Prince Harry has issued a shock new statement hitting back at claims about his recent meeting with King Charles III. In the scomment he accused sources of being “intent on sabotaging” his attempt at reconciliation with his family and says he says he did not give his father a picture of his wife.
The 41-year-old me t his father at Clarence House in London on September 10, in their first face to face meeting since February 2024. In the strongly worded Prince Harry described claims that he was surprised his recent reunion with the King was “distinctly formal” as “categorically false”. He said quotes attributed to him after the landmark meeting – including that he had felt more like an “official visitor” than a “relative” – were “pure invention.”
But a spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex, who quit royal life in 2020, hit back today, saying: “Recent reporting of The Duke’s view of the tone of the meeting, is categorically false.
“The quotes attributed to him are pure invention fed, one can only assume, by sources intent on sabotaging any reconciliation between father and son.
“Presumably, those same sources have also chosen to disclose that gifts were exchanged.
“While we would have preferred such details to remain private, for the sake of clarity we can confirm that a framed photograph was handed over, however the image did not contain the Duke and Duchess.”
The meeting, which lasted just shy of an hour at Clarence House in London, came just months after Harry told the BBC his father was not speaking to him.
The Duke of Sussex later attended an Invictus Games event in London as part of his four-day visit to the UK. Asked about the meeting during that event, the duke said of the King: “Yes he’s great, thank you.”
Neither the King or Harry have disclosed what was discussed in their chat, which happened during Harry’s four-day visit to the UK.
Harry’s wife Meghan and his two children were not present at the meeting, and instead stayed at home in Montecito, California.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.express.co.uk ’
