Prince Harry turned down an offer “good enough for Hollywood royalty” when he decided against staying at a royal residence at King Charles‘ invitation, a royal expert has claimed.
Sources claimed the Duke could have stayed at St. James’ Palace – minutes from where the monarch is based – after requesting to stay in a royal residence, but instead opted to stay at a Mayfair hotel without the protection offered by the central London compound.
Speaking on the Daily Mail’s Palace Confidential podcast, Palace expert Richard Eden blasted the decision, saying: “Look, we have Hollywood royalty, we have Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones… they have a flat at St James’s Palace.
“It’s good enough for Hollywood royalty, but not good enough for this minor royalty in California,” he added.
Daily Mail’s Royal Editor Rebecca English noted that “Princess Beatrice lives there, Princess Anne – that’s where she has her offices and the apartment that she says in when she’s in London overnight.
READ MORE: Harry statement that made Charles ‘furious’ deleted from royal website
She said there had never been a single concern raised “from anybody about the security there, ever.”
Meanwhile, the Mail on Sunday’s Editor at Large Charlotte Griffiths said the move made the Prince look “petulant and paranoid”, and said that he “needs to get over it.”
The Duke of Sussex returned to London earlier this month, but did not reunite with his father during the brief visit.
Royal expert Ingrid Seward told the Mirror: “When Prince Harry turned down his father’s offer to stay at a royal residence during his three-day trip to London in May, it was a surprise to the royal household.
“The King was aware Harry had no UK base. He could not fail to be aware Harry was unduly anxious about security.”
Explaining further about Harry‘s decision, royal broadcaster Helena Chard recently told Fox News Digital: “He could have stayed at St James’ Palace, a stone’s throw away from Clarence House, where the King is usually based.
“Harry turned down staying in a palace, where he would have received armed security protection from the SO14 Royalty Protection Group. He chose to stay at a hotel in Mayfair without this protection.
“Not only would he have received armed security protection, but there is a far higher chance that he would have seen his father. It worries me that Prince Harry has deeper-rooted problems, most likely related to his mother, as I feel his behaviour is beyond strange.
“I am, however, aware that his behaviour keeps the victim narrative alive, a narrative which maybe he feels serves a purpose at this time.”
A representative for Prince Harry has been approached for comment.