News and photos William and Kate 2019

[Ghost]

Apparently, Mustique time:

https://www.instagram.com...aE_/?igshid=1957fa4pjtc33

[danifaul]

Kensington Palace has posted a beautiful photo on behalf of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to celebrate the Duchess of Cornwall's 72nd birthday on Wednesday.

https://www.hellomagazine...uchess-cornwall-birthday/

[JaneAir]

Kensington Palace has posted a beautiful photo on behalf of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to celebrate the Duchess of Cornwall's 72nd birthday on Wednesday.

https://www.hellomagazine...uchess-cornwall-birthday/

That is a beautiful picture!  Flattering, but she still looks like herself. 

[Future Crayon]

[Duchess of Suffolk]

A CONVICTED torturer was allowed to get within feet of Prince George in a massive security breach uncovered by The Sun.

The royal family launched an investigation after we told them driver Darren Benjamin, 40, was allowed into Kensington Palace.

Worried Prince William has demanded to know how a convicted torturer got within feet of his three young children.

Wills and Kate are said to be “concerned” he got so close.

Benjamin, who was caged for a brutal attack, later boasted to pals about seeing George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis in the courtyard.


' POTENTIALLY DEADLY OVERSIGHT'

He even told them how “pleasant” the future king was.

The violent criminal was jailed for seven years in 2008 for his part in a torture plot where an innocent man had boiling water poured down his back.

But he was allowed to deliver furniture to Kensington Palace on July 14 in his role as a driver for an independent company.

He said he was greeted by George, seven, Charlotte, four, and Louis, one, who were in the courtyard with their nanny Maria Teresa Borrallo.


CLOSENESS TO CHILDREN 'CHILLING'

A source said: “This is the type of potentially deadly security oversight that simply cannot be allowed to happen.

“Darren is a violent criminal who was jailed for the most brutal type of torture.

“It’s chilling as he has been boasting to friends about just how close he came to our future king and the other Cambridge children.

“His friends were shocked that he was able to get into the Palace and within touching distance of royalty given his past.”

On Sunday night a senior royal insider said the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are “concerned” he got near their children with no extra protection provided.

They said: “The Duke has been informed and is obviously taking a close interest into what happened.

“He strongly believes criminals deserve a second chance once they have served their time, but is concerned current security policies might not be strong enough.

“It’s very important we know who is coming into the Palace.”

Staff are said to be shocked by the lack of detailed background checks by the royals’ large security operation.



https://www.thesun.co.uk/...reach-convicted-torturer/

[Kaiserin]

So he is convinced every criminal deserves a second chance, but just not close to him and his family?
But delivering furniture, if that is what he works for a living now, to other families with children is OK?
Come on.

Either criminals are re-socialized or they are not. If that furniture company has employed him, it should not make no difference where the van goes?
Or do all companies dealing with the palace have to hand in CVs of their employees to make sure that no former criminal who served a sentence gets that close to a BRF palace?
Where's the line? Are former money launderers allowed? Shop lifters? Or former teen girl abusers (pun intended)?

[Margaret]

So he is convinced every criminal deserves a second chance, but just not close to him and his family?
But delivering furniture, if that is what he works for a living now, to other families with children is OK?
Come on.

Either criminals are re-socialized or they are not. If that furniture company has employed him, it should not make no difference where the van goes?
Or do all companies dealing with the palace have to hand in CVs of their employees to make sure that no former criminal who served a sentence gets that close to a BRF palace?
Where's the line? Are former money launderers allowed? Shop lifters? Or former teen girl abusers (pun intended)?

I knew it wouldn't be long before something would come along to shatter my newfound thawing towards William.  The bare fact that this driver did something involving torturing a man with boiling water some years ago does not automatically mean he is a threat to the Cambridge children, or any children, or any person.  He has served his sentence and been released.  There's no logic here.  Ordinary care should be taken when it comes to deliveries to the royals' homes, but there is a line and IMO William has crossed it.  Or maybe whoever wrote this article is just being sensationalist.  Either way, William suffers IMO.

[kpzra]

I have to do a background check everytime we deliver to a military installation or any place with enhanced security. I'm surprised they don't have the same there.

[Ellie]

If you ask me someone who tortures another should be in jail the rest of their lives. I understand William and Kate's concerns but it just feeds into his paranoia which will be really, really bad on the children.

[NAOTMAA]

So he is convinced every criminal deserves a second chance, but just not close to him and his family?
But delivering furniture, if that is what he works for a living now, to other families with children is OK?
Come on.

