Kate releases photo of Princess Charlotte to mark 2nd birthday

Kate releases photo of Princess Charlotte to mark 2nd birthday

Princess Charlotte celebrates her 2nd birthday tomorrow, May 2, and to mark the occasion, KP has released a new photo of the youngest British royal.

Princess Charlotte 2nd birthday s
[HRH The Duchess of Cambridge]

The photograph, take by Kate Middleton in April at Anmer Hall, features Charlotte in a yellow (yay a new color!) sweater with blue sheep on it, and a blue bow in her hair. She’s holding something colorful (a kite?) and positioned in a sea of hay. She’s not smiling; instead giving a “you want me to do what now?” smirk.

I love the expression, although hay is a pretty drab background choice.

KP wrote on twitter: “The Duke and Duchess are delighted to share a new photograph of Princess Charlotte to mark her second birthday tomorrow ? TRH would like to thank everyone for the lovely messages they have received & hope that everyone enjoys this photograph as much as they do.”

I’m a bit bummed there is only one photo. They only released one photo for George’s 2nd birthday as well, but we had just seen him at Charlotte’s Christening earlier that month so it was okay. But we haven’t seen Charlotte since Christmas, so it would have been nice to get more than one photo. But I guess we’re going to see her at Pippa’s wedding later this month, so only one photo now is okay? Sure. Anyway, I’m glad they released a photo.

I wasn’t expecting this today (I was expecting it tomorrow), so today is a two day post – go here to see Queen Letizia looking amazing at King Willem-Alexander’s 50th birthday.

Here is a 1931 portrait of QEII (also not smiling). Charlotte definitely looks like a young QEII.

281 thoughts on “Kate releases photo of Princess Charlotte to mark 2nd birthday

  1. OMG, gorgeous. Her hair is so bigger and I think she will be really a brunette. Imagine Charlotte blonde, the comparations between her and Diana would be insane. I thought George had more pics on his second birthday, those taken by Harry’s private secretary, but I may be wrong. Anyway, Happy Birthday Charlotte, this is my birthday month too (I am on the 30th).

    P.S. Is it my imagination or Charlotte’s eyes are not blue anymore. They look green or hazel.

    1. Those pics taken by Harry’s private secretary were released in December 2014. George’s 2nd birthday pic was an extra from Charlotte’s Christening.

      1. I agree. My eyes are greyish blue. Well according to a friend. I was surprised and flattered that she had noticed that about me. William has more a turquoise ocean kind of blue.

    2. I don’t remember her eyes being blue, unless they were photoshopped that way by fans or press. They’re hazel, lighter than Pippa’s, but hazel like KM’s.

  2. She looks cute, and reminds me of Lady Sarah Chatto, also of the Queen as a child. Only one photo though?

    1. Just the one. Unless they plan on releasing more later, but I doubt it. They only did one for George’s 2nd as well. We’ll see Charlotte again at Pippa’s wedding on May 20.

      ETA: Charlotte does look a lot like QEII when she was a child.

      1. I’m with Bea. I see Lady Sarah Chatto more than i see the Queen.

        Obviously, Lady Sarah and the Queen resemble each other in adulthood, but i’ve never seen Charlotte’s so-called resemblence to the Queen, even in the photo you’ve posted above.

        When not looking like Carole, she looks like Lady Sarah to me. And i think as she grows, her windsor genes will take her in that direction.

        Louise is the one who looks like the Queen as a small child.

        Her eye colour seems to have changed too. They look grey on my screen.

        1. I agree with you on the resemblance. She has hooded eyes that the Queen does not have in her 1931 pic and there aren’t any comparable Carole pics from that age but I bet she looks more like her. She doesn’t look like Kate at that age.

        2. I’m with you – I’m always puzzled by comparisons to the Queen. I think Charlotte looks like Charlotte, but overall, she reminds me much more of Pippa and Carole.

          I also think her eyes are more gray/hazel/green than blue. Like Kate’s?

        3. Agree Herazeus, I also see Lady Sarah Chatto in Charlotte. I saw some comments on DM saying Charlotte looks like Carole and Pippa and many people see this as an insult. I don’t think so. I think both women are pretty atractive.

        4. I don’t see the HM. Different eyes, jawline, chin, lips. Maybe a similar expression is what makes people think they look alike?

