Friday, 17 October 2014

William and Kate Photographed at Doctor's Appointment

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were photographed attending a doctor's appointment after dark in London on 15 October. Three photos can be viewed in their entirety at NY Daily News; the website has obtained exclusive rights to them.

NY Daily News Screenshot

It would seem the couple were visiting Dr. Alan Farthing for Kate's first trimester scan, suggesting the Duchess is now twelve weeks pregnant. Upon departure, Prince William was seen clutching an envelope, most likely containing images of the scan. The Duchess was all smiles as she made her way inside and I must say, it is simply wonderful to see her looking happy and well, considering the very difficult time she's been experiencing with Hyperemesis gravidarum.

Alan Farthing assisted Sir Marcus Setchell during Kate's first pregnancy and since Sir Marcus's retirement has been the Queen's surgeon-gynaecologist. Assisted by obstetrician Guy Thorpe-Beeston, a specialist in high risk pregnancies, he has been supervising Kate's pregnancy and will continue to do so. Below we see Sir Marcus (in the middle) and Dr Farthing leaving the Lindo Wing after Prince George's birth.


If it was indeed the twelve week scan, we can expect to hear official confirmation from Kensington Palace any day now confirming the month William and Kate's second child will be born. It is thought the baby is due in late April - close to the couple's fourth wedding anniversary which takes place on 29 April.

It is the first time the Duchess has been spotted publicly since the pregnancy announcement six weeks ago and she last carried out an engagement on 5 August, when she visited the poppy installation at the Tower of London with William and Harry. Kate has been spending much of her time at her parents' home in Bucklebury under the supervision of doctors.


Kate was suitably attired for the rainy evening in what appears to be a black cape or a black cape jacket with a turtleneck underneath. Due to the low quality of the photos, it is very difficult to discern the exact items the Duchess wore. However, the eagle-eyed Ashley came up with some very likely possibilities. Libélula's Black Clasp Jacket is one such possibility. The merino wool £335 garment is a practical yet stylish piece.

Libelula

Pieces from Temperley London's Honeycomb Collection are also strong possibilities. The Duchess already owns at least two of the tunics. Below we see the Honeycomb Tunic and the very comfortable looking Honeycomb Cape.

Temperley London

For those hoping to 'Repli-Kate' the look, the good news is capes and cape jackets are very much in for the Autumn/Winter season. Comfortable, chic and wearable, they offer a stylish option for the unpredictable and chilly seasons. Below we look at the Mango's £80 Wool Blend Cape, Joseph's Cashmere Cape and Ted Baker's Embellished Cape.


Kate wore her trusty jeans, probably by J Brand or Zara and her Aquatalia New Dry Fur Trim Wedge Ankle Boots, also known as the Neptune Boots.


Readers will recall Kate debuted the boots last December during a visit to Shooting Star Hospice and teamed them with the Reiss 'Delaney' Jacket and navy corduroy pants. The entire look divided readers, especially the boots. Have they grown on you since?


Again, it is excellent to see Kate looking so well and we do hope she is feeling better. HG is incredibly unpredictable and it appears it's been much tougher for her with this pregnancy. The Palace confirmed Kate will join William on Tuesday, 21 October to greet Singapore's president at the Royal Garden Hotel. Below we see the Duke and Duchess with President Tony Tan and his wife Mary Chee Bee Kiang during the 2012 royal tour.


Given the hotel's close proximity to Kensington Palace and the brevity of the engagement we may very well see Kate join her husband, however, it entirely depends on how she's feeling. The Palace were eager to stress "she very much hopes to undertake the engagement" and "it will be reviewed closer to the time".


With all this talk of royal babies, we leave you with a look at oh-so-adorable Prince George who graces the cover of Majesty Magazine.

Majesty Magazine

We hope you all have a fantastic weekend and thank you for reading! :)

156 comments:

  1. Yes indeed...it *is* nice to see her looking so happy and well. And with hubby at her side, I might add! :))))

    And the cover with George is just too cute!! How kissable is that face?!

    Also, I do like the Black Clasp jacket. Very nice...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kim from Washington17 October 2014 at 04:45

    Thank you Charlotte for this hopeful posting... Blessings all around.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Pauline Oak Hills17 October 2014 at 04:48

    Thank you for the new post. It was great to see William & Kate together at last. Kate looked well and very happy. William looked happy but had a concern look on his face. Looked like he was carryinvg an evelope, maybe pictures of the baby/babies. Maybe Kate looked so happy that it was a girl or two girls but we will never know until she delivers. We can only hope for the best for Willi & Kate. Hope she continues to feel better and we will get to see her and William together on the 21st and maybe even in New York if that rumor is true. Would love to see George but they are keeping him under wraps.
    Well I am still recovering from my accident. It has been slow and pissing me off...lol

    Charlotte is there anything on the move to there country home?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kate, Texas, USA17 October 2014 at 05:36

    It's wonderful to see Kate out and looking well (at the moment). Hoping for her sake that she is doing better health wise. William looks to have a big smile on the picture when they're leaving. Praying the appointment was great and the little baby is strong and well. Wondering if they'll find out the sex or if it will be a surprise like last time? We should do a poll on here like last time. That was fun! Maybe the baby will arrive on the Queen's birthday? Congrats to Will and Kate and cheers to the 2nd trimester being here!

    I really like the selection of could be capes and tunics above. I guess I'm desperate for seasons and a real winter here in south Texas. :) Boots are cute, but I didn't care for the outfit selection on Kate's visit to Shooting Star Hospice. Obviously, wardrobe wasn't the focus that day and that's a good thing. What was completely great about that day is the happiness of the children. I just remember the little girl pictured above saying the cutest and funniest things to Kate. Such a precious doll!

    George's kissy lips and cute cheeks are adorable on the magazine cover! He's going to be a great big brother! I'm really looking forward to seeing Kate on Tuesday. In the meantime, it was great to see these pics. My daughter has her storybook parade at school tomorrow and she is going to be Queen Elizabeth. Her book is called The Queen's Hat. She is SO excited and we had a great time putting her outfit together! Where's Angela Kelly when we need her though? :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Come visit me in January, Kate - I'd love to share a Minnesota winter with you. ;o)

      Delete
    2. Kate, your daughter's school project seems great fun. Would love to see a picture of the hat!