Either criminals are re-socialized or they are not. If that furniture company has employed him, it should not make no difference where the van goes?
Or do all companies dealing with the palace have to hand in CVs of their employees to make sure that no former criminal who served a sentence gets that close to a BRF palace?
Where's the line? Are former money launderers allowed? Shop lifters? Or former teen girl abusers (pun intended)?

I knew it wouldn't be long before something would come along to shatter my newfound thawing towards William.  The bare fact that this driver did something involving torturing a man with boiling water some years ago does not automatically mean he is a threat to the Cambridge children, or any children, or any person.  He has served his sentence and been released.  There's no logic here.  Ordinary care should be taken when it comes to deliveries to the royals' homes, but there is a line and IMO William has crossed it.  Or maybe whoever wrote this article is just being sensationalist.  Either way, William suffers IMO.

They got a great PR team in control of them that knows how to make them look good (making them appear far busier and harder working then they actually are) but every now and then we get the reminder that behind the PR and carefully choreographed moments is an unpleasant jackass. Just goes to show you no matter how good a team you got behind you you can't keep everything hidden, it always comes out in one way or another

[Oh_Caroline]

My issue is less that he has a criminal record as I've worked with people that have turned their lives around and more with the fact that he was supposedly boasting about how close he got to the kids.  Now it could just be the way the articles were written....shock, horror, gasp, OMG, etc. as the desired emotional response...but still.   Was it "hey I've done so well turning my life around that KP let me in" or more "damn those royals are stupid letting someone like me in."

I've travelled to places with my old job where they did background check (cause the ones we got when hired didn't count) and even places that we each had an escort the whole time.  Just because my job said I was OK didn't mean some of the places I went thought the same.

My guess is that they're supposed to have designated people (or this is what they should do) and somehow this guy slipped through security cracks.  I do agree that his conviction is worrying but not necessarily a ban on turning one's life around.  It sounds like him delivering isn't the issue but that a delivery person with a criminal record got so close to the kids and Maria with probably zero/minimal security (security doesn't follow them within the confines of KP) and no warning.  If he'd been screened than Maria could have been given a heads up to avoid the area during the delivery.

[Snow Queen]

I think torturing another human being shows a pretty serious moral defect. Normal people don’t do that, sociopaths/psychopaths commit crimes that extreme. Torture is not a petty crime that someone does their prison time and they are cured afterwards. I would be upset knowing that person was bragging about being in close proximity to my children. He should have been vetted by security and not allowed anywhere near the property. Will can be extreme at times but I think he is justified at being upset by this.

[Margaret]

I think torturing another human being shows a pretty serious moral defect. Normal people don’t do that, sociopaths/psychopaths commit crimes that extreme. Torture is not a petty crime that someone does their prison time and they are cured afterwards. I would be upset knowing that person was bragging about being in close proximity to my children. He should have been vetted by security and not allowed anywhere near the property. Will can be extreme at times but I think he is justified at being upset by this.

One thing that concerns me about this is that we do not have all the facts about the crime and his conviction.  He is said to have tortured someone but what actually happened?  When and in what circumstances?  I want to know that.  But whatever he did he has served his sentence and been released and is entitled to get on with his life.  If security was slack, that is not his fault but is the fault of the people looking after William and his family.  William should be complaining about his staff, not this man. 

[getafix]

So he is convinced every criminal deserves a second chance, but just not close to him and his family?
But delivering furniture, if that is what he works for a living now, to other families with children is OK?
Come on.

Either criminals are re-socialized or they are not. If that furniture company has employed him, it should not make no difference where the van goes?
Or do all companies dealing with the palace have to hand in CVs of their employees to make sure that no former criminal who served a sentence gets that close to a BRF palace?
Where's the line? Are former money launderers allowed? Shop lifters? Or former teen girl abusers (pun intended)?

K, some animals are more equal than others 

G

[Oh_Caroline]

I read it as William being upset at the staff for ignoring a potential hole in security. 

As for this mans crime...

Benjamin, of Harlesden, North West London, was part of a four-strong gang in ski masks who tortured innocent Anthony Powell. They tied and gagged him after pouncing as he put the bins out at his Wolverhampton home. The men put a knife to the victim’s throat and stabbed him in the leg as they grilled him about a BMW Z4.

Wolverhampton crown court was told he “knew nothing about” the vehicle — but “despite his protests, they poured scalding water along his back”.

https://www.google.com/am...ch-convicted-torturer/amp