          I’ve always seen Carole and Pippa, and she looked a lot like KM and James M when younger from the few baby pics we have of any of them. Her face is asymmetrical like her mother’s – like most of ours are. Like KM, half of CC’s face looks like Pippa, half like Carole to me. Now there is an added William look too, although that might just be the familiar look of exasperation we see on his face so often.

          1. Charlotte’s expression here is all William–bored, exasperated, “I’ll give you just one minute more because I don’t want to be here or do this” look. And who can blame her? Who wants to have to sit through getting their hair done, nice clothes put on, and then have to sit still next to a pile of dull, itchy hay? Would have been much nicer for her and for the KP audience to show Charlotte in action doing something her parents claim she loves to do: playing with one of her pets or with a pony.

      2. I have to honest KMR. I can see Lady Louise in the Queen. I used to think Charlotte looked like HM. Anymore I don’t know. I think I am just watching Charlotte grow, like the other royal children.

      3. I don’t think she looks like Lady Sarah at all – Lady Sarah has a very wide set mouth which seems to be her prominent feature and Charlotte does not. I don’t see it. I see the Queen and Kate really in a perfect mix.

        1. If you look at the portrait of QE with her grandchildren — the photo with baby Charlotte on her lap, you will see that Charlotte’s mouth does resemble Lady Sarah’s, I think.

          Also, in the first birthday photo where she is pushing that little cart, there is a striking resemblance to Lady Sarah.

          I agree, however, as others have pointed out, we all see different things in the photo of little Charlotte.

        2. So is charlotte -wide mouth ..

          Its a shame – flasher waity/carol asking France court case for millions, for middeltons/carol bank. …what a disgrace to the BRF. Real royals do not act so sleezy questionable -money hungry, hope she lose!. The same asking of freebies from businesses with whiny Willnot status – and the same sleazy scam with billy ambulance pay – No class!!

    2. Thanks for this. I was beginning to think I was strange because I have always thought of Lady Sarah when I see pictures of Charlotte, particularly once she got past the infant stage. I can also see some of the Queen in her look. It is fun to read the comments, because everyone sees something different in her features even though we are all looking at the same picture.

    3. +1
      This is an annointed middelton – we are lucky to have a photo of her (especially before the middleton royal wedding) .

      she do look like Princess Margaret daughter – Lady Chat to. Middelton PR keep insisting she look like HM (NOT!), more lady carol middelton if not li!e LC. Is the ‘photographer’ at meet greet visits this week….

  3. What a gorgeous photo of Charlotte. I like how Charlotte is looking at the camera and what a lovely set of eyes and hair which is growing now. Charlotte appears a little serious for a two year old. I have never really seen Lady Sarah Chatto up close. I think it is hard for me to say who Charlotte resembles at the moment. I have never really seen photos of Kate when she was a young girl. Only a couple of William.
    A massive happy birthday Charlotte!
    ps Happy Birthday Jamel for May 30th.

        1. Did I misread you, Jamel. Is your b’day on May 30? If your b’day was yesterday, I hope it was happy. If it’s coming up, then all the best to you on the special day later in the month.

  4. I too see a resemblance to the Queen. She’s grown a lot since Christmas. I’m starting to see a resemblance to George. I’m glad Kate shared the photo. Someday I hope we see Mia and Charlotte together as I think that would be fun and heartwarming, but as much as Will and Kate claim to be normal, they much prefer to present a very proper image of their children rather than a carefree one.

  5. She’s a cute little girl but I’m not a fan of the photo composition…something bright could be a kite? Why not show it? And the background is dull.
    Just one photo for the plebs they really should learn from the Swedes. A few photos would be so nice and really what harm can it do?

    1. +5. Did Kate take this picture? It is poorly staged, poorly lit, and the subject isn’t smiling. I know how hard it is to get kids to smile in pictures, which is why you make silly noises, dance around like an idiot and take 50 photos to end up with 2 that you like.

      1. Again, it’s not even amateurish in terms of composition and lighting. Not even a happy snap. It’s flat and dull just like Kate and her fashion choices.

      2. This photo is intended to go down for the ages in history…Kate should either hire a professional photographer or pick the best one among her iPhone impromptu mommy snaps. This amateurish attempt at a portrait is just not working. Reminds me of when Mike Middleton did the first portrait of the family with PG.

    2. Agreed. And while they are at it – imagine how great a 1 minute video would be? I’m very surprised they don’t use video for greetings, holidays, birthdays, etc. I thought that their Heads Together videos might make them want to try out video for personal greetings. It seems so outdated to release a “snapshot”.

      1. I loved the video of Victoria and Daniel walking in the woods with their girls. It was short and sweet, and they looked relaxed and natural. The BRF stage their photos so much that they suck the life out of them.

      2. That’s what I thought! Let’s see a video, Charlotte was a riot to watch at the Canadian garden party- more please of this wee spitfire of a princess!!

    3. they could learn a lot from the swedes in general: about having kids in public and yet still be kids. How to wear mother’s/father’s clothes without it being creepy/weird
      How to have in-laws be present yet not be totally center of attention….
      I could go on

    4. +1
      I don’t understand how Kate isn’t an amazing photographer (art history major, photo enthusiast and all the time and resources at her disposal). My husband is a hobby photographer so we spend a lot on his love and he and his friends are always very critical of their work. I would not have cut off her hands. I am by no means a professional but still, I am always disappointed by her shots ?? anyway… Happy birthday to Charlotte and again much love and appreciation for the AMAZING SRF ☺️

    5. This picture, while little Charlotte is cute does nothing for me. The sweater is ill fitting or unkempt, and I’m sure the child does smile at times. Perhaps this is just waity’s little teaser and she’s going to have all kinds of pictures taken at the **wedding**. And really? hay as a background, from someone supposedly allergic to horses is setting the scene for some pretty rank comments, not about the child but on other sites William has been compared to well you know. I am hardly impressed that waity took this picture all by herself, with a very expensive camera. I’ve seen much better pictures taken by parents. This had to be one of a series and if this is the best I am even less impressed. We plebes take better pictures I think, so if this is yet another attempt at ‘hands on mom and just like y’all’ image creation it bombed. IMO

      1. According to the published genealogy for Kate she is a descendant of William Fox Talbot, one of the early pioneers of modern photo processing. There is a museum devoted to him and his work at Lacock Abbey in Wiltshire ( not far from Cam’s family home). Perhaps there is some sense that there is a legacy of good photography in the genes…

      2. Kate doesn’t even do the basic principles of photography that I learned in my high school photography course. First the balance is way off. Charlotte’s hands are cut off but there is tons of space over her head. She also chose a sweater that blends with the yellow hay background, which once again is out of focus as if that’s the only way Kate can take a picture. And her subject doesn’t look impressed. I do better stuff with my iPhone with my niece and nephew who give me about 30 seconds to stay still and pose.

  6. Of course, Charlotte is a cute toddler.

    But the picture is so blah. Beige, yellow, and a smirk. Really, Kate? Maybe PC was cranky that day. Okay, since you didn’t hire a pro, try another day. And what is she holding?

    Compare this to the gorgeous pics of Swedish royal kids.

    1. This shows that Kate is a garbage photographer because using that beige hay background with her yellow top is just horrible composition. It all blends in together. Let’s stop pretending Kate has any idea what she is doing more than any mom with an iPhone.

      And she couldn’t get one with a smile? Most kids that age love to smile for the camera and getting a serious photo is often impossible to do. So instead they use one with a smirk knowing it will be sent worldwide and analyzed to death.

      1. I agree with the yellows.. it all blends.

        She should’ve had a green grass background, that would’ve been a good contrast with the yellow.

        PC is very cute though. I can totally see Lady Sarah Chatto in her.

      2. “And she couldn’t get one with a smile? Most kids that age love to smile for the camera and getting a serious photo is often impossible to do. ”

        Let’s not make a bigger deal out of this than it really is. I have two children about PC’s age and have been around kids my whole life. A very good number don’t smile for the camera (my daughter) or are not super smiley to begin with (my son). It’s a picture of a toddler and I’m not judging W+K for Charlotte’s expression.

        1. The funny thing is Kate didn’t need a formal portrait. An amateur photographer would have snapped away while Charlotte was going about her day. That’s the beauty of digital- you can take tons of photos to capture a perfect moment.

      3. Not all kids like to smile for the camera. My cousin always used to bust out in tears once she saw a camera so it was impossible to get a decent photo of her smiling

        1. Except that Charlotte has smiled in previous photos and didn’t have an issue smiling with the cameras when they were in Canada. My point is that Kate just isn’t that good of a photographer. Charlotte has seemed pleasant the few times she has been seen in public so maybe a less odd setting would have garnered a more positive expression.

          1. Kate is an indifferent photographer without a modicum of talent. Most moms take better pics than she does. My guess is she wants perfection and doesn’t relate to the subject. To her setting the scene matters more just like that fake staging of Charlie’s christening.

        2. My friend’s daughter (who turns 2 on May 6th) absolutely hates the camera so a lot of the photos he sends me are of her smirking or giving a “I don’t give a F” look LOL! When she does smile big, she smiles with her whole being.

      4. If she’s such an avid photographer, as we’re supposed to believe? There should be plenty of other photos out there where their daughter is smiling. This is the one they chose to release.

        Maybe because this is the one they staged away from their home, from a photo shoot deliberately for this purpose. I don’t think this is Anmer, but rather the same spot elsewhere on Sandringham where the Vogue shoot took place. Anmer doesn’t have a barn, they don’t have horses, they don’t have hay.

        Wouldn’t want anything too personal getting out, like a casual family snap of her having fun at home. Staged photo shoot resulting in a staged photo of a kid who is bored with having to pose for mummy.

        1. Yes, I think the background is part and parcel of hiding anything remotely personal about their lives. So drab, dull just as they are. Not suitable for a bright little girl. I want pictures showing CHARLOTTE as she is, having fun, what does she like…

      1. JET, you made me nearly choke on my coffee! So funny!

        P.S. My youngest took my picture with my phone yesterday and it was far better a shot than Kate snapped. Boring, boring, boring.

      2. Ha iPhones do have great camera but the person taking the pics still has to recognize the great photo op ??

  7. Charlotte is a cutie pie! I am not a fan of the composition of the picture either. It looks like a Sears photoshoot circa 1982. I see some Pippa in her too.

    Outside of finding her cute, I am neutral. The reason is that we don’t see the kids. I will admit that I do forget about them from time to time. There can be a balance similar to the Swedes.

    Thanks for the quick post, KMR!

    1. First thing I thought was Pippa, too. I’m harder pressed to see a resemblance to William’s side of the family.

      1. In this photo, all I see is Pippa. Other photos with more of a side view that showed the outline of her jaw made her resemble Sarah Chatto, but mostly to me it’s all Middleton.

  8. I allways thought Lottie was more Windsor than George. That’s still my opionion. And I think she resemblances a lot with Lady Sarah Chatto more than the Queen. But on this picture I see a lot of Kate and Pippa too. Maybe because of her expression.

    The photo per se is odd, but Lottie is a precious girl, and I’m glad we have a new picture of her. 🙂

  9. They have chosen this image for its very insipidness. Closely cropped (God forbid you see any details of what she is playing with), neutral expression. As if it is a portrait, rather than a photo. Kate and William seem very controlling and the oneupmsnship by denying the press a photo call or even a professional photographer seems so petty.

    1. But, they are modern Royals. Cut them some slack, Lisa.
      Just kidding.

      How are you? Missed seeing your comments recently.

      1. Hi! I think there are at least a couple of Lisa’s and I respond only intermittently 🙂 but hello all the same.

  10. Charlotte looks adorable in this pic. A dear little dot.

    I had thought for some time she looks like the queen however, I can now see a resemblance to Sarah.

  11. I think she resembles her aunt and uncle (Harry that is) very much but her look can still change enormously. I think she looks so very cute. We haven’t seen her smiling bright a lot (on the rare occasions) so she might be one of the children that just don’t smile so much. If that is the case- good they did not publish a photo that is not really her.

  12. Charlotte is cute. I love the smirk lol

    Sorry, I don’t see any resemblance to the Queen. Perhaps Lady Sarah. I think she very heavily favors Kate’s side of the family.

    1. OMG the first picture is so much Leonore! Is it CG’s father?! Thank you for finding this. It shows how much the genes travel through generations.

    2. Ha at first I thought wow there’s a pic of CG smiling! Then I went back and read it was his father!!! Oopsies
      Leonore looks like a mini replica of the sister!

    1. Wow Isabella is like a copy of Frederick. I love these photos. Charlotte’s one is just terrible to me. Charlotte is cute and has a spunky personality and that photo shows none of that.

  13. She loks so much like the Queen as a child, I see a strong resemblance! (But that is of course in the eye of the beholder as some here hqve pointed out that they don’t think they look alike)

  14. She looks like the Queen.I like her sweater, Kate always tries to dress her children unique, I like that.Charlotte’s hair grew long! I wonder where they have hay at Amner Hall, isn’t Kate allergic to horses? Maybe, they have sheep 🙂

  15. I think Charlotte looks like Pippa, especially in the shape of her mouth and her eyebrows. Cute picture for a portrait type of shot but would have loved to see something where she looked more like a carefree kid. Oh well, again, typical of the Cambridges, they performed as expected, but never go above and beyond expectations.

  16. Happy Birthday to Princess Charlotte. What a cutie you are!

    I don’t see the Queen in Charlotte and can’t seem to see Pippa or Carole, either. To me, Charlotte is Charlotte. We all know that kids change from one moment to another, though.

    Loved her sweater and her eyes and lips are so very pretty. Her hair is so beautiful, too. She looked thoughtful and very into her own self in the photo. A confident little girl, I think.

    I do wish we would see more photos of her and PG, though. Learn from the Swedes, please, W and K. Nobody is asking for constant coverage, but it is always so long between photos and people can’t help but feel disconnected from the children. I supposed that is the point, though.

    1. When people don’t care about the kids, they also don’t care to support th luxurious lifestyle. Will and Kate are stupid this way. Brexit is going to make the UK go through some serious changes and everything, including the monarchy and it’s lazy members, will be on the table. This is age of social media and over saturation. One or two sad pictures won’t cut it. They are applying a 19th century approach to a 21st century society. More proof this archaic institution has passed its expiry date.

      1. Given their intense desire for privacy, I can imagine this photo was provided reluctantly with the characteristic sullen Cambridge approach, hence its deliberate nothingness: one image only, nondescript background, no personality, a smirk from the subject, poor image construction (the latter a given, since it’s from the untalented Kate).

        You’re absolutely right in W+K desiring a 19th century approach of invisibility when it suits them; they choose not to accept that the material benefits they so enjoy are, ultimately, courtesy of the public. No-one will hold them accountable – least of all the public – so the farce continues.

  17. Cute kid. However, it’s too bad that this photo doesn’t give us a glimpse of her “feisty” personality or even the toy she’s holding, so coupled with the blah background there isn’t anything here that makes me feel anything more for her than I would feel for any other child I don’t know.

    1. Agree, Lauri. A boring backdrop for a very cute little girl! Reminds me of the nasty photo of little George looking like a street urchin sitting on the dingy steps years back. Wasn’t that a birthday photo of him, too? Kate did not take it, though. If I recall, that is.

      Yes, Charlotte looks very sweet in the picture. She has beautiful eyes and oh, that hair! She is really coming into her own. I don’t see HM in her, as others seem to see. I really don’t see her Middleton grandma or aunt, either. Something in the expression in her eyes reminds me of her father.

      Oh, she has shown such spirit in the past, and it would have been delightful to see it in the birthday photo.

      Oh, well. I also would have enjoyed seeing a photo of her with her big brother.

      William and Kate are so secretive. When you think of Victoria and Daniel, and the other Royals from Sweden, sharing their beautiful children with the world, it’s really quite sad. There’s no overkill in any of the Swedish releases. With Kate and William, it’s just a trickle every now and then.

      Next time we see the two will be at Pippa’s wedding. Looking forward to witnessing just how they do. Could be really funny/charming. Or, the fear of God could be put into them and they will be unable to even smile.

      Happy Birthday to Charlotte. Two is a big deal, you know!!!

      1. To be fair the BRF is the most high profile Royal Family in the world and everything they do makes headline news. Princess Charlotte’s photo was one of the top headlines on Good Morning America this morning. Most Americans don’t even know that Sweden and Denmark have royal families. I can see why they want to dial back the photos so that they aren’t headline news every week. We haven’t seen the kids since Christmas I believe but it doesn’t feel that way because you still hear their names frequently.

        1. Laura, most Americans I know really don’t give a rat’s butt about the Royals. So, Charlotte’s photo made it on GMA, I assume on The Today Show and other morning shows in the US, too. It goes over the wire and producers have not a hard day. “Oh, here’s a story eeryone will love.” And, so a little blurb about Charlotte airs.

          Yes, W and K are high profile, but the interest in them does not come close to all the hoopla that surrounded Diana, Charles and William and Harry. PC and Diana shared their kids with the world. Again, not with overkill, but with an understanding of how people — especially their countrymen, felt invested in those boys.

          I still think a few more photos would be nice.

          Thankfully, KMR has introduced us to the other Royals and they are far less stingy when it comes to sharing family photos. People enjoy seeing the children and realizing how they are growing.

          Oh, well, to each her own. Tried not to be snarky in this post. I am not criticizing you. Just stating how I feel.

          Thanks, KMR.

          1. “Yes, W and K are high profile, but the interest in them does not come close to all the hoopla that surrounded Diana, Charles and William and Harry. PC and Diana shared their kids with the world. Again, not with overkill, but with an understanding of how people — especially their countrymen, felt invested in those boys.”

            You make good points but again Charles and Diana were the Prince and Princess of Wales; they were the future King and Queen. George and Charlotte are the heirs to the heir to the heir. It’s also a different time; no one is as interested in one ‘celebrity’ because there are so many public figures vying for attention.

            Intentional or not, I think it’s smart for them to keep a lower profile until W&K are the PoWs. That way when The Queen passes they’ll likely be seen a lot more and it’ll be more ‘fresh’.

          2. What has “freshness” got to do with anything? It’s sounds like something for purely PR purposes and not about getting the country acquainted with the future king and his sister. To assume that Willy is going to suddenly pivot and allow the kids to be more accessible to the people once he’s POW is a huge leap, IMO, certainly not supported by his behaviour and attitude up to this time.

          3. Jessica, i think you misunderstand the emotional investment required to keep the royals on their perch.

            It’s not a celeb-fest, nor should it be.

            However, going by the longevity genes of the Windsors, William won’t be POW for at least a decade.

            If he waits until then to start showing the kids, the emotional investment won’t be there.

            Victoria, who hid for 40yrs and refused to attend any public ceremonies during that time, understood the emotional investment part of keeping the royals and made sure to release photos and tableaus and video when it became available, of herself and the kids during those 40yrs.

          4. @maventhefirst

            I actually do think they will ‘allow more access’ once he becomes the PoW (and even when they move to London) because they have an American PR consultant. I think they’ll definitely change how they do business; we’ve clearly seen a change with how they handled Heads Together.


            I definitely understand that people need to be emotionally invested in the RF but in this political and economic climate less is more. Most people are apathetic to the RF so releasing a few more pictures isn’t going to make a difference; they just need to not piss people off by being ultra-lavish. I mean please think about it; how often do you want to see someone else’s kids (and kids who aren’t even family). Birthday photos, trooping of colour, Christmas and a royal tour here and there is pretty much all that is necessary.

          5. Let’s compare the love the British public appear to have for little Mia Tindall.

            A combination of being photographed playing naturally and in her element, as well as more frequent showings of her vs the stilted, old fashioned, unnatural photos of GC.

            The funny thing is that Mia is always shown with the same backdrop, her parents indulging in ultra expensive sport, yet the coo-ing is amazing.

            That is public emotional investment.

          6. Jessica, I think the change that we saw with Heads Together was due to Lorraine Heggessey, former British TV executive who is now heading up the royal foundation, and NOT to Jason Knauf, the American, whom I think you are referring to. For the past two years, since he came onto the scene, Jason has simply cowed to William and Harry’s tantrums, and by doing so has allowed the KP press office to become a source of irritation and ridicule.

          7. Jessica, I don’t think I get your comment about the public having more access to photos of the kids in the future because the PR rep is an American. What does that mean?

            Also, I agree with Herazeus. For the Royals to continue, people need to feel connected to them. Love them and their families.
            Mia Tinsdale is a perfect example of a child who has captured hearts worldwide.

            The limited number of times we see George and Charlotte does little to capture hearts and minds. Everyone — or most people, anyway — love children. They are eager to see how the little ones grow and what type of personalities and looks they have.

