Five royal claims you haven’t heard yet as Earl Spencer’s book published

Earl Spencer describes King Charles as acting like a “petulant” child in the new book about his late sister Diana, Princess of Wales, which has been released today. The author has been engaged in a PR battle with Buckingham Palace following claims that Charles sounded “giddily elated” after Diana’s death and allegedly said: “We’ll forget her soon enough.” A Buckingham Palace spokesperson said last Wednesday that grief can “cloud reason” and “colour memory”. But Earl Spencer has defended his book’s claims and criticised the royals’ statement as “below the belt”. Shorts Pre-released extracts, serialised in The Daily Mail, focused on claims about Charles’ reaction to Diana’s death, the alleged “lack of obvious care” for Prince Harry after the funeral, and the claim that Diana tried to call off her engagement to Charles. Now that the book is available, The i Paper took a closer look at some of the other most eye-catching claims. Spencer describes Charles acting like a ‘petulant’ child Earl Spencer described Charles as acting like a “petulant” child in the book. Charles is said to have told the author that he was “lucky” to be inheriting the Althorp estate while still in his twenties. According to Earl Spencer, Charles told him: “You’re just so lucky – you know, inheriting when you’re so young. I mean, I’m 43 … and I employ fifty people … but my parents insist on treating me like – like a child!” Late Queen alleged to have said Charles was ‘resentful’ Queen Elizabeth II is alleged to have complained that her son Charles was “resentful”, according to Earl Spencer’s book. The author claims, via a courtier, that the late Queen said: “He always resents things. He even resented it when I taught him the alphabet.” Earl Spencer also includes a claim about Elizabeth’s response to the news that Diana was involved in an accident. “When the Queen had heard the first news of Diana’s being in a traffic accident, she had asked tetchily, ‘What is she up to now?’” he wrote. “This, before the seriousness of it all became clear.” Diana suspected Charles had ‘tryst’ with Camilla on train Diana suspected that Charles may have had a “tryst” with Queen Camilla, according to the book. The suspicion followed a press report in 1980 which claimed Charles was seen with a blonde woman on the royal train. “The thrust of the exclusive was that Charles had, disgracefully, used the publicly funded vehicle for a tryst with Diana,” wrote Earl Spencer. Charles and Diana at a polo game in 1983 (Photo: Princess Diana Archive/Getty) Diana was “shocked” by the article, according to the author. “As it was not Diana, then who was the blonde?” he wrote. “After her marriage took the direction it did, Diana became convinced that she must have been Camilla Parker-Bowles – particularly as the railway siding was just 19 miles from Camilla’s home.” Law firm offered to help him sue over Diana crash Earl Spencer also claims that a law firm offered to help him, Prince William and Harry sue over the crash that killed Diana in France. Earl Spencer said he received a letter which said: “A legal action on behalf of the children or any other member of the family might be considered.” He said that he did not reply to the letter. Spencer apologies over Piers Morgan claim Earl Spencer has apologised to broadcaster Piers Morgan for an “incorrect” assumption made about the broadcaster in the book. Morgan had read out a section of Spencer’s book related to him on his YouTube show Piers Morgan Uncensored, before threatening to sue the author. The passage read: “I assumed Morgan must be feeling particular guilt because, four years earlier, he and his Sunday Mirror counterpart had published photographs taken with hidden cameras by a gym owner. They were of Diana working out in a leotard.” Earl Spencer says Prince Harry is ‘completely fine’ with his new book (Photo: Dominic Lipinski/AFP) However, Morgan said the photos were printed by the Sunday Mirror in November 1993 – before he joined the newspaper. “I joined the Daily Mirror in October in 1995.” The broadcaster said: “My question though is this, if Earl Spencer can be so incredibly, defamatorially wrong about such basic facts involving me, well, why should we believe anything else he puts in this book? … Earl Spencer, you’ll be hearing, and your publishers, from my lawyers.” A statement released by Spencer’s representatives acknowledged that Morgan had “pointed out that he did not join the Daily Mirror until October 1995”. It added: “As an historian, accuracy is important to Earl Spencer. He therefore wishes to clarify that his assumption was incorrect. Earl Spencer apologises to Mr Morgan for this error.” Earl Spencer has been contacted for comment on Morgan’s remarks. The earl has also said that Harry is “completely fine” with the memoir. He told People that William and Harry were in the book “as examples of two little boys who had the most exceptional mother”, adding: “I’m not in any way compromising their privacy at all.” Earl Spencer, responding to Buckingham Palace’s pushback on his claims about what Charles said to him after Diana’s death, told the BBC: “I can tell you here and now, those are exactly the words he said.” He has also denied being vengeful. “I don’t hold resentments,” he told CBS Sunday Morning. “I’m not a vengeful, resentful person. I’m just an eyewitness to history.” Buckingham Palace has declined to comment on the latest revelations and referred back to Wednesday’s initial statement. Earl Spencer was approached for further comment.