In the early hours of Friday morning Prince William and Kate Middleton emerged
from Boujis nightclub in South Kensington, west London, looking like a happy
couple ending a fun night out. Her hair was in flyaway disarray, his face
glowed alco-pink. She sported a sparkler on the middle finger of her left
hand; he displayed his chest.
Kate smiled broadly, even as the waiting photographers unleashed the shock and
awe of their camera flashes. As the pair settled into a waiting Range Rover
with their police protection, the prince seemed absorbed in making some
point and gestured firmly with his hand. But Kate was in a happy mood,
beaming as the cameras fired.
It was the first time the pair had been seen out for the night together since
their relationship had cooled six months ago. The photographers were eager
to get pictures of a couple apparently reunited.
Alessandro Copetti, a snapper with the Matrix picture agency, was waiting in
front of the Range Rover. “I was lucky enough to be in the right spot at the
right time,” he said yesterday. “It was very simple. Kate and William could
have used the back door at Boujis, but they didn’t. They came out at a
distance from each other. Kate was in front with a bodyguard and William was
behind. They walked normally, it was pretty civilised. There was no problem.”
Copetti captured the image of the moment: shot through the windscreen, it
showed William sitting next to a smiling Kate in the back of the car.
A source at Clarence House, the prince’s residence, said yesterday: “They had
their picture taken as they left, which they expect and are used to. There
was no problem with that.”
Then it all began to go wrong. After the Range Rover pulled away, some of the
paparazzi followed. “The prince’s car was pursued by a number of
photographers on motorbikes and in cars, and I think some were on foot,”
said an official for the prince yesterday. “They chased them up the road and
through various streets until [the prince’s car] managed to lose them.”
“[Such harassment] has happened a few times,” said a palace source, “but
this one was the most threatening.”
It was an unnerving echo of the tragedy a decade ago that ended in the death
of William’s mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.
Only a few hours earlier the long-delayed inquest into Diana’s death had
opened, reawakening all the old emotions by revealing previously unseen film
of her final moments. The footage from CCTV cameras had shown Diana and her
lover, Dodi Fayed, leaving the Ritz hotel in Paris. Diana had smiled. She
and Dodi had held hands. They had walked out into a barrage of flashguns and
had been pursued – down the road and through the streets by photographers on
motorbikes and in cars.
In one telling picture, also taken through the windscreen, Diana was shown
glancing back at other photographers behind her car. Minutes later she was
slumped in the back seat, dying, after her Mercedes smashed at high speed
into a pillar in an underpass.
The similarities between the two incidents were not lost on her eldest son and
his entourage. Later on Friday officials at Clarence House made a forthright
complaint.
“The aggressive pursuit was potentially dangerous and worrying for them,” said
Paddy Harverson, a spokesman. “It seems incomprehensible, particularly at
this time, that this behaviour goes on.”
In response, some newspapers refused to run photographs that had been taken of
the prince and Kate outside Boujis.
An open-and-shut case of intrusion and harassment? As ever with royal
photographs, it was not as straightforward as it seemed. Photographers who
were at the scene deny the palace’s version of events but also are
unrepentant and not in the mood to lay off the prince and his girlfriend.
Press harassment may have been one of the reasons why the William-Kate
relationship faltered earlier this year. The prince and his advisers appear
determined to nip any problems in the bud now that the romance is on again.
Is the palace being oversensitive on behalf of a young man desperate not to
have his romance ruined by the paparazzi or has the point been reached when
tougher powers are needed to restrain them? ONE of the photographers who was
at the scene claimed yesterday: “There was no aggressive pursuit. It wasn’t
like that.”
According to this photographer, who asked not to be named, the prince emerged
from the front of the club with his police protection and moved straight to
his car. There was little chance for photographs and many of the snappers
got few frames of interest.
Without delay the prince’s Range Rover drove off. “The driver shot off down
towards Fulham,” said the photographer. “Nobody followed. We don’t normally
follow because they shoot off so fast.”
The photographers stood around chatting as they looked through the images they
had taken on their digital cameras. The driver of the Range Rover, however,
found himself caught in a one-way system which took him in a giant U-turn. A
few minutes later the car reappeared outside the club. By now some of the
photographers knew they did not have a suitable photograph of the prince
with Kate. Several decided to follow the Range Rover.
“There was a small group of guys following,” said one of those in the group.
“We got to Scotch Corner, then Hyde Park Corner and two police vans had
either coincidentally or on purpose appeared. Then the Range Rover stormed
through two red lights, at which point all the guys bottled it – they can’t
burn a red light with the police around.”
To the prince, rekindling his relationship, it must have seemed desperately
unwanted attention. To the photographers it was far removed from the
pressures Diana faced.
The fact is that much has changed in the decade since her death and the new
systems of press self-regulation have worked well until now, according to
the Press Complaints Commission (PCC).
“The system has been transformed since Diana’s accident,” said Tim Toulmin,
director of the PCC. “The rules have changed and the PCC has a sophisticated
system for putting alerts [not to use unjustified material] round very
quickly.
“It’s been relatively straightforward, although there has been frequent
contact between the PCC and lawyers representing Kate Middleton and the
prince.
“The lawyers take a perfectly reasonable approach. When Kate Middleton herself
is going around her daily business, she doesn’t expect to be followed by
paparazzi and newspapers should not publish pictures taken in those
circumstances.
“When she is with Prince William or is at a public event, such as his passing
out [from Sandhurst], obviously they expect pictures to be taken. They may
not like it, but they accept it. That includes around nightclubs and so on.
Where they had concerns [the other night] it related to the pursuit.”
Self-regulation, said Toulmin, has been respected and has worked well among UK
publications. The flaw is that it is hard to impose on photographers working
for overseas publications. The lives of the British royal family become
stories all over the world and the PCC has no power to police foreign
newspapers and magazines.