      Delete
    3. Kate, Texas, USA19 October 2014 at 06:44

      Julie, I would LOVE to come visit in January! My kids have begged for years to see snow....real snow! Jean, I would love to show you a picture, but not sure how. I'll describe the outfit and hat and hopefully you get a good visual for now. She looked so cute, or in her words "so beautiful"! She wore a peach dress and jacket with a soft flowered blouse that tied in front. Black gloves, pocketbook, and shoes. The hat - peach, large rimmed with a soft pink bow tied to the side (sounds like it clashed, but really looked quite nice) It had several large flowers in front going around to the side of the hat. She was SO proud of her hat. She had such a great time! I am going to print out a picture from the day and she wants to send it to the Queen with a letter. We'll see if she gets a response. :)

      Delete
    4. Pauline Oak Hills19 October 2014 at 22:38

      Jujlie Maybe we should have our reunion at your house in January...lol

      Delete
    5. Kate I'm in north Texas and I know exactly what you mean about the weather.

      Delete
    6. Theresa. New York20 October 2014 at 14:33

      @ Kate: Send the letter to the Queen. I was a young girl when the Queen's father died. I sent her a letter of condolence and I got a reply starting with: The Queen commands me...". I was thrilled and I still have it 60 years later. Send it. You might be surprised!

      Delete
  5. Well, she was smiling,:) So is she having a girl? That can be hard to state with accuracy at 12 weeks or twins? Who knows but at least it looks like all is progressing well despite the illness. So yeah!!! Glad she felt well enough to travel for an appointment.
    Ali

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kate, Texas, USA19 October 2014 at 07:04

      Ali, I was just thinking they could have a blood test to determine the sex of the baby if they wanted, so they possibly could know boy or girl now. When I was pregnant with my daughter back in 2005, I was considered high risk and was asked to participate in a study when they take blood from the mom to determine the sex and possible other chromosomal abnormalities. It's called cffDNA. It was very expensive 9 years ago, but not sure how expensive it is now. Apparently many European hospitals use it, but it's not commonly used here in the States yet. Anyway, there's a small % of the baby's DNA in the expectant mother's bloodstream...x or y chromosomes detected. I knew at 8 weeks I was having a girl. They also did it with my 3rd, a boy. The test was accurate both times. So yep, they might know if Prince George will have a brother or sister right now. Who knows if they'll find out or be surprised as they said they were with George. Kudos to them for being so patient and being surprised with George. I couldn't stand not knowing and found out with all four of mine...LOL!!!

      Delete
  6. Any way to tell who snapped the photos? I looked for a photo credit and didn't see one. Interesting that it showed up in a NY - US paper and not a UK one -- a result of W&K recent complaint about pap shots?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was a New York paper that shot these photos. I think they stepped out line on these. Can't a person go to her OB?GYN with having photos taken. They also say these were ofter to the UK papers but were turned down. I wonder why???
      I do wonder if there really is someone on the inside leaking this information. How in the world would they know when and where her drs appt. would be. I hope they find these people or person and have them arrested for leaking information. And I bet every person who works for the royal family signs something saying they will not leak information.

      Delete
    2. Arrested?? Please, let's keep some perspective here . . . leaking information regarding your employer's whereabouts is generally NOT a criminal act. I'm sure the royal family's employees have signed non-disclosure agreements, so if someone breaches that, Williams & Kate have the option of suing for breach of contract (and we know William knows his way to the courthouse). I think it's quite dangerous though to suggest that people should actually be arrested for leaking information about the royal family. These people are "royal" through a fortuity of birth or marriage, they're special for no other reason. We're long past the time where kings could throw whomever they wished into the Tower, let's not go back to THOSE days!

      Delete
    3. Maybe the clinic - secretary, receptionist who knows ......
      Simone

      Delete
    4. Agree, they ought to be consistent and sue even though it is a nice situation. We shouldnt support those creepy papz.

      Delete
    5. Rebecca - Sweden18 October 2014 at 14:53

      My guess is maybe some lucky person just getting some snaps of them. But most likely is that some paparazzi went round the neighborhood asking (read:paying) people to alert him if the see Kate going in there. This seems most likley since the pictures is of them leaving, which gives the paparazzi time to get there.

      Delete
    6. I would think a pap would take better photos than those. Therefore I think they are from a camera phone.

      Delete
    7. Rebecca - Sweden18 October 2014 at 20:30

      In the rain and in the dark from afar? You probably wouldn't get this good pictures with a camera phone I think.

      Delete
  7. thank you for update looking forward seeing the duchess on duty

    ReplyDelete
  8. Surely Catherine should be free to visit the doctor without photographers lurking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sarah from Calif.19 October 2014 at 02:40

      Jean , We can only hope .....

      Delete
  9. I just checked Yahoo UK and Daily Mail and I can't see this story. Anyone know why the British media isn't printing this story yet? Have the RF asked them not to?

    The Duchess looks really, really well. I'm thinking she'll be able to start work any day now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How can you tell that from these dark, grainy photo's. Very good eyes.

      Delete
    2. anon from Leominster20 October 2014 at 01:53

      Some of the other blogs that have printed the pictures, let you click and enhance them considerably.

      Kate looks quite healthy in the photos and she is moving swiftly with great assurance - not like she is weak or shaky - as she looked previously when she came out of hospital and the two women I have known with H.G. looked. If judging from the photos alone, I would say the worst is past. Whether that means she feels up to greeting the Malaysians is hard to say.

      I am a bit surprised at reports Kate is still losing weight because she doesn't look gaunt in the photos but there are all sorts of strange reports out there, and it is hard to be certain.

      However, seek those sites out (all reputable sites from the States where they have better acess to the photos - a simple Google will do it) and you won't need that good vision.

      Delete
    3. Hello Anon from Leo,

      For copyright reasons, the images cannot be published in their entirety. I have included a link at the very top of the post which takes readers to NY Daily News, where the photos can be viewed properly. Tumblr sites can do this but for the majority of bloggers it would be incredibly risky but if I had the opportunity to license them I would be delighted for readers to have the opportunity to enhance them. Unfortunately, they are exclusively licensed by NY Daily News.

      Delete
    4. anon from Leominster20 October 2014 at 04:03

      Know what you're saying, Charlotte which is why I didn't mention where I saw them. (One might be a tumblr - I'm a trifle hazy on these distinctions. Other than your site, I mostly drift around.) If anyone get in trouble, I hope it won't be from me. And I absolutely wouldn't expect or want you to risk it!!! Your blog is so much more than posting some pictures.

      Delete
  10. These pics make me think of TRH of Cambridge as just a regular normal happy couple. They really seem so down to eat here. Very lovely and happy

    ReplyDelete
  11. So good to see Kate after so long an absence, even if the photos are very small. Prince George is so cute and I trust his little brother(s) or sister(s) will be as cute as him. :) I put some "s" just in case. One never knows. :)
    Fantastic post Charlotte! You made my day!

    Monica, France

    ReplyDelete
  12. It's lovely to see Kate after such a long time!!:-)))

    ReplyDelete
  13. Prince George is going to lead everyone on a merry chase....he is so precociously adorable!

    I sure hope Catherine in on the mend. Thanks for the pre-weekend update.

