! covered that part, it was deep and I’ve never thought about it like that, and you can read about it there.

A lot of what she said comes with age, like realizing you’re not everyone’s cup of tea and that you shouldn’t change or dim your light for a relationship. After that I think it was Glennon who said “Think of how weak you’d have to be, to be everyone’s cup of tea. You’d have to be water.” That’s so true! Overall I came away from this thinking that I’m fine, that I’m right where I should be, that I can’t ruin anything, and that I should lean more into the things I love and value about myself. I appreciate Tracee for being unapologetically herself and for talking so openly about it.

The British media was full of headlines this weekend about one particular section in Prince Harry’s Spare. The section? Where Harry describes his flight training for Apache helicopters, training which came over the course of months and years. Basically, in this one particular section, Harry describes being in the aircraft with his instructor and the instructor – now identified as Sergeant Major Michael Booley – engineering something like a mid-air stall. Harry then had to learn how to restart and maneuver the aircraft.

A full third of Harry’s memoir Spare was devoted to his time in the army, in the course of which he learnt to fly Apache attack helicopters. However, one section, in which he describes an alarming incident on a training mission, is being disputed by the trainer who was sitting next to him, Sergeant Major Michael Booley.

Harry wrote: “On one of our first flights together, with no warning, Booley threw the aircraft into a stall. I felt the left wing dip, a sickening feeling of disorder, of entropy, and then, after several seconds that felt like decades, he recovered the aircraft and leveled the wings. I stared at him. What in the absolute—? Was this an aborted suicide attempt?’ No, he said gently. This was the next stage in my training.”

Booley told the Mirror: “Whilst the book compliments me, the recollection of the sorties and lessons is inaccurate, I’m afraid. It’s important to highlight that nothing in the cockpit comes as a surprise. Every sortie is thoroughly briefed beforehand, every single aspect. The sortie is flown exactly as per that brief.”

Booley added that he retains fondness for Harry, saying: “He was an exceptional student, very talented indeed. He is a friend and a man I respect immensely who would always have my ear.”

[From The Daily Mirror & The Daily Beast]

The Daily Mirror also reported that Booley said Harry’s recollections were “a complete fantasy” and that he was “staggered” by Harry’s version. You get the picture, they got someone on the record to call Harry a liar and fantasist. Here’s the thing: Sgt. Major Booley released a statement after the report came out and he claims his comments were wildly twisted. From his Facebook:

I am Michael Booley, Harry’s former Sgt Major flying instructor, quoted in this article. Out of the blue, I was contacted by the press to be made aware they were writing articles and as I was named in Harry’s book “Spare” I was offered an opportunity to comment on it. I was completely unaware of this. As I had not seen it, I was then provided with an inaccurate version of the book (translated) and in response I expressed my concerns about any possible detrimental narratives from the outset. I later saw the English version and highlighted the differences to the press.

I was then assured that if I offered any comments, they would be reported on accurately. Stupidly and against my better judgement, I proceeded on trust. I made it absolutely clear that Harry was an exceptional student and I had nothing but the utmost respect for him. I highlighted some inaccuracies in the book, in particular reference to the flying sorties, but felt that they were probably not Harry’s words and highly likely to be dramatised due to the fact that the book was Ghost Written. I did not know who the ghost writer was and certainly did not blame him.

Not once did I say anything derogatory about Prince Harry and I certainly never said it was “complete fantasy” as the article headlines would have you believe. I made it clear to the reporters that I would not approve of anything derogatory and yet here we are.

I also made it clear that I myself am suffering with complex PTSD and am under treatment for it and any misquotes or twists could potentially impact my health and well-being. I feel let down and betrayed by them. I also feel foolish for having listened to their assurances of trust and honesty. I should have know better. I certainly did not ask for or receive any payment, as some above comments suggest and am very despondent about how this article has been portrayed !

[From Booley’s Facebook]

I saw some Sussex Squaders shrugging and saying “well, he shouldn’t have agreed to the interview.” And I agree, although I think the larger point is that the Mirror already had a negative narrative they wanted to run and they were likely asking very leading questions and falsifying what Harry wrote in Spare, in addition to willfully misquoting Booley. I feel sorry for him because I definitely feel like this happens so often with outlets like the Mirror, the Mail, the Sun. Still, a good lesson for everyone when dealing with the British media: shutting up is free.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.




The Duchess of Sussex was racially, emotionally and financially abused when she lived in the UK. Prince Harry was trying to help her and protect her, but his family and the British media were actively trying to harm her and/or drive her out of the country. They did nothing – worst than nothing – when they knew she was suicidal. Meghan only began to talk publicly about her suicidal ideation in March 2021, in the Oprah interview. She also touched on it in the Netflix docuseries, although one of my biggest takeaways from the series was that Meghan perfectly understood the extreme danger and threat to her life overall. No one with any heart, compassion or background in psychology would send the message to Meghan that she’s somehow wrong to… speak about what happened to her, what she was going through and how she considered taking her own life. Enter Marjorie Wallace, the founder of a “mental health charity” in the UK.

Charity founder and investigative journalist Marjorie Wallace has revealed she doesn’t like ‘victimhood’ when asked about Meghan Markle saying she had suicidal thoughts. The 80-year-old, who founded mental health charity SANE in 1986, said while she doesn’t like to ‘condemn’ anyone, she doesn’t ‘respect people who take victimhood on as a career’.

Ms Wallace, who made her name with her reporting on the thalidomide scandal, remarked that people have to ‘find ways of living with whatever disability or disadvantage you have’. A close confident of the Earl of Snowden for more than 40 years, the veteran journalist said everyone ‘whether they’re privileged or they’re poor’ has troubles in their lives.

She made the remarks on Rachel Johnson’s Difficult Women podcast. The topic of conversation turned to Meghan Markle and her decision to discuss in her Netflix documentary with Prince Harry that she developed suicidal thoughts as a working member of the Royal Family.

When asked by Johnson about whether she thought it was wise to reveal this, Ms Wallace said: ‘I don’t like to condemn anyone. I’ll tell you what I don’t really like, and this is nothing to do with the Netflix series, is that I don’t like victimhood and I’ve never played it myself in my life. Yes you can have terrible times, and I’ve had terrible terrible times with my children, with my life, with my divorce – all kinds of terrible things. But I don’t really think playing the victim card helps, whatever you’re a victim of, and I don’t really respect people who take victimhood on as a career. That’s not my stoic philosophy, I think you’ve got to find ways of living with whatever disability or disadvantage you have. Everyone has it whether they’re privileged or they’re poor.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Meghan: I was being abused by my husband’s family and by the national media and I contemplated suicide. I went to many people behind-the-scenes and asked for help, I wanted to check into a facility for in-patient treatment, that’s how bad it was, and they wouldn’t help me.

Lady Marjorie Hootentooter: How dare you speak about this, don’t you know you’re supposed to bottle up your emotions and trauma and never speak about them, that’s what I teach everyone at my mental health charity!!

I mean… you truly cannot make this sh-t up. This horrid woman has close ties to King Charles and Queen Camilla too. So not only do we have Camilla’s “allies” saying that Harry has (in essence) had too much therapy, we also have the founder of a mental health charity – and a close friend of the Windsors – speaking publicly about how a Black woman should have just sucked it up and been stoic when she was being harassed, smeared and threatened on an hourly basis for years.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.








eXTReMe Tracker