Archie Harrison had ‘premature’ security protection says Morton
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry expressed concerns about Archie Harrison allegedly not being granted an appropriate level of security after he was denied a royal title. But Princess Diana’s biographer Andrew Morton pointed out Archie would have likely moved around with his parents for years and would therefore have been protected by their security details. All senior members of the Royal Family, including the Duke of Sussex before stepping down, receive 24/7 security, and minor royals are assigned guards whenever on official duty.
Mr Morton told ToDieForDaily.com host Kinsey Schofield: “They both had bodyguards themselves and traditionally what happens is that you know if you’ve got a baby that’s recently born they will always travel with them so they don’t need it.
“Archie didn’t really need a bodyguard and or protection for a long time so it was all a bit it struck me as being a bit premature.”
Prince Harry voiced his concerns Meghan would suffer the same fate as his mother Diana, who notably renounced her security detail following her divorce from Prince Charles.
Mr Morton continued: “Yeah, I totally agree and with regards to Diana, she remembers she was an independent humanitarian separate from the Royal Family and we’ve seen the same with will it with Harry and and Meghan they are now independent humanitarians.”
JUST IN: Queen ready to break royal tradition as Prince Charles prepared to “take over” if needed
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed in their controversial sit-down interview with Oprah Winfrey that Archie would not be granted security by the Firm because “he is not going to be a Prince”.
She said: “Okay, well, he needs to be safe so we’re not saying don’t make him a prince or princess, but if you’re saying the title is what’s going to affect that protection, we haven’t created this monster machine around us in terms (of clickbait and tabloid) fodder. You’ve allowed that to happen which means our son needs to be safe.
“While I was pregnant, they wanted to change the convention for Archie. Why? There’s no explanation.”
Meghan also revealed during the interview that she wrote several letters to the Royal family asking them not to remove Archie’s security.
Prince Harry slammed over resignation comments
Prince Harry confessed that the actor Tyler Perry offered them his security after he received the information regarding Archie’s security in Canada, he said: “While we were in Canada, in someone else’s house, I then got told, short notice, that security was going to be removed.
“So suddenly it dawned on me, ‘Hang on, the borders could be closed, we’re going to have our security removed, who knows how long lockdown is going to be, the world knows where we are, it’s not safe, it’s not secure, we probably need to get out of here.”
Meghan added: “We didn’t have a plan and we needed a house and he offered security as well so it gave us breathing room to try to figure out what we were going to do.”
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could copy Cambridges with adorable family snap [REVEAL]
Meghan Markle is ‘much more protective parent’ than Kate Middleton ‘out of the limelight’ [SPOTLIGHT]
Meghan Markle received rare honour before Kate Middleton during Christmas celebrations [INSIGHT]
However, Dai Davies, the former chief superintendent who led the Met police’s royalty protection unit, claimed that the royal couple’s intention to live abroad with publicly-funded security was impossible as would have cost them between £8million and £20million a year.
A royal source added to the allegation concerning Archie’s security saying: “Harry and Meghan’s lifestyle choices were deemed to be totally unworkable.
“They were jetting around the world on holidays, discussing plans to base themselves in multiple countries throughout the year, while demanding to be looked after by royal protection officers who had no desire to leave their families for extended periods.
“On top of this, the British Government and Metropolitan police were under massive pressure to reduce costs which the senior royals were well aware of.
“In the end, it was completely unworkable for everyone.”
Source: Read Full Article