    Mel in SoCal

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hello Charotte,
    Thank you once again for the interesting & informative post. It is great news if Kate is on the mend...appears from the pics she may be :) Hopefully we will see some more pics soon when William & Kate join the Sinapore President & his wife.
    Charlotte, I hope you have an enjoyable weekend. Best regards, Linda

    ReplyDelete
  15. If you zoom in, you can see slushy snow on the ground. These are not current photos as it is not snowing in London yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't understand the slush comments. It's raining... rain collects. Are you thinking these photos are from winter 2013??

      Delete
    2. I can't see any slush, just rain.

      Delete
    3. Looks to me like rain as well. Not cold enough to snow as Will only has on a sweater - no coat. Sorry Stephanie, No issue here for you to rabble rouse..

      Delete
    4. It looks like slush, but it is dark so maybe not. I don't know what "rabble rouse" is, are you trying to say I caused trouble just because I thought the pictures might be old cause the ground looked white? Take it easy, Anon :)

      Delete
    5. I love to raise a good rabble, actually. And enjoy reading others who do the same. Are you the Anonymous who's been posting similar comments recently? The ones that always end with digs at the posters? Because what you are doing is cowardly -- not putting a name on a comment designed to incite someone; calling someone out by name yet hiding behind the veil of anonymity. Very poor form and certainly does not start the constructive discussion some people here actually do strive for.

      Delete
    6. rabble-rouser
      noun
      a person who speaks with the intention of inflaming the emotions of a crowd of people, typically for political reasons.

      Delete
    7. I provided the definition, but I am not the Anon who used the term 'rabble rouse.' The pictures look wet but not icy.

      Delete
    8. Does it matter if you aren't the anonymous who made the original statement? You're anonymous, and you're all the same.

      Delete
    9. I just have to say rabble rouse is now my new favorite word!!! :)
      I shall try and use it more frequently in sentences now.

      Delete
    10. Yes, bluhare, it matters, because the dictionary definition I copied may not be exactly what Anon 02:56 meant. I was simply answering Stephanie's need for a meaning for the term, not speaking for the person who originally used it.

      LOL, Blair!

      Delete
    11. You miss my point, or ignored it, not sure which. Either way, it doesn't matter.

      Delete
  16. Irrespective of when these photos were taken, can we at least consider not supporting the paparazzi by not posting any offf-duty photos? Or even acknowledging them? This should not be limited to just Tanna - ALL paparazzi make a living off of stalking, determining favourite hotspots and schedules of those of interest. That is what they ALL do. There are no "ok" paparazzi photos. If we are true fans of Will and Kate, we will honour them this and support them in this way. We know they have voiced upset over photos of them in public, even without George around.

    Anyways, hope Kate is feeling up to the event coming up, would be nice to see her looking and feeling fresh and revitalized.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They are not private citizens and they were on a public street. I really don't think these photos are over the top in the intrusive department.

      Delete
    2. I agree royalfan!

      Delete
    3. I would have had an issue if the photos were taken inside the clinic at the appointment itself .... But they weren't ..... Simone

      Delete
    4. That is the arguement when they have voiced upset in the past, but they still complain. It doesnt make sense but maybe we should give them what they want for a while?

      Delete
    5. The problem with that, Stephanie, is it is not a good solution in the long run. If no one cares about the BRF which is what will happen if they aren't seen, then the BRF dies. Poor Charlotte's already reduced to using pap shots as article starters because nothing is happening. I know she's pregnant and not feeling well now, Anonymous before you rush in to name call, but she wasn't for a month. Which is why I have such a hard time with her office announcing and cancelling appointments. They weren't announcing anything when she could work.

      Delete
    6. bluhare, I don't think the RF is in danger of not being cared about. Some family members are more popular than others, but as a whole I think people care at *some* level. Just look at the stir a grainy photo or two can generate...

      Delete
    7. I do after the queen dies, royalfan. She's what's holding it together right now. And if William doesn't look to the future, there won't be much left to hold together. Whether he likes it or not, he's the future of the monarchy, IMO, and if he doesn't care then it doesn't bode well.

      Delete
    8. Bluhare, do agree with you here. The royals are popular in polls but much of that has to do with the security and popularity and longetivity of the queen herself. I would think it's safe to say a majority of Britons can't recall life under any other monarch. If you're under 60, you don't remember any other monarch. She represents continuity and stability.
      I think Charles will inherit some of that good will plus he's a very hard worker and appears to be very caring and concerned and genuinely interested in people when he's out in public.
      I'm not so sure about William. At best he seems lukewarm about his royal duties (though he and Kate do seem to enjoy the perks of the job!) and at worst, he's disinterested and indifferent about royal duties. I don't think that bodes well at all for the monarchy in the UK.
      As for the photos, I think it's tough to raise the conspiracy theory bait that these are old photos. And they are all on a public street, they're as public as if they were just walking down the street.
      You might want to ask yourselves, when you get done pontificating over the secret meaning of Kate's smile/William's frown, this - someone had to tip off the photographers that they'd be going into/coming out of the doctor's office at that specific time. Paps go where and when they know there's going to be a photo opportunity.
      That could very well have been Will and Kate's PR staff to stem the tide of increasing concern and comments about what exactly was wrong with Kate that she hadn't been seen out in public at all for two months.

      Delete
    9. I think it might have been Will and Kate directly also. Maybe just to let people know she was ok. Will may be taking a page from his Mom's book and tipping off the press. I'm glad she looks well.

      Delete
    10. Agree that the "institution" may well cease to be funded and exist, but frankly so what? If the members of the family are willing and happy to give up the funds and live different lives and have different jobs then good for them. If they enjoy their current roles and positions then I would assume they can figure it out. What would change for Britain without them in their current roles? Some fundraising and tourism dollars. Others can do those jobs. Why should any of them have to do that job if they choose to give up the money? If the Queen and Prince who came out of the era when the Royals last had a true political role were no longer alive the younger generation might long ago have said no more public monies. We are off to other jobs. Ali

      Delete
    11. I think tradition can really been a good thing. And the tradition in Britain is centuries old and can really be a force for unity. That's why I don't say "so what".

      Delete
    12. Bluehare I completely agree and understand but I also understand not wanting to "have to fulfill a destiny not of their ones own choosing" . Ali

      Delete
    13. anon from Leominster20 October 2014 at 06:20

      True, but I don't think they would be happy if they gave it all up tomorrow. The Duke of Windsor wasn't happy. Diana wasn't. Sarah has drifted, not too happily, with constant financial woes. The real world is harsh, even for the wealthy. Books have made it clear that Diana didn't really understand the real world - and when sometimes faced with it in later years, she was shocked.

      William and Kate are living in a pretty half and half world now. I suspect if William found out he had to fly helicopters until he was too old, working a normal schedule with normal holidays, all of a sudden the excitment would vanish and it would become a day to day job like the rest of us mortals - without many things being handed to him. Although William's wealthy, he's not that wealthy given their life-style. He would probably have to quit flying and look for something more lucrative.

      Since it's unlikely Charles would have the Duchy of Cornwall anymore - there would probably be a settlement and most would go to the state- he would no longer be able to pay for so much.

      William and Kate would be reduced to mere celebrities,with more hounding annoying press attention since there would be less control or deference, without perks or paid-for protection.

      A lot of cushioning would suddenly evaporate. Kensington Palace would no longer be an option, nothing breeds desire like not having something anymore. They would have to consider buying a hugely expensive London home or paying rent.

      The "annoying" staff handles a great deal that most of us have to cope with. Be careful what you wish for.... It is a world that William has never known and Kate barely does, since she has always been cossetted by her parents. They would need to grow up fast and like many trying to support stately homes, money would become an all absorbing issue.

      Minor royals do face these issues. Houses and jewels have had to be sold, taxes can send them reeling. Marie Antionette may have liked to play the milkmaid but she wouldn't have wanted to be a real milkmaid. Not that much has changed.

      Delete
  17. Amy, Detroit Michigan17 October 2014 at 20:32

    I do like me some glasses-wearing William!

    I think the boots and capes are super cute.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Stephanie, yes, good question about the slush.It hasn't snowed at all in London this season (we've actually been having unseasonably warm weather). Was this picture really taken recently? If not, maybe that's why the British media hasn't been reporting on this story?

    ReplyDelete
  19. The UK media aren't printing these photos because they are afraid of being sued by William. Many UK journalists are complaining about the fact that these pictures are apparently ok to be run by non UK publications, but not uk ones especially as it's being suggested that whoever took these pictures was given an insider tip off. It's also been confirmed that they were taken on 15th October. The palace hasn't said a word about them. This hypocrisy on the part of WK is causing friction for UK media especially because of its inconsistency. Either pap pics are allowed or not. Either certain private events are allowed or not. Picking and choosing according to PR image will backfire in the long run. Acquitaine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's an interesting topic on its own, Acquitaine. Do you suppose WIlliam's actually got a cunning plan (with apologies to BlackAdder) and this is his way to divide and concquer the UK media?

      Delete
    2. anon from Leominster19 October 2014 at 01:30

      Willism is playing a dangerous game if this is the case because, as with any intimidation, well-meaning or no, it is easy to overplay your hand.

      File a case and lose it and you are lost forever, the press will take such a loss as open season and will publish everything. You only want to bring cases you are certain you will win. (Such as the French photos.)

      Use too many threats and suddenly the wall cracks. Some paper decides what the hell - the benefits they getting from being in favour aren't worth it, and publishes anyway. Then everyone does, and it is impossible to shut everyone out. When the photos are on the Internet within hours, trying to bar them from the British press seems pointless.

      The British press was badly shaken by the recent scandals but that, so to speak, is now yesterday's news and the caution that followed in the wake of that mess won't last forever.

      You also don't want to be shut out of the more favourable press. I remember Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones were constantly in Hello!, all favourable publicity. Then they sold the rights to their wedding to another magazine and when Hello! published bad snaps, sued. No doubt, they felt there was no choice. They won the case but it looked to me like they lost the war; all of a sudden you saw nothing of them in Hello! when they would have wanted to be seen. It's a bit like the baby and the bathwater.

      So if I were William, I would be careful not to get too far in grievance with the press. At the moment, William and Kate are the golden ones. But all the public knows is what the press publishes, and I mention Prince Andrew yet again as a cautionary tale of a once very popular royal who got bombarded with bad publicity -- justified or not --- and was out of public favour in the wink of an eye. That he was older and not the draw that he once was didin't help.

      William needs to make his peace with the press while he is at the top of his game because the photographers aren't going anywhere. They will always be part of his life, for better or worse.

      Delete
    3. Addition to the 2018 Oxford Dictionary:

      Will'ism (n): The tendency to threaten a lawsuit, especially regarding privacy, without being wholly sure of the outcome.

      Delete
    4. Bluhare: Snap! LOL! Acquitaine.

      Delete
    5. bluhare, I do understand where you're coming from, but I think everyone has a raw nerve, no? And this issue is William's. It's not like he doesn't have a good reason.

      Delete
    6. William will never make peace with the press for one good reason, he holds them responsible for the death of his mother. Furthermore they have not left his son alone. You don't harass a baby or their nanny. Children are off limits unless the parents are with them or give the ok to that a photo.

      Delete
    7. The press have left George alone for the most part. I have seen very few photographs of him at all, and mostly the official ones.

      William is using this, and royalfan I think William's raw nerve would be better served by taking on the case of drinking before driving. and also the security measures of Al Fayed, and whether you should wear a seatbelt in the back seat of a car. From what I know, the British RPO's would have required it. and Diana would probably be alive today had she had hers buckled.

      William is a public figure. He and his family will be photographed. Yes, I think that unreasonable intrusion should be dealt with, but he knows he can't go out without being photographed, he knows his son can't go out without being photographed, and his wife can't go out without being photographed. It is a fact of life for them; they know it. I think his ire is best served by going after unreasonable intrusion, which would be when they're photographed when having a "reasonable" expectation of privacy.

      Delete
    8. Anon I give u credit for the first part of your comment, why Will hates the press! But qhere is the proof, the pap who is accused of harassment had a great relationship wth the Middletons, suddenly the pap starts harassing the kid. I want proof until then lets not judge. William starts to paint the world black and white OI do not agree. Blue 79

      Delete
    9. Rebecca - Sweden19 October 2014 at 20:00

      Bluhare - Logically, you are right. But the fact is that things like that don't work logically.

      Delete
    10. Rebecca, you're right too. However, there's a time and a place and there's also plenty of evidence that shows William didn't like photographers a long time before his mother was killed. I totally understand that; I would hate it. But that's his life, and for better or worse IMO he should accept it and move on to something where he could actually accomplish something.

      Delete
    11. Rebecca - Sweden19 October 2014 at 23:37

      I agree with you. Just saying, sometimes we're our worst enemy and that seems to be the case with William and photographers. It is a legit thing to hate for him. But at some point that hate has to be left at mumbling around the dinner table, and put on a happy (or at least indifferent) mask. Use the press back and for good instead, like Harry seems to be doing.

      Delete
    12. I think so too, Rebecca. William should leave it to mumbling and ranting at the dinner table (thank you for that visual!). You said it very well. For what it's worth, I do have sympathy for William, but he does himself no good sometimes.

      Delete
    13. Maybe after he rescues a few people in drunk driving accidents he will come to a better place mentally. I would not want to be his first assignment, or any of his assignments for that matter.

      Delete
    14. bluhare, I don't argue with the alcohol and seatbelt part of the equation where Diana's death is concerned. However...and this is a big however...the limo was being pursued by paps on motorcycles with camera flashes going off. If not for *that* part of it, it's quite possible that they would have made it to their destination safe and sound.

      And to be fair, can you imagine William taking on seatbelts and/or drunk driving? Yes, it is a very worthy cause and it would certainly get attention if he did so, but it would also be the equivalent of keeping Diana's memory alive in a way that some members of the firm would not appreciate. Two come to mind rather quickly...........

      Delete
    15. Yes someone mentioned that a while back, Moxie. Was it you? Good point about it whoever it was. This might be a way to exorcise a demon or two.

      Delete
    16. Not gonna do it, royalfan!

      Everyone else: She's trying to get me to talk about the "C" word. NOTGONNADOIT.

      Delete
    17. Okay, bluhare, no talk about the c-word. Point for you. But you didn't argue with me. Point for me. :))

      Delete
    18. Are we talking about the "c" word I think we're talking about? Goes along with another "c" word? C & C, two people in the RF, 1 of which is my least favorite "royal" of all time? Just curious, sorry. But I love a good mystery, and bluhare & royalfan, you're killin me here lol.

      Delete
    19. LOL, Jenn. That C word. Your least favorite royal. Royalfan's too. :)

      Delete
    20. Yes, Jenn, *that* royal. :)

      Delete
  20. Stephanie for such a strong voice against these photos why did you zoom in on them?
    I personally feel since the Cambridges are not very charitable to their followers and never release photos of themselves or the child then they are fair game for photos of this sort. I think if they were no so stubborn and really gave the issue thought they would see releasing photos would help them to win in court and more importantly in the public's mind against the photographers

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because I read somewhere else there was snow so I checked for myself.

      Delete
    2. Acquitaine, sorry but I'm still baffled. The UK media might not be publishing the photos because they are afraid of being sued, but that doesn't explain why they aren't publishing the story. For example, when those topless photos of the Duchess emerged, the UK media didn't publish the photos but they did publish the story about it. The RF can't stop the media from publishing true stories (unless there's an injunction) - this is freedom of speech. So why the UK media is not picking up this story I have no idea.

      Delete
    3. Sabby 00: since those pictures, the palace aka William has stepped up the threats and or complaints to the PCC. Many stories are being ignored by UK media these days as a result.

      Also, don't forget the Tanna threat was only last week. Many editors are jittery about pissing off the palace.

      It's very naive to think the palace doesn't have any control over the media.

      It's a combination of threats (legal) or complaints to the PCC. Both work to shut down a paper or remove the editor if followed through.

      An example of a story pulled after the fact post nude-in-francegate is the william with the middleton's Christmas 2012 pictures and story. Unfortunately, by the time he complained, the story was already up, BUT it was pulled from all UK media after his complaint came through. Same day.

      The way the palace work is to keep the editors in the fold. Anyone who traansgresses is put outside the fold. This means editors are able to verify all stories. It doesn't necessarily mean the palace will answer or verify, but that access is something UK Media value.

      And that is how the royal family suppresses and controls the media.

      William has taken to suing and or complaining so frequently that often stories and pictures that are available to non uk media are frequently ignored by uk media.

      Another easy check is the appearance of pictures online at sites like popsugar (a uk media site) which appear for a few hours and are pulled after KP complains. Ps KP is William's office. BP usually ignores these things. Next time look at where the complaint is coming from. If it says KP, that's directly coming from William. Acquitaine.

      Delete
    4. Not very charitable?
      Are we forgetting the birthday pictures? The two engagements in NZ/Aus George was present at? The mother's day picture? The (unexpected)christening video and photos? We have seen alot of George then we ever saw of William at the same age so I'm not sure where the "uncharitable" accusation is coming from

      Delete
    5. Oh, Courtnee, I'm sorry but I disagree. We did see pictures of William as a baby and toddler. A lot of them, as a matter of fact.

      Delete
    6. Courtnee, that was so wrong that I now have to say the four words I hate saying.

      I agree with royalfan.

      Delete
    7. I agree royalfan and bluehare :)

      Delete
    8. Thank you, bluhare, but I wish you would preface that with a "WARNING...you may want to sit down..." :))))

      Delete
    9. Stephanie, I wish I'd have waited for you to comment. Then I could have said something like "ditto" and royalfan wouldn't have noticed that I agreed with her. :)

      Delete
    10. Aquitaine, I get what you're saying, but how come just yesterday the UK media published a story that the Duchess is "reportedly" worried that staff are spying on her at Kensington Palace and that she does not feel comfortable living there? There's no proof that this story is true, and it's a story that doesn't make the RF look very good, and yet they published it. Why would they publish this unverified story, but not publish a proven true story of them visiting a doctor's office?

      Delete
    11. Sabby 00: why would they bother to sue or complain about a story that was untrue and clearly fiction?????

      William ONLY complains when a story is true. He ignores the fiction except where he has deliberately planted the fiction himself in order to weed out those in his circle talking to the press.

      In the latter scenerio, he won't and doesn't complain, but the untrue story is traceable to the person in his inner circle who he told the lie to, and that person is frozen out.

      He has been using that tactic for years.

      The UK media do make stuff up, but unless it's a libel, entire royal family ignores it.

      Stories that have truth in them will always get a reaction from William because he is so paranoid and sensitive to the media. It's funny because the media have, for the most part,been respectful whilst being vile to Harry and other members of the family and yet he is the one that complains the most and is the most litigious. Acquitaine.

      Delete
    12. bluhare, it might get easier if you say it more often. Just a thought................... :)))))))))))

      Delete
    13. You're funny, royalfan.

      Delete
    14. Acquitaine, I suspect you're right. It just seems so frivolous; in the photos of the Duke and Duchess leaving the clinic, they seem so happy and it's such an exciting event - the Duke and Duchess attending a scan of the future Royal baby. Why would you deny the British public a chance to see these happy photos? Why would you not want your adoring public hearing about how well the pregnancy is progressing, especially since much of the public had been worried about the Duchess' health? It's not as if the scan didn't go well - look at the Duchess' beaming smile. It seems so childish to withhold these photos. I also really dislike the way the RF manipulate the press. Either we have Freedom of Speech or we don't.

      Delete
    15. I don't recall Charles and Diana ever taking baby William on an engagement. I may be wrong on how much we see George vs how much we saw William but I still say Will and Kate have been generous with the George exposure

      Delete
    16. Baby William was taken to Australia, and had his picture taken on the lawn with Diana, I think at Government House in Sydney, as well as in the course of travel. William was also frequently photographed at home with his parents and eventually with his brother.

