Royal expert says ‘recollections vary’ over paparazzi car chase to hammer home security risks

Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams says “recollections conveniently vary” over events surrounding the paparazzi car chase involving Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and her mother.

It is “no coincidence” that the Duke of Sussex’s “near catastrophic” car chase with paparazzi in New York comes at a time when he launched a second legal challenge against the Home Office over his security arrangements.

Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams said it’s no surprise “recollections conveniently vary” over the length of time and version of events surrounding the paparazzi car chase after Prince Harry, wife Meghan and her mother Doria Raglan left an awards ceremony.

A day before the news was released by Prince Harry’s spokesman, his lawyers argued in the High Court he should be given the go-ahead to bring a case over the decision of the executive committee for the protection of royalty and public figures (referred to in court as Ravec), that people should not be allowed to pay privately for their protective security.

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, were chased by paparazzi after attending the Ms. Foundation Women of Vision Awards in New York City. Picture: Getty Images

“It is no coincidence that recollections conveniently vary over the car chase - what New York authorities said happened and what the Duke’s representative has said happened are at variants,” said royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams.

“It is timely that he is in court with the Home Office about his security arrangements and has several court cases on the go against newspaper groups about alleged invasion of privacy.

“We will only know the truth about what really happened with the paparazzi when the police release findings into their investigation of that night, if indeed they ever do,” he said.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were chased by paparazzi through the streets of New York City after attending the Ms. Foundation Women of Vision Gala night. Picture: Getty Images

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were forced to take a taxi as they attempted to evade paparazzi. Picture: Twitter

The Duke maintains that his and his family’s safety is in constant jeopardy and he needs protection round the clock in LA and when visiting the UK.

A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed last Wednesday the photographers’ alleged pursuit in NYC had resulted in multiple near-collisions involving other vehicles, pedestrians and two New York Police Department officers, as well as multiple traffic violations, such as driving on the sidewalk, running red lights and reversing down a one-way street.

Prince Harry’s lawyers are arguing in a second challenge against the Home Office that to not allow him to pay for police protection while in the UK is unlawful.

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, left the UK arguing his family’s safety is in constant jeopardy and he needs round the clock protection. Picture: AFP

At a High Court hearing in London last week lawyers for the Home Office argued it was not appropriate for “wealthy people” to be able to “buy” specialist armed police protective security.

The Duke’s lawyers said the decision by Ravec was inconsistent with the 1996 Police Act which allows the “chief officer of the police” to provide special police services “subject to payment”.

Harry’s renewed case is related to an earlier attempt to challenge the decision that he would no longer be given the same degree of personal protective security when visiting the UK after stepping back as a working royal and moving to the US.

Shaheed Fatima KC, for Harry, said the case raised an “important issue of principle”.

Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle and Prince Harry say they were hounded by photographers after she received a Women of Vision award from Gloria Steinem in New York City. Picture: Getty Images

She said the argument relied on by Ravec “that allowing payment for protective security is contrary to the public interest and will undermine public confidence in the Metropolitan police Service”, could not be reconciled with the fact that parliament had expressly allowed for payment for such services.

She argued Ravec had not provided any principled guideline for allowing a distinction between the provision of protective security for those individuals within the Ravec circles.

“Ravec had exceeded its authority, its power, because it doesn’t have the power to make this decision in the first place,” she told the court.

Prince Harry and Meghan. Picture: AFP

The metropolitan police are against the move with Matthew Butt KC, for the force, telling the court such specialist policing exposed officers to “unique risks”.

The case is among five other civil cases the duke is pursuing through the courts in London, including against Mirror Newspapers and the Mail group, ANL.

The judge will give his ruling at a later date.