Prince Harry's recent behaviour has been branded 'appalling' and 'foolish' by Sky News Australia contributor Louise Roberts, who criticised the Duke of Sussex's actions in the lead-up to his reunion with King Charles.
Reunion at Highgrove House
The Duke of Sussex, 41, reunited with his father alongside his wife Meghan Markle and their two children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, on Friday, July 10. King Charles and Queen Camilla hosted the Sussexes at Highgrove House in what Buckingham Palace described as a 'private family occasion'.
Controversy Over Accommodation
However, Harry made headlines in the days prior, largely due to intense speculation over where he would stay during his UK visit. The Duke was told he could stay at Buckingham Palace, but the offer was withdrawn because he took too long to respond to the invitation.
Just one day after Harry touched down in the UK, it was announced that he had lost his High Court case against the Daily Mail's publisher, Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL). He then proceeded to hit out at Mr Justice Nicklin, claiming the ruling was a 'complete and obvious whitewash'.
Louise Roberts' Criticism
Sky News Australia contributor Louise Roberts has now slammed Harry's recent behaviour, branding it 'appalling' and 'foolish'. 'This is not the behaviour of someone who wants to rebuild trust with his family,' she told Sky News presenter Gabriella Power. 'He was offered the accommodation, he did not respond in time. The way his team played it, allegedly, is that he said yes and the offer was suddenly withdrawn.'
She argued that Buckingham Palace would need time to employ staff and security if Harry was to reside there. 'That became an issue and then on the day he was at Chatham House doing his terrific Invictus work, he got news that his action against Mail Newspapers had blown up and he'd lost the action.'
'I believe he was told that just before he went on stage and looked rather upset, as you would imagine. He then blasted that decision as a whitewash, which I also think was foolish because it's the decision of the court and the judge, who basically said to him, 'You did not prove your case. End of story.' Therefore, he will be on the hook for some damages and some legal expenses I would imagine.'
She added: 'That's not the sort of behaviour of someone who's going there to plug Invictus ahead of the event next year and hopefully to see his father. His behaviour in the lead up to it, appalling.'
