Photographs of Harry and Meghan walking into a Cotswolds pub on Thursday, published in The Sun on Saturday, have raised suspicions that the Sussexes may have quietly co-operated with the anonymous photographer who snapped them.
The first tingle to the collective “spidey sense” of royal watchers came from how pin-sharp they are—rather like the pictures of Thomas Markle getting measured for his wedding suit—which is always a bit of a giveaway.
Also, British photographers don’t wait outside random pubs on the off chance that Harry and Meghan might show up. And, given you are not allowed in the U.K. to publish photos sourced by following the subject, one has to wonder how a professional photographer just happened to be parked up outside the Falkland Arms pub in Great Tew on Thursday, in the perfect position to grab photos that look like a typical U.S.-style tabloid set-up.
Also, the pictures tell exactly the story the Sussexes want. There has been a lot of speculation about their marriage, and whether it’s really as strong as it’s made out to be, and here they are, hand in hand, going for a romantic, midweek pub lunch.
Plus, this is all studiously English. The Sussexes, you may recall, told us at some length that England’s iconic institution, its monarchy, was a ghastly, corrupt, racist outfit that would be quite happy to see them dead. Now, they want to make it clear that they love England after all, and how better to do that than by shunning the fancy elite restaurants in London in favor of an ancient British pub (named after Lucius Cary, second Viscount Falkland, who died at the battle of Newbury in 1643), where a humble dish of fish and chips costs £20 ($26).
The narrative that they are totally normal, with simple British tastes, will surprise the regulars of phenomenally expensive Montecito restaurants like Lucky’s Steak House, and perhaps their private jet broker.
Yet another strange thing about the pictures is that a couple who have gone to great lengths to tell us about the security risks that attend their every waking hour have rocked up at a pub, one which Meghan visited last week with her pal Kelly Zajfen, who posted pictures on Instagram, without any security! Either they have been exaggerating their security needs, or the security stayed conveniently out of shot until after the pics were taken.
Either way, it’s as fishy as yesterday’s cod and chips, and that’s before we mention that just three days earlier they were screaming blue murder because two alleged “European” paparazzi showed up at their kids’ school, walked around the perimeter, and looked over the fence.
These people haven’t been named, and haven’t been accused of committing any crime. This entire story is based on a briefing from the Sussex side, which has a reputation for crying wolf on “near catastrophic” security alerts.
A careful reading of the Sussex statement produced after the alleged incident at the school suggested these “European” chancers didn’t even get as far as producing a camera. The extent of their crimes appears to be renting a van, wearing backpacks and looking over a fence from a public space.
In the information the Sussexes put out to the media on their WhatsApp groups, they say the police “established” that the van was a rental vehicle. This feels like an attempt to invoke the police without actually having to say whether they were called to this event. I’ve contacted the local police force to ask what their involvement was, and await their reply with interest.
But it’s all very, very odd. A fracas at the school on the Monday results in photographers being warned off, and then on the Thursday these perfect photographs of Harry and Meghan are taken without a murmur of protest.
The other thing I found odd was that when the photos first appeared late Friday night on The Sun’s website, the credit said “NO CREDIT” in capital letters. This felt like a forceful note from the photo desk. It was quickly tidied up, and the pics now just carry no credit, but someone was clearly very specifically saying: the photographer of this must not be identified. Why not? What does the snapper have to hide?
I’m profoundly unconvinced that this was a casual trip to the pub.
Matt Wilkinson, royal correspondent of The Sun told the paper’s newsroom podcast that they got the photos “almost by accident,” adding: “As I say, this was almost like an accidental, you know, stumbled upon them and here they are walking to the pub.”
Anyone else feel that the word “almost” is doing quite a lot of work here?
Want more royal gossip, scoops and scandal? Follow all Tom Sykes’ reporting at The Royalist on Substack or listen to The Royalist podcast on YouTube.
