Prince Harry labelled ‘petulant and privileged’ by Paul Burrell

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

If Princess Diana had still been alive then Harry wouldn’t have married Meghan Markle and would have settled down in the Royal Family, her former butler claimed. Giving his take on why the Duke of Sussex was entranced by Meghan Markle, Mr Burrell drew a parallel between Ms Markle being 36 when she got married to Harry and Princess Diana being 36 when she died.

Speaking on behalf of Slingo, he said: “Had she had her way and if she was still here, Harry wouldn’t be doing what he’d be doing now.

“He probably would’ve married Cressida Bonas or Chelsea Davy, or a young aristocratic lady from England and settled down in the Royal Family, in his routine which he loved.

“He loved the army, his uniforms, his public service and they would’ve buckled down to it.

“But this is my theory; when he lost his mother aged 11 he was lost, in a wilderness, completely lost until he met a 36-year-old, mature woman who whispered in his ear that she wanted to change the world. He didn’t hear Meghan’s voice, he heard his mother’s voice.

“That’s what changed the game.”

Mr Burrell says he could have seen Meghan marrying a film star, but her hook caught the “big fish”.

He said: “Diana was 36 when she died. The parallels are unbelievable. Nobody’s drawn that parallel before.

“Meghan being 36 and knowing her mind, being a strong independent personality, Harry has to have seen in Meghan something, some strong element of his mother.

“He has to have recognised that at that time.

“Before he’d been going out with young women who weren’t matured, who didn’t have the foresight, the dream to do something with their lives, Meghan did.

“So Meghan’s hook caught the big fish Harry. I could see Meghan marrying a footballer, or a film star but she bagged a prince and princes trump movie stars and footballers.”

Mr Burrell was just one of the many people Prince Harry slated in his memoir Spare.

Speaking about being referenced in the book Mr Burrell, who was Diana’s butler between 1987 up until her death in 1997, said he felt “intensely annoyed” at being referred to as “mummy’s butler” by the Duke of Sussex.

Harry wrote in his book: “Mummy’s former butler had penned a tell-all which actually told nothing. It was merely one man’s self-justifying, self-centring version of events.

“He was milking her disappearance for money. It made my blood boil.”

Mr Burrell hit out at Harry’s comments saying the Duke of Sussex had never referred to him as “the butler”.

DON’T MISS
Moment rapist PC David Carrick was arrested shown in court sentencing [WATCH]
First images released of suspected Chinese spy balloon being recove… [PICTURED]
Meghan feels confident to ‘go out on her own’ as Harry acts a ‘fool’ [REPORT]

He said: “There was something else which annoyed me intensely, I was really upset, really upset the fact that he referred to me as ‘the butler’, ‘mummy’s butler’.

“Well mummy’s butler was called Paul, Harry and you knew me, all your life you’ve known me as Paul.

“He had never known me as ‘the butler’ so why suddenly has there been a shift only recently, a shift to being called the butler?

“Suddenly I’m sort of being dismissed by this petulant prince as irrelevant because he says my tell-all book told nothing.

“The circumstances in which I wrote my book are very different from Harry, his privileged world and privileged life and him not having suffered at the hands of a judicial system and the media in the same way I did.”

Source: Read Full Article