|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hazeleyes
|
I find it very interesting how a few weeks ago we were discussing whether or not Charles and the Queen have legal custody of George due to the new changes in the legislation esp. in accordance to the act of succession and the marriage act, and now that the new changes were finally approved and implemented starting the day before, Charles sees how important it is for the plebs to see him holding George.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don't know, now you know. -Notorious B.I.G.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MidnightDiamond
|
I find it very interesting how a few weeks ago we were discussing whether or not Charles and the Queen have legal custody of George due to the new changes in the legislation esp. in accordance to the act of succession and the marriage act, and now that the new changes were finally approved and implemented starting the day before, Charles sees how important it is for the plebs to see him holding George. What new changes. That is an old picture of george though. I would say from 1st birthday. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hazeleyes
|
I find it very interesting how a few weeks ago we were discussing whether or not Charles and the Queen have legal custody of George due to the new changes in the legislation esp. in accordance to the act of succession and the marriage act, and now that the new changes were finally approved and implemented starting the day before, Charles sees how important it is for the plebs to see him holding George. What new changes. That is an old picture of george though. I would say from 1st birthday. In 1717 and again in 1772, the courts ruled that the monarch has legal custody of all children and grand-children. They attached this preamble to the Royal Marriages Act when putting into consideration that anyone in the line of succession had to ask the monarch for permission to marry and for permission to take any children & grandchildren out of the country. What is not clear is this included great-grandchildren. But legally speaking it would follow suit, since the monarch has claim even over for example, their brother's children and family. However, with the changes implemented on March 26th, 2015, this only applies to the first 6 in the line of succession. Only the first 6 in the line of succession need permission to marry and technically, need permission to borrow "custody" of children under 18. This would eliminate any ambiguity of legal custody of great-grandchildren if they are in the immediate line of succession since they can be appointed Counsellors of the state. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don't know, now you know. -Notorious B.I.G.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MidnightDiamond
|
I find it very interesting how a few weeks ago we were discussing whether or not Charles and the Queen have legal custody of George due to the new changes in the legislation esp. in accordance to the act of succession and the marriage act, and now that the new changes were finally approved and implemented starting the day before, Charles sees how important it is for the plebs to see him holding George. What new changes. That is an old picture of george though. I would say from 1st birthday. In 1717 and again in 1772, the courts ruled that the monarch has legal custody of all children and grand-children. They attached this preamble to the Royal Marriages Act when putting into consideration that anyone in the line of succession had to ask the monarch for permission to marry and for permission to take any children & grandchildren out of the country. What is not clear is this included great-grandchildren. But legally speaking it would follow suit, since the monarch has claim even over for example, their brother's children and family. However, with the changes implemented on March 26th, 2015, this only applies to the first 6 in the line of succession. Only the first 6 in the line of succession need permission to marry and technically, need permission to borrow "custody" of children under 18. This would eliminate any ambiguity of legal custody of great-grandchildren if they are in the immediate line of succession since they can be appointed Counsellors of the state. Ah!  So the Queen has custody of George and Heirnot |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lady G
|
At last, a shot across the bows of the rotten ship Middleton - go Charles  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Cowards falter, but danger is often overcome by those who nobly dare."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Countess of Cows
|
http://www.thedailybeast....mile-helicopter-trip.htmlPrince Charles is facing charges of being a green hypocrite once again, after he used a total of 200 gallons of aviation fuel, as opposed to four gallons of gasoline, to make an 80-mile journey by helicopter, just days after urging people to save energy by turning off their lights.and after all the pretty talk during their visit 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I would sooner have you hate me for telling you the truth than adore me for telling you lies." Pietro Aretino
I would rather be hated for something I am, than loved for something I am not. -Bob Marley
|
|
|
|
|
|
hazeleyes
|
I think that Charles is cleaning house. What do we know: Reporter who got the exclusive scoop on Beatrice's new job and move to NYC is the same one who got the exclusive about the Middletons moving in to Anmer Hall. I will quote one of my previous posts from another thread b/c it is more appropriate here: a worker spouting positive about Beatrice and negative about Middletons? Blood princess that her father couldn't protect from the press vs the commoners who are trying to take over George's upbringing and taking control away from Charles?
This is a direct source. I think this is Charles cleaning house. The Yorks get jobs away from the Uk and get protected from the press while lonesome Andrew gets left behind as bait while simultaneously the Middletons get dragged through the mud? William gets to work right away and working more with HM while Harry gets to work in Australia while HM gives him a personal letter of reference? Wessex are on an african safari for the next two weeks while Zara & Mike will be in Kentucky until the end of the month? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don't know, now you know. -Notorious B.I.G.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MidnightDiamond
|
Well everyone will eventually come back, and William will do this one thing with HM and then throw a fit and leave. But I agree someone is probably talking from Charles' side but how is he getting info on the Midds, he have a spy there |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hazeleyes
|
Oh I think he has a couple, but the favorite frontrunner in my opinion is Niraj Tanna.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don't know, now you know. -Notorious B.I.G.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lola Heart
Warned
|
If I were the British Royal Family, I would be keeping an eye on Sarah Ferguson, I think she finally learned how to use the media to her advantage instead of being ambushed by them, bartering family gossip for press. I mentioned this on another thread, but Sarah's got Duchess Discovery wares to sell and as this article points out, she's not burdened as others might be by ethical concerns: http://www.dcscience.net/...guson-in-quack-diet-scam/Sarah's got very strong survival instincts and the future of her branch of the family is in a weak position, I wouldn't underestimate her as the British Royal Family often seems to do. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MidnightDiamond
|
I'd say Andrew will pull a Charles and make her non-negotiable.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LDJJ
|
Congratulations on 500 MidnightDiamond!!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
