Charles Warned of ‘More Major Claims’ as Royal Expert Criticises Spencer’s ‘Harsh Remarks’
King Charles has been warned that further damaging claims could emerge from Earl Spencer’s forthcoming book as the increasingly bitter dispute over Princess Diana’s legacy shows no sign of easing.
Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams has strongly criticised Diana’s brother over allegations contained in Swan Song: Diana, My Sister, describing the row as “particularly ghastly and unedifying”.
The controversy centres on Spencer’s claim that the then-Prince Charles made a deeply insensitive remark in the days following Diana’s death in 1997.
According to Spencer, Charles allegedly told him: “Rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough.”
The alleged conversation has not been independently verified.
Buckingham Palace has responded unusually directly, saying that “the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgment and colour memory in ways others do not recognise, even many years after such a loss.”
Expert Condemns ‘Brutal’ Attack
Speaking to the Express, Fitzwilliams criticised Spencer for revisiting the allegations almost three decades after Diana’s death.
“It is quite extraordinary that Earl Spencer would wait 29 years after his sister’s tragic death to launch a brutal and unprovoked attack on the King,” he said.
Fitzwilliams argued that short, memorable claims such as “we’ll forget her soon enough” could prove particularly damaging because they are likely to stick in the public mind.
His description of Spencer’s actions as an “attack” reflects his own assessment of the memoir and should not be treated as an established motive on Spencer’s part.
Palace Response Compared With Late Queen
The King’s response has also attracted attention because of its departure from the Royal Family’s usual reluctance to comment on books.
Some have compared the statement with Queen Elizabeth II’s famous “recollections may vary” response following Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey.
Fitzwilliams argued that the latest Palace statement went considerably further.
“This is a long statement. The King could not remain silent,” he said.
He then offered his own interpretation of the wording, suggesting the Palace was effectively questioning Spencer’s judgment and memory.
That remains Fitzwilliams’ reading of the statement rather than language used directly by Buckingham Palace.
Funeral Decision Back at Centre of Debate
Much of the dispute relates to the intensely sensitive period following Diana’s death and the question of whether Prince William and Prince Harry should walk behind their mother’s coffin.
William was 15 and Harry 12 when they joined the funeral procession through London.
Fitzwilliams noted that the image became one of the defining moments of Diana’s funeral, but said the decision was always controversial.
“There has long been debate about the decision to involve the young princes in walking behind her coffin,” he said.
“The image became part of national iconography, but it was always controversial too.”
Questions Raised Over Spencer’s Motives
Fitzwilliams also speculated about Spencer’s personal motivations, pointing to tensions within Diana’s family before her death.
He suggested Spencer’s feelings towards Charles may be linked to unresolved guilt surrounding Diana’s 1995 Panorama interview.
Spencer introduced journalist Martin Bashir to Diana after being shown forged bank statements, a matter that later became the subject of major scrutiny.
Fitzwilliams further noted that Diana and her brother had experienced periods of tension during the 1990s.
Those points form part of his interpretation of Spencer’s motives, which Spencer himself has not confirmed.
Harry and Meghan Drawn Into Timing Row
Prince Harry and Meghan have also been pulled into speculation surrounding the timing of the memoir.
Fitzwilliams suggested the publication may have been deliberately scheduled to coincide with the Sussexes’ reported return to the UK.
He questioned how Harry might respond to the increasingly public confrontation between his father and maternal uncle.
Again, there is no confirmed evidence in the supplied report establishing that Spencer coordinated the book’s release with Harry or Meghan.
The suggestion remains the commentator’s theory.
‘More Explosive Claims’ Could Follow
Fitzwilliams believes the controversy is unlikely to end with the excerpts already published.
“More explosive claims will undoubtedly surface,” he warned.
However, he immediately questioned their reliability, adding: “But how true are they?”
That question is likely to dominate coverage as more material from Spencer’s memoir emerges.
The Palace has so far issued one pointed response but has not addressed every allegation individually.
Spencer, meanwhile, has publicly stood by his account of his conversations with Charles.
The result is an increasingly public battle over events that took place almost 30 years ago, with competing recollections and interpretations once again placing Diana’s death, her funeral and the relationships within the Royal Family under intense scrutiny.
