Diana's Brother Claims Charles Said 'We'll Forget Her'; Palace Rebuts
SingTao · 2 SOURCESabout 5 hours ago3 MIN
Summary
Earl Charles Spencer, the younger brother of the late Princess Diana, has made explosive claims in his forthcoming memoir that King Charles III, then heir to the throne, responded with apparent coldness when discussing funeral arrangements shortly after Diana's death in a Paris car crash on August 31, 1997. In his book Swan Song: Diana, My Sister, serialised by Britain's Daily Mail, Spencer claims that during a phone call with the then-Prince of Wales about whether Diana's young sons should walk behind her coffin, Charles allegedly said: "Don't worry, we will forget her very soon." Spencer describes being stunned by the comment, responding "I cannot believe you just said that" before hanging up. Buckingham Palace broke with its usual practice of not commenting on royal books, issuing a statement that grief can "obscure reason, affect judgment, and distort memories in ways others cannot perceive." The memoir, published by Michael Joseph (Penguin Random House), is scheduled for global release on September 22, just days before the 30th anniversary of Diana's death.
Key Points
- Princess Diana died in a car crash in Paris on August 31, 1997, at age 36, alongside companion Dodi Al-Fayed and driver Henri Paul
- Earl Spencer claims Prince Charles called him to insist that Princes William (15) and Harry (12) walk behind their mother's coffin during the September 6, 1997 funeral procession to Westminster Abbey
- Spencer says he objected, arguing Diana would not have wanted her young sons subjected to global scrutiny while grieving, but Charles reportedly dismissed his concerns
- The funeral procession ultimately included Charles, William, Harry, Spencer, and Prince Philip walking behind Diana's coffin from Kensington Palace to Westminster Abbey
- Buckingham Palace issued an unusually direct statement saying King Charles III understands that "the pain of losing a loved one can obscure reason, affect judgment, and distort memories in ways others cannot perceive, even years after a bereavement"
Why It Matters
The Palace's rare direct rebuttal signals that the allegations are considered damaging enough to warrant breaking decades of protocol about not responding to published criticisms. The timing—months before the 30th anniversary of Diana's death—ensures these claims will reach a wide audience, potentially reshaping public perception of Charles's character at a vulnerable moment in his reign . For Hong Kong readers who followed Diana's life closely, the episode illustrates how grief, memory, and royal duty have long intersected in ways that continue to reverberate across generations.
The Palace's rare direct rebuttal signals that the allegations are considered damaging enough to warrant breaking decades of protocol about not responding to published criticisms. The timing—months before the 30th anniversary of Diana's death—ensures these claims will reach a wide audience, potentially reshaping public perception of Charles's character at a vulnerable moment in his reign . For Hong Kong readers who followed Diana's life closely, the episode illustrates how grief, memory, and royal duty have long intersected in ways that continue to reverberate across generations.