Harry & Meghan make money trashing the royals so why should we pay for his security – it’s not right, says royal expert
PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle make money trashing the royals so it's not right that we should pay for his security, a royal expert has said.
The Duke of Sussex, 39, lost his legal fight against the removal of his government-funded UK security yesterday.
He has vowed to appeal after the Home Office refused to spend taxpayers' money on his bodyguards post-Megxit.
The Sun's royal photographer Arthur Edwards said Harry's lawsuit was "ridiculous" - and the High Court was right to throw it out.
Speaking on The Sun's Royal Exclusive show, he said: "I think Harry should stop going to the High Court.
"Every time he goes, he seems to lose. He lost against the Mail on Sunday.
Read More Royals
"His win against the Daily Mirror wasn't exactly a win because he ended up paying his own court costs.
"I think it's got to stop. And I don't think Harry should demand royal security.
Inside Prince Harry's fury as UK security team was pulled after Megxit
PRINCE Harry went to officials with many concerns amid his battle to get security while in the UK.
Today's findings have laid out some of them - including how Diana was treated, who's taking responsibility for his family and how he believed threat levels were raised because of 'racism'.
Harry asked who would be willing to put him and his family in a position of extreme vulnerability and risk – “a position that no one was willing to put my mother in 23 years ago – and yet today, with greater risk, as
mentioned above, with the additional layers of racism and extremism, someone is comfortable taking accountability for what could happen. I would like that person’s name who is willing to take accountability for this choice please …”.
The prince also asked if anyone had thought about "the consequences" of the decision to cut his security.
He said: "Prove to me that someone has actually thought about the consequences without being punitive, which is how most of the decisions have been made in the last couple of months."
Harry outlined: "The obvious difference aside from that is the fact that I was born into this and the threat will never decrease because of my status regarding the Family”.
"He's no longer a working member of the royal family. He just pops in when it suits him."
Arthur added: "When he finds he fancies coming he doesn't stay very long.
"Even then, I don't see why he shouldn't pay for his own security.
"He's making enough money out of trashing the royal family.
"And he expects to come here and for people to sort of carry on as though nothing's happened."
A judge ruled there had not been any "unlawfulness" in the call to pull Harry's security.
Retired High Court Judge Sir Peter Lane added the decision had been "justified", and was not ";irrational"; - as it had been dubbed.
But the Duke of Sussex has vowed to appeal the judgement and claimed he is "not asking for preferential treatment".
The Sussexes were stripped of their round-the-clock protection when they stepped back from royal duties in 2020.
Harry moaned he was unable to return with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet, "because it is too dangerous".
Royal snapper Arthur said: "He should stop this ridiculous suing people, stop trashing his family.
"He should start to make some headway about engaging with his brother again.
"When he came here recently to see his father, he spent half an hour with him.
"In my view, that wasn't enough because there's a lot to be said in half an hour after all that's gone on over the years.
"And after seeing his father he should have gone to see his brother and tried to bury the hatchet.
"This is ridiculous. He pops in for an hour or two or for a day or two when the Queen's Platinum Jubilee was on.
"Then he pops in for a day for the Coronation. He should have brought his son Archie for that."
Arthur added: "He just popped in, did it, and went back the next day.
READ MORE SUN STORIES
"I don't think you can just keep doing that and expect Scotland Yard to turn out highly-trained top policemen to just latch on to Harry when it suits him.
"I think the Home Office was right to reject his appeal."
What level of security protection are working royals entitled to?
A HANDFUL of working members of the Royal Family have 24/7 protection - but others are assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Senior officers are assigned to specific members of the household and are supported by others, one expert told The Sun.
He claimed will always be a minimum of one protection officer with a member of the Royal Family, but the protection team is increased according to threat and risk.
King Charles, Queen Camilla and the Wales' family have round-the-clock protection and the monarch also has a corridor officer based outside his bedroom door, the expert said.
The reported the likes of Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie, Countess of Wessex are given protection when they are taking part in official engagements - but do not have taxpayer-funded security at their homes.
Prince Andrew had his taxpayer-funded security removed following the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
His daughters Princess Beatrice and Prince Eugenie are said to not have funded security as they are not full-time working royals - and are employed elsewhere.
Robert Jobson, an award-winning royal author, explained: "According to a 1917 Letters of Patent issued by King George V, the title of HRH Prince or Princess is passed to ‘The grandchildren of the sons of any such sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of dukes of this realm.
“Both Harry and Meghan know this. Archie, on the other hand, did not qualify to become a prince automatically.
“In 2012, Queen Elizabeth II issued a Letters Patent to expand on a previous decree that granted such a title only to the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales."