Queen’s nephew named in blackmail plot
Update 3 : It’s being reported that the victim of this blackmail plot is about “to go public”. Since his name is now widely known, his side of the story should be put frankly and fearlessly.
A nephew of the Queen is being named as the victim in the Royal blackmail plot. His name is now being widely touted on the internet, including the authoritative Huffington Post, quoting the Radar publication.
British journalist Nicholas Davies, author of three books on the Royal Family, revealed the name during a phone interview on American TV. Speaking from his Surrey home, Davies told host Martha MacCullum, “This is absolute nonsense, [...] would never be involved in anything like this. It is a con trick which exploded in their face.”
The Huff reports, “British law prohibits any of them from naming the hard-partying royal. As the tale goes, two men demanded £50,000 from 45-year-old [...] in return for footage allegedly showing a royal aide talking of gay sex with him. The aide is also allegedly seen on a video tape taking cocaine from an envelope embossed with [...] name.”
The Queen will be dismayed as he was always one of the good guys, as will his wife [...].
Update : The Telegraph online is reporting that the Queen will stand by her nephew in the current blackmail case and has offered her “unswerving support”.
The paper “has learnt that the Queen, who is very fond of her relative, is dismayed by the effect the revelation of an alleged £50,000 extortion attempt is having on him and his family”.
One source said: “It is a fraught time for him. He is grateful for the support of the Queen and other members of the Royal Family.”
So is anyone surprised?
By Trudie on October 30th, 2007 at 11:19 am
I’ve had to take his name down, Trudie, as reporting restrictions are still biting for British media and websites.
But, yes, I’m a little surprised. He was (is) one of the good guys and was much admired for his career and apparent steadfastness.
By John on October 30th, 2007 at 11:25 am
Really sad if true, emphasis, if true. The Huff Post can spin things somewhat hysterically, would the ‘named royal’ really be described as a ‘hard partying’ individual?I don’t know as I don’t live in England but I follow royal goings on pretty closely and have done for a long long time and I have never heard a whiff of trouble on this person. Any other insights out there???
By Claudia on October 30th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Now that this individual has been publicly identified, I’m more puzzled than ever to understand why he sold off the Poltimore Tiara!
By Arthur on October 30th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
Wicked, Arthur.
By John on October 30th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
John, this stroy is rife with one liners. I’m having trouble controlling myself.
By Arthur on October 30th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
Are you sure you haven’t broken the law? I read in one of the papers that, by law, you aren’t allowed to provide any identifiers of the person. Excluding his name, but identifying him as the queen’s nephew (she only has one) seems like legal trouble.
By Dan on October 30th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Dan, the Telegraph has identified his gender, so is equally culpable.
Royal Anecdotes operates from servers based in the U.S. — so technically we’re not a British website. That’s my excuse anyway.
Everyone knows who this is now. Is a link to a U.S. site contempt of court? I doubt that could be nailed down. The news is out there and it’s only a matter of time before the British media names him.
It may well turn out, though, that the victim is completely innocent, as Davies claims. Let’s hope so. Although as he was the one who named him in the first place, there must be some special pleading going on here.
By John on October 30th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Well I am not only surprised, I am devastated! In a million years I never dreamed it might be he.
There is something decidedly fishy about this story and I must say, I can scarsely believe it. Whomever those lowlifes are who attempted the blackmail, I hope they slither back under the slimy rocks from whence they came. I am glad that the Queen and the Senior Royals have offered their suppprt. This really is infamous, especially if it turns out to be untrue. Furthermore, this man is not a minor Royal. A minor Royal would be a cousin or a second cousin once or twice removed from the Queen.
My dear Arthur, you are quite heartless!
By Gigi on October 30th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
I’m sorry, Gigi, sometimes I can’t help myself.
As always, you are correct. There is apparently nothing on tape except statements made by the aid of what he claims happened. Definitely not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. At this point, it’s a case of he said, she said. Oops, there I go again! 
By Arthur on October 30th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
aide (sp).
By Arthur on October 30th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
John, I wasn’t accusing you of wrongdoing, only wondering if you had gone further than the law allows.
Indeed, it sounds like the whole thing may unravel if all they have is the taped ravings of an aide. All it may prove is that the aide had access to the Viscount’s envelopes.
By Dan on October 30th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Arthur the Poltimore Tiara just wouldn’t suit him I’m afraid.LOL
By Trudie on October 30th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
Well, it’s not hard to figure this out unless the Brits have a funny way of defining “nephew”. From my viewpoint, she only has one nephew. Is this the person they are referring to?
By On the Outside on October 30th, 2007 at 10:08 pm
There is no longer any “Mustique” surrounding this story, On the Outside. The Queen’s one and only nephew has been identified as the target of the blackmail attempt. Definitely not a minor Royal, as Gigi previously noted.
By Arthur on October 30th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
On the Outside, you are correct and so is Arthur. Queen Elizabeth II has one, and only one, nephew, and we are all defining nephew as the son of the sister or brother of the Queen. I shall reiterate my position: I do not believe that this heinous story is true. Either there has been a doctored tape produced through entrapment or something is rotten in Denmark. As for the two jerks who attempted blackmail, to the dungeons with them! This is the kind of thing that just makes me crazy. I fear I am seething, or, in Texas jargon, I am having a hissy fit!
By Gigi on October 30th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Gigi, don’t have a fit.
All we have so far is claims from a purported aide who, at most, had access to one of the Viscount’s envelopes.
In these days of camera phones, 24/7 gossip websites and whatnot, anything can be alleged. As the Viscount is unusual among the Family–he has a job in a world-known firm named Christie’s–he would be one of the more logical targets of a blackmail or extortion attempt.
Whatever he did or didn’t do, it’s the aide who has put him/her self in legal jeopardy.
By Dan on October 31st, 2007 at 2:14 am
Excellent reasoning, Dan. I hope you are right. Nevertheless, it is a terrible thing to happen to the accused and by extension to the entire Royal Family, even if if proves to be unfounded.
By Gigi on October 31st, 2007 at 3:35 am
Well lets face it as a non working royal and I mean carrying out engagements on the behalf of the family, This guy has to work in the public sector and therefore is open to all sorts of people. This makes them more likely targets than those protected by the royal system. Who knows he could be taking the heat for a Senior royal. I could think of a couple of Senior members this could apply to and HM’s nephew is well placed enough within the RF yet far enough from the throne that makes this plausible.
By Trudie on October 31st, 2007 at 10:24 am
Trudie, he has his own business in upmarket carpentry so will have connections with high-worth customers, aristocracy and Royalty.
I doubt though he would be carrying the can for anyone else. Reports suggest this has devastated his family. His marriage must now be in serious doubt.
By John on October 31st, 2007 at 10:36 am
Only if the allegations are true, John, which I really believe they are not. This just does not seem accurate to me. All these years have gone by and there was never a hint anywhere in the oh-so-intrusive gutter press that things were not as they seemed in that quarter? I find it impossible to credit.
By Gigi on October 31st, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Let’s hope so, Gigi. He should now come out and fight his corner. He shouldn’t need to hide behind a judge’s restriction order when everyone who would be interested in this knows his name.
By John on October 31st, 2007 at 4:46 pm
This story has certainly knocked Prince Philip’s heart condition off the front page. I wonder how the Prince’s heart is doing now?
By Arthur on October 31st, 2007 at 6:11 pm
Arthur, after all Prince Philip suffered during his extremely difficult and often perilous childhood, this particular incident likely did not even cause a blip. Further, Prince Philip is and always has been remarkably well-informed and seems to know things before anyone else has a clue. My guess is that he knows the allegations are false and is only peeved at the would-be blackmailers. As a former Naval officer, he knows how to steer a ship through stormy waters, full gales and even hurricanes. Prince Philip is quite a useful fellow to have around when the going gets rough, actually. He keeps his head in a crisis.
By Gigi on October 31st, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Well I’m shocked, I wouldn’t have guessed him in a million years. He seems such a family man and not living the high high life. His wife Serena has Irish connections, her mother lives in Tipperary and her paternal grandfather lives in County Limerick and so i have watched them with interest and they seem such a happy couple. I really don’t think it is true. In one way I hope he does speak out but in another maybe it would be better to let it all rest. Whatever he says will only draw the press on him and his family and make life intolerable for them.
And I must apologise to the much maligned Freddie, i was sure it was him.
By Eliza on October 31st, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Well, it’s all gone quiet again. The papers are not letting this slip, except for Ephraim Hardcastle who ran a little snippet on him yesterday apropos of nothing. A sly hint, I think.
By John on November 1st, 2007 at 10:09 am
If it has gone quiet, I wonder if suddenly the news outlets have gotten a clue that the allegations are unfounded?
By Gigi on November 1st, 2007 at 2:51 pm