      Delete
    17. Yes, Anon 19:29. William accompanied C&D on their tour down under in 1983 and there were several official photo calls when he was a baby/toddler. In comparison, I would not refer to W&K as being "generous" with George.

      Delete
  21. Hello everyone,

    I've asked around and it seems the photos were 100% taken on 15 October.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I doubt these are paparazzi pictures, more likely snapshots taken with the phone of someone who happened to be there. The Daily News is basically a gossip rag, and they no doubt were happy to buy the photos, possibly from a tourist returning from London. It will be interesting to see if this predicts a due date in mid to late April.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Thank you for sharing the photos, fantastic! I can't seen to enlarge the photos at all, though to have a closer look!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Apologies, my 'zoomed' screen size made the photos very small on the link provided, I have now seen them in all their glory!

    ReplyDelete
  25. I must admit, that I think that William looks more 'handsome' with his contact lenses than wearing glasses. He's been pictured wearing them a few times recently, which makes me think that he wears 'soft' lenses, rather than gas-permeable ones.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Whatever the pics, I just noticed your word "Repli-Kate" about her looks and clothing, and I love it...guilty as charged!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Who would you like William and Kate to complain to about their picture in a US paper? I'm being serious. Would you like the UK ambassador to say something to the US government who would then speak to the free and Independent newspaper? We'd all have a good laugh about that. In the US the press works differently and the royal family has no influence whatsoever. They were in a public space.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. The BRF can hardly complain to the U.S. press. We have a first amendment here and no privacy laws (as they do in the UK). In the US the right of the press trumps any possible right of privacy; the laws are simply different than they are in the UK, so the D&DoC could hardly complain to the embassy or the papers directly. That's so absurd it is laughable.

      Delete
    2. LOL, Moxie, but isn't it muddled a bit as the photographs were taken in England and presumably sold to the US publication? That's similar to what happened in France and I think their suit is still in process there, although Kate isn't naked in these shots :). I find it hard to believe that the NY Daily Mail just happened to have a staff photographer lurking outside her doctor's office so someone probably got tipped off, for money, and money changes everything. Doesn't it?

      Delete
    3. They were either tipped off or they monitored and choose to work with a press institution that would protect their anonymity - which US institutions will do. That's how a pap specializing in rare photos is going to continue to make a living -- and it is the UK press that will not get the hits/revenue such an exclusive can bring. That's an argument for the royal family to give their country's press exclusive photos that the family releases. It's good for UK business and it stops the value for the pap shots which favors a foreign market. A keen eye will note that the photos show them going in (middle photo where she is smiling) and then the photographer moved to a better vantage point and got the two shots coming out -- which is why I don't think it was just someone on the street. I'm not sure why they release the name of her doctor -- especially when he doesn't have a private entrance for them to use.

      Meanwhile, an interesting note is - these are just photos of people walking on a public street - what the US press will not do is publish nudity of anybody - you have to go to other foreign press and the internet for that.

      Delete
  28. Thanks, as always, for a lovely post, Charlotte! :o)

    ReplyDelete
  29. Someone earlier posted that they might have been snaps on a camera phone by a tourist or passer by and then sold, in todays world that is believable, or some pap who checked out the Docs office a few times a week and got lucky. Who knows but hard to sue as it is not a stalker as the other case, or someone trespassing etc. I do think there are lines that we, all of us think should be followed for our privacy, and ultimately our safety. All of us. I think W and C have been consistent and I am sure any lawsuits or complaints are being driven by their attorneys, with full understanding of the laws and peoples, all peoples, expectations of some privacy. Just my two cents. :) Ali

    ReplyDelete
  30. I am surprised to see Kate has put on weight. Isn't HG supposed to make you lose weight, if you're throwing up 30 times a day. She looks really healthy and well. I wonder who leaked the information about the doctor's visit. Was it with Kate and William's approval that the leak took place?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Lynn Georgia USA18 October 2014 at 15:03

    Charlotte, Will you revisit the photo of the three doctors leaving the hospital after the birth of George? Please identify them left to right for me. I don't know which is Setchell and which is Farthing. Is the third gentleman the high-risk obstetrician? Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know I'm not Charlotte, but Setchell is in the middle and Farthing is on the right. Not sure who the gentleman on the left is.

      Delete
    2. I think he was the neonatologist---cannot remember his name.

      Delete
    3. Kate, Texas, USA19 October 2014 at 06:30

      Lynn, his name is Guy Thorpe-Beeston. He is an obstetrician specializing in high risk pregnancies and is apparently helping treat Kate through this pregnancy also. Bluhare was correct on the others; Marcus Setchell is in the center and Alan Farthing is on the right.

      Delete
    4. Lynn Georgia USA19 October 2014 at 19:19

      Thanks to all!

      Delete
  32. anon from Leominster18 October 2014 at 18:28

    Hope Charlotte doesn't mind if I mention another blog but From Berkshire to Buckingham has an excellent analysis of these photos and concludes that they were taken just a couple of days ago. One point the author of that blogs makes is the doctor Kate is visiting is her present doctor, not her primary doctor with George who has since retired.

    I realise the laws concerning the press are different with more freedom in the States but it has always seemed ridiculous to me in these days, that the royal family attempts to bar photos in the UK when they are widely published abroad. I particularly refer to the pictures of Kate at church when she was pregnant with George which were picked up by Reuters and others. Soon they were everywhere but the legtimate British press had been asked not to publish them. When everyone can see them on the Internet, this is nonsense, and just encourages the gutter press. It is far better to have one standard that applies to all. Any other policy seems out of touch with the world today.

    As far as intrusiveness, there would have to be one standard that applies to all - celebrities can't be treated differently from William and Kate. I tend to agree with restrictions on photographing children and photos of adults where privacy was clearly expected (such as France) but pictures in public, taken on a public street, are fair enough. I have read of instances (not all with William and Kate) of photographers shouting offensively, and this strikes me as harassment. But photos taken at some distance, as these were, are another matter.

    I suspect they were taken by a professional since it would have taken quick action by a passer-by, but we don't know for sure. (The waiting car could tip someone off.) There is no way to stop casual photographers from selling their pictures so it just seems best to assume pictures like these are part of public life.

    As for Kate, there were recent reports that she has continued to lose weight but her face looks fairly healthy in these photos so who knows. The cape might make it appear she is more than twelve weeks but she has been known to use capes to mask how pregnant she is so again, who knows. I'm still betting on April. I don't recall the Palace announcing any due date in her last pregnancy, so not sure why it was expected that they would this time at twelve weeks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marci from Salt Lake18 October 2014 at 21:48

      I appreciate your thoughtful analysis of the issue of privacy vs. freedom of the press, Leo, and I agree with your conclusions. There is a definite line where people in an expected private setting should not be photographed without their consent, but people in a public setting should have no such expectation.

      I recall that the photographer who happened to see Kate entering the hospital to give birth to George consciously made the decision not to photograph her, and while that's fine for him and I'm sure agreeable to Kate and the rest of the RF, I would not have blamed him a bit if he had decided to take a shot. It's the principle of freedom of the press that I advocate, not necessarily that of embarrassing the royal family or Kate in particular at a moment when she must have been experiencing high stress. That particular incident was one showing clearly the complexities of the issue--complete freedom of the press in a public space still ought to be balanced by the subjective decisions of good taste and compassion and other virtues not readily apparent in today's press rooms. So while I am glad that photographer did not photograph Kate at that time, I do not believe she had a legal right to privacy at that moment, entering the hospital. Inside the hospital is a different story altogether. The same thing should apply to the issue of the church incident. Inside the church one expects a certain level of privacy, but outside I don't agree that the same expectation holds. Presumably tourists can go and photograph the church; the presence of other tourists who might be in the shot cannot stop the photograph; why should the presence of the Royal family stop other photographers? Oh--"they are not shooting the church, they are shooting the family" one could argue. Well, isn't the Royal Family supposed to be a tourist attraction? Aren't their photographs in the press at such functions one incentive to a certain type of tourist that is generally attractive to the British government?

      All this is to say I thoroughly enjoyed your post, Charlotte.

      Delete
    2. When Charlotte posts something (a new post, pictures...), I am confident that she has all her ducks in a row. I never doubted that they were taken last week.

      Marci, I'm not sure a US-based concept of freedom of the press applies on the other side of the pond. And I don't believe the BRF qualifies as a "tourist attraction". I do follow the RF and I admire the tradition, ceremony, etc., but I would not refer to the institution as a tourist attraction. Buckingham Palace, yes. Members of the RF, no.

      Delete
    3. I respectfully disagree royalfan. The members of the royal family are definitely a tourist attraction. Weddings, Jubilees, Trooping the Color, Order of the Garter, Foreign Tours, and even Christmas at Sandringham -- the attraction is the people, not the place. American commenters on this blog have specifically applied for and received tickets to Order of the Garter, for example.

      Delete
    4. Lynn Georgia USA19 October 2014 at 19:25

      As I remember it, the palace did announce July as the "due date" for George. I think the announcement came around the beginning of Kate's second trimester.

      Delete
    5. royalfan, sorry but I'd also respectfully disagree. Since the British royal family has no constitutional power and is only a figurehead monarchy, their only use to the UK taxpayers is in their tourism value.
      The British royals are unique and quaint even among the few remaining monarchies in the EU due to the queen's longetivity and their rather ancient protocol, their patronages, etc. That makes them a tourist attraction, as are the homes they live in such as Buck House, Windsor Castle, KP, Sandringham, Balmoral and Holyroodhouse. The fact that these are actual homes inhabited by the royals increases their tourism value.
      As Moxie pointed out, the monetary value they bring to the British government and businesses can be seen in revenue from events where they are in attendance like the weddings, the Jubilee celebrations, Trooping the Color and the State Opening of Parliament.
      That's why it's so important for Will and Kate to realize that they are public figures and the tradeoff for living the taxpayer-funded lives that they do (security, renovations at KP AND Anmer Hall, etc.) is that they are seen in public.
      I think the more reclusive and antisocial William and Kate choose to be over the years, the less likely it is that Parliament - especially the Commons, who represent the UK voters - will continue to fund them at the levels to which they are accustomed.
      Do they need protection and security? Absolutely. But with the personal fortune of Charles as well as William and Harry and Her Maj, no reason they couldn't foot all or part of that bill themselves.

      Delete
    6. Royalfan: I am with everyone else too as far as these people being a tourist attraction.

      As an example, 2 very important people died this month. The Dowager Duchess of Devonshire (the last Mitford Sister) and The Duke of Marlborough. Their homes Chatsworth House and Blehneim Palace respectively are bigger, have more history than most of the homes/palaces owned by the BRF. The families and dukedoms are illustrious and respected, and no one gives a toss about who occupies their homes, but crowds flock to see them. That is a true example of homes being tourist attraction whilst the occupants are not.

      I'd also add the dukes of Northumberland AKA the famous Percy family whose lineage is probably more ancient than the actual BRF, have a fabulous Castle (made famous by HARRY POTTER films as the setting for Hogwarts), their history is just as tantalising as that of BRF (who can forget Henry Percy being forbidden to marry Anne Boleyn) etc. Their homes attract tourists, the occupants do not. The Windsors, under Edward VII, set out on a deliberate policy to make themselves as visible as possible in order to hold onto the monarchy. Much of the public show eg Trooping the Colour in it's current form is his invention and it works because the royals are participants. Acquitaine.

      Delete
    7. Ladies, I understand what you are saying, I really do and I am not arguing with you. Goodness knows that I've been to England a few times and I too have done the typical "tourist stuff." It's just difficult for me to think of *people* (in this case, members of the royal family) as a tourist attraction. In my mind, they are not performing a role for our entertainment value. And I guess there is a very fine line there because of the pomp and circumstance involved.... I don't know...perhaps it's just the way my brain is processing the term "tourist attraction." :))

      Delete
    8. anon from Leominster20 October 2014 at 02:12

      I tend to agree with you Royalfan, yet that the royal family is a tourist draw is a frequent reason put forth for their exisitence. The counter argument is France and Versailles gets a many visitors but Versailles is something else again. (So I've heard, never made it there.)

      I have visited a number of stately homes though, both privately owned and Trust, and the difference is marked. "Lived in" homes even if they aren't very lived in, really do have a different feel. It's hard to put a finger on. I know the National Trust has increasingly moved to keep family members resident when possible or at least try to put family photos out, so I don't think it's just me.

      Having toured all the various royal palaces except Balmoral, they all do have a certain homely feel to them. That is helped by seeing photos of events going on in those room - and not just weddings and other hired events (although Buckingham Palace does have some of those.)

      Besides this, there is tremendous interest in the British monarchy all over the world as this blog shows. It leads people to want and come and try to catch some of the pageantry. That would be lost without a monarch.

      But it works both way. The monarch must be seen. Support can't be assumed. The monarchy really is a business these days and like any business, impressions count. While some here have suggested people are content just to know the RF is out there and assume they are working without proof, I would say that is less so with the young and with recent immigrants.

      Being in touch with the nation is the most important thing for the queen and her family as change can happen alarmingly quickly and not always with considered thought. (Just ask the House of Lords.) Once something is gone, it can be very difficult or impossible to restore. (Ask the former King of Greece.) It's much better not to risk it happening in the first place.