The prince’s advisers feel the paparazzi were so desperate to get pictures for
the foreign press of William back with Kate that they lost their restraint.
The prince, insiders say, wants to make a point – and to do so publicly –
before matters get out of hand.
Clarence House seems set to take a firm stand. Although William accepts that
he will be photographed coming out of a nightclub, he wants a clear line in
the sand. There are no plans to strike a deal with photographers by posing
for certain pictures on the understanding that he and his girlfriend will be
afforded more privacy at other times.
The paparazzi are less than impressed. “He [the prince] wants his palace and
his privacy – to have his cake and eat it,” said one snapper who was at
Boujis. He added: “I didn’t get any pix that night – it was a Range Rover
against a scooter.”
If the prince’s relationship with Kate blossoms, and especially if a wedding
looks likely, the pressures will intensify. The battle could get highly
personal, with individual photographers targeted under laws introduced since
Diana’s death.
“The right to privacy [that we have now] simply didn’t exist in 1997, when
Princess Diana was killed,” said Sarah Webb, head of media law at the legal
firm Russell Jones & Walker. “It only came in with the Human Rights Act
in 2000 and the law has been gradually working through the courts.
“Princess Caroline of Monaco brought a claim against the German press for
publishing photographs of her going about her daily life. That went to the
European Court in Strasbourg and it was decided that these photographs . . .
were an invasion of her privacy. Kate Middleton and Prince William could say
that going to clubs and so on was part of their daily life. Kate Middleton’s
lawyers did warn earlier this year that this might happen.”
Laws against harassment could be used against photographers who repeatedly
pursue the couple. John Whittingdale, chairman of the House of Commons
select committee on culture, media and sport, said: “There are laws about
dangerous driving and harassment. The latter would require the palace to
take action, which I think they would only do under extreme circumstances. I
would hope that the police would take action if [photographers] break the
driving laws.”
One source suggested that certain photographers “have it coming”. They have
been warned.
Prince William mourns Sandhurst mentor killed by Taliban bomb
Prince William yesterday paid tribute to his instructor and mentor at
Sandhurst who was killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan on Thursday,
writes Michael Smith.
Major Lex Roberts, 32, of the 1st Battalion, the Royal Gurkha Rifles, was the
first British soldier to be killed there by one of the relatively
sophisticated “shaped charge" bombs, supplied to the Taliban by Iran.
His death is a second blow to William, whose friend and course mate Second
Lieutenant Joanna Dyer, 24, was killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq in April.
A statement released on behalf of the prince said he was deeply saddened to
learn of the death of Roberts, whom he remembered with “great respect” as
his platoon commander and also as a good friend.
Roberts was leading a convoy of vehicles on its way from Helmand to Kandahar
air base when the bomb went off.
Roberts was specially selected to act as the commander of William’s platoon at
Sandhurst because of his mentoring abilities. He was posted back to his
battalion after the prince had finished training. He had only recently
arrived in southern Afghanistan.
Yesterday his widow, Susie, said: “Lex was my best friend, the most wonderful
husband and deeply loving father to Alice and Freya. He died doing the job
he loved and I had just received a letter from him saying how much good he
felt he was doing for the people of Afghanistan.”
'She ' is a bad influence. What rubbish. How can one judge others through newspaper reports. Be Brave - rather go and live your own life with the many ups and downs.
carmen, Johannesburg, South Africa
"According to this photographer, who asked not to be named........"
How hypocritical!! These insane paparazzi think it's perfectly acceptable to harass and invade the privacy of the royal family, publishing every personal moment of a prince's day if at all possible, but then THEIR names and privacy are deftly protected by the press with a simple request not to be named; much less exposed in photographs and articles about their own personal lives.
How often have royals and celebrities made polite, heartfelt requests for photographers and other members of the press to back off and let them live their lives. And how often have those requests been acknowledged and honored?
I say these so-called professional photographers are due a bit of the same treatment they give to others. Chase them down while they go about their daily errands. Print photos of and write inappropriate articles about their families. Stop protecting their right to privacy. It's only fair.
Kathy, Taunton, UK
As an Aussie I find it bemusing that you suffer the comings and goings of these people who are after all spending your money at every nightclub and bar going, as far as I can see. Apart from the ungraceful exit from nightclubs with the assistance of royal minders where else are the snappers going to get some shots?
stephen, brisbane, australia
There absolutely should be a Diana Law for pappos staying away from movie stars and our beloved royals. The law should protect people having pappos not intruding their space within 100 yards and not following by any vehicle. They have long lenses, so why do they have to be soooo close. I don't see any reason why this law couldn't be passed worldwide too!! This is the focus people should be looking at instead of how suited Kate and William are to each other.
Jane Heather, Delta, BC, Canada
What William and Kate were up to is what most young couples do. What the press did is intrusive and dangerous - if they didn't get the picture this time - one or both of the will be in the public eye for many years to come and there will be many more photos...
Marios Patrinos, Reading, UK
William & Kate complain about Paparazzi and Press attention.
Simple answer: Buy a couple of six-packs and a bottle of Rioja from the offlicence ... and stay out of Boujis for a while!
Tony J, Swanage, UK
Hmmm. Kate isn't good for him or Queen material because she isn't sloshed? She's a party girl and he isn't? Weren't they at the same party? Never heard of him being a pushover. Give it a rest. I think that it's much better that they are seen out and about like normal couples. Let them let off steam and have fun while they are unencumbered with public duties and a "role" in society. Better a life built together, with fond memories of youth.
Elizabeth, Victoria, BC, Canada
Kate appears to be a Party girl and leading William down the wrong path. He appeared quite sloshed, She is not good for him, I think. Certainly not Queen material.
Robert Graham, Westchester, NY