There is a lot of chatter coming in through the grape vine about Prince Harry’s right to police protection. Whether from his fans or his critics, but now, a protection officer whose served King Charles for a great number of years has also come out.
For those unversed, he also served as the head of security at St Paul’s Cathedral, apart from his role as a police protection officer to King Charles III.
Scott Hamer, the man in question, wrote his thoughts publicly on LinkedIn a bit ago in August.
“I’m absolutely astounded that a decision still has not been made on the protection of Prince Harry by the UK Government!” he opened his post by saying.
He also called it”absolutely outrageous” that a Risk Management Board Meeting (RMB) hasn’t been held for years “(or the decision communicated) – or a Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC) held to properly assess the threats and risks to him and his family – of which there are many; some in the public domain, some not.”
As it stands “the threats to him are very real and the risks to him are far greater than the risks to many of our other protected Royals and politicians. A truly objective threat and risk assessment would clearly demonstrate this.”
However, that isn’t the sole reason he feels the Duke is entitled to taxpayer funded police protection. In the second half of his piece he posed a question like, “the other aspects to consider are impact and vulnerability. Should Prince Harry, or his family, be the victim of an attack the impact on the UK’s reputation around the world to protect its Royal Family, and the son of The King, would be immeasurable. ‘UK Plc’ would have failed – and be culpable.”
he also pointed out one of the worst aspects of this near the end — which is that by making his security public, “his vulnerability has massively increased”, according to Mr Hamer. Moreover, “every terrorist and criminal now knows just how vulnerable he is and the details of police protection tactics have been divulged to the public in recent days by people who, quite frankly, should know better.”