      Delete
    9. @ Elizabeth......

      The Queen has real constitutional powers. The monarch of the UK is not just a ceremonial figurehead.

      It Is Her majesty's government. A monarch can use the royal perogative if they so wish. The unique thing about our parliamentary system of government is the head of state chooses not to be involved in politics.

      How many heads of states do you know that are not involved in government...??

      As for the tourism aspect the mainly first world English speaking countries with real tourist dollars naturally gravitate towards Britain. I don't think an Australian/American/Canadian would visit Versaille as opposed to Buckingham palace etc

      Delete
    10. @Anon.

      The monarchy is most certainly not a "business"...!!!

      Delete
    11. As it happens, this American has been inside Versailles, and the palaces of Vienna and St. Petersburg and Stockholm, also Het Loo and the Sultan's palace in Istanbul, but not Buckingham Palace. Just a matter of timing and opportunity. She has seen the inside Windsor Castle.

      Delete
    12. I think it's unarguable that the Royal family do bring in overseas tourists and to the time of about £500m but as far as most Britons are concerned the Queen provides a sense of national identity and pride, maybe you have to be British to understand that but she is much loved and revered and we would never think of her as a Tourist Attraction :-) Plus she is one of the most trusted and respected individuals globally and that doesn't hurt British overseas trade and relations either. That does always raise the question in my mind of what next .... Ie after the Queen departs us and it does concern me, but then there is little point in worrying about something that is far out of my control.
      Simone

      Delete
  33. SkyKing, Iowa, USA19 October 2014 at 00:26

    Thanks for the post! While I don't care for these boots, it is great to see a smiling Kate and a progressing pregnancy for this couple - which is much more important than the footwear.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Regarding the non-photographing of Kate entering the hospital, in the early stages of labour with Prince George in July 2013, I do wonder if the photographer was being entirely honest when he told the media that he decided not to photograph Kate for reasons of 'decency' and so on. It doesn't entirely 'ring true'. (considering that's his profession) Perhaps he was worried about a lawsuit etc. and did not want to jeopardise his career? Perhaps the couple's bodyguards remonstrated with him? Maybe he thought it would benefit him more NOT to photograph her and instead raise his profile by giving interviews to the press explain why he didn't?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jane London: that particular photographer is on record boasting about the non published photos he holds that he hasn't sold for the sake of the couple's privacy. He is frequently given exclusives by the couple and has had that access for a decade now. I think (given his track record) that he took a picture, but decided not to publish. I think these unpublished pictures are his pension plan and or set for a tell all book which he keeps threatening to write. Acquitaine.

      Delete
    2. Yes, I suspect that most people assumed the "decency" had more to do with the photographer's circumstances than a "higher" personal conflict.

      Delete
    3. Acquitaine: Thanks for your clarification.

      Delete
  35. Prince George, who was born knowing how to wave the Queen's wave, also now knows how to make what she calls her Miss Piggy face. What a royal stare on that Majesty cover!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now that you mention it...absolutely! :)

      Delete
  36. Ive read a few articles that state kate is having a girl...and that she found this out at a 12 week scan? This may sound a little graphic but medically speaking, the fetus has a tail at twelve weeks. Its called a zygote. There really isnt any proof of sex until 20 weeks. I believe and I could be wrong, that it is impossible to differentiate between the sexes at this stage in pregnancy. Its pure speculation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Long time no see, jenndog!

      Delete
    2. Can't they tell by blood work or other test what the sex is at that stage?

      Delete
    3. Bluhare, I still read the comments section a lot. I dont comment because you say what im feeling most of the time, lol. Seriously though, I still get a good laugh from you and royalfan!

      Delete
    4. But mostly me, right? ;)

      Delete
    5. bluhare.............. LOLOL

      Delete
    6. You're welcome, royalfan. :)

      Delete
    7. Kate, Texas, USA20 October 2014 at 04:31

      Jenndog, I responded to Ali's comments above, but there is a blood test that Kate could have done to find out the sex now. I found out with my daughter and son both at 8 weeks. There are traces of the baby's DNA in the mother's bloodstream. I went in to a bit more explanation above, but yes, they could know boy or girl at this time.

      Delete
    8. Jennifer from Wisconsin20 October 2014 at 16:03

      Hi Ladies! :)
      I found out in August my daughter was a girl and was due January 2nd. So I agree Jenndog~ It's all speculation. Doubt they'll tell anyway. The only bit of a secret/privacy they can have must make it more fun.

      Hope everyone is doing great.

      Delete
    9. Jennifer from Wisconsin20 October 2014 at 16:08

      Anonymous~ I am not an expert but I have two girls and they used an ultrasound each time to tell us. I gave enough blood (to make a vampire happy) for testing everything else but never had it used for that.
      Announced April ~ YAY ~ That probably means 12 weeks and she's feeling better too.
      Happy Day to all!

      Jennifer

      Delete
    10. Thank you for all the informative replies everyone. I had no idea that it was possible to tell the sex through a blood test, but I still think the press is trying to jam their inaccuracies down our throats. I sincerely doubt that they know what the duchess is having.

      Delete
  37. at the moment i think ikon has many lawsuit in the past months i think the palace suit his photos for tailing george in park with nanny it hard to know the sex of the baby and or they can know if their expecting twins

    ReplyDelete
  38. Kate, Texas, USA20 October 2014 at 04:43

    Charlotte, any thoughts on hearing an announcement from the Palace over the next couple days? Thinking after these pictures were published and if Kate is well enough to make the scheduled engagement on Tuesday, the palace might announce the month Kate is due. Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  39. It's official---the baby is expected in April. and though the Duchess continues to suffer from HG she is improving and will undertake 2 engagements tomorrow---the one already announced and a visit to the Natural History Museum in the evening

    ReplyDelete
  40. Confirmed: Kate's baby is due in April. This is on our news in the US this morning. They even called her the former Kate Middleton. The Palace said she is 'steadily improving.' Progress all around.

    ReplyDelete
  41. woo-hoo we've got a due date! April.

    Mel in SoCal

    ReplyDelete
  42. Deanne from Canada30 October 2014 at 21:59

    Quick Question: Does it appear uncanny that the Mappin & Webb Fortune (double ring with white and yellow gold) pendant has not made any reappearances but now is 'replaced' by another Mappy & Webb "Empress" pendant. Could we guess that it was lost on the Oz tour?

    ReplyDelete

Comments are most welcome! Constructive discussion is always encouraged but off topic or hateful remarks will not be published. If you wish to share your name and where you're from without using the sign in options, simply select the "Name/URL" option on the drop down menu and insert your name, and if you wish the country/state you're from. You can leave the URL blank.

If there are a large number of comments, it is necessary to click the 'Load More' button at the end of the comments section to see the latest additions.