            The one photo that was released of Charlotte today was sweet at the initial look, but without looking at it again, I can tell you little of the child. Oh, she was wearing a yellow sweater with little lambs on it and she was standing in a field of hay. Her hair is longer and she looked serious. But, I have little idea of who she is or what she’s like. Same thing with George.

            William and Kate rake in the money and dole little out in return. Why should they, though? They get away with everything. Nobody wants to make them show any accountability to the public that is paying their lavish lifestyle. Secrets abound. Until a crisis pops up and then they drag out the little darlings for damage control.

            What a shame.

          8. I don’t expect them to relax around photos of the kids being taken legally at any age. Once they move to London this fall, I expect many more fights with the press and complaints by W&K. Giant new yew hedge, anyone?

          9. @Herazeus

            I wouldn’t confuse commenters and bloggers love for Mia sightings to the entire British public; I think they ‘love’ Mia and George/Charlotte the same even though we don’t get to see the latter as much. They are all members of the Royal Family.


            You don’t really know what Mia is like; just because you’ve seen a few more photos of her playing doesn’t mean you know what she’s like. But to clarify my earlier comment I did confuse Lorraine and Jason and their position (I’m not trying to start a nationality war so I’ll scrap that). I agree they need to do more engagements but I think they can be conservative in how often they show their children. After ski-gate everyone was convinced there would be pap or Easter photos of the kids but nothing as damage control. I think they are genuine in wanting to shelter them from the press and unnecessary public scrutiny.

          10. Jessica: i don’t stick to sugar sites or even royalist sites in forming an opinion.

            And a better measure of Mia’s popularity is the number of articles written about her. She might be of royal descent, but technically she is a private citizen destined to obscurity which makes her media profile an interesting study. No news editor will continue to post articles about anything if it doesn’t sell, and the fact is that Mia Tindall sells.

            That popularity is helped along by the pictures of her that appear frequently and show her personality. Nevermind the absolute privileged life she leads, the public firmly believe that she is a ‘normal’ child being raised ‘normally’ in direct contrast to the perception of GC and the public reaction to their pictures which don’t support any ‘normal’ narrative their parents wish to sell to the public.

            People enjoy Mia’s pictures and that enjoyment can be seen in the type of comments people leave under media articles which show an emotional investment.

          11. Mia’s (and Savannah and Isla) popularity and the image of “normal” everyday kids? Goes a long way towards people forgetting Peter and Zara live off Anne and benefit from her taxpayer security.

            I don’t expect an uproar when Anne passes and through some nifty legal wrangling, Zara and Peter end up owning Gatcomb without paying inheritance tax.

          12. Jessica, of course, I don’t know Mia personally. But, do you know George and Charlotte? In the photos and videos we’ve seen of Mia, she appears to be quite a lively child! Her personality shines through, so in a sense we know about her.

            With George and Charlotte, not so much. The trip to Canada did allow people to see a very different Charlotte from the laid back little baby who was so carefully posed by Kate in photos.

            Kate and William — and most parents — want to protect their kids’ privacy The press will respect that — as long as some entry to their lives via photos are given. William and Kate are way too secretive, imo. Yet, they certainly are not quiet when it comes to taking money and spending it most lavishly.

            If the Royal Family is to continue, they must be more open to the public. And, please, can we all agree that Will and Kate use their children to benefit them when the timing is right. How many times after a major snafu made by W and/or K has been made and anger is shown by the public and press, do we get to see cute appearances by the kids?. If that’s not using your children for your own benefit, what is?

            Oh, and btw, I was not looking for any “international” conflict when I asked what you meant by an American doing the PR for the couple. I just found it an odd statement and hoped; you would elaborate. Thanks so much.

          13. Jessica,

            ” Most people are apathetic to the RF so releasing a few more pictures isn’t going to make a difference; they just need to not piss people off by being ultra-lavish. ”

            This argument goes against all we know about human behaviour. As mentioned by several, exposure to the people does make a difference in attitudes and sense of connection. That’s human nature. The Cambs don’t live in a vacuum; their anti-social *behaviour* has consequences.

            Also, generally speaking, arguing that we don’t know what’s in their minds is no argument at all and a way to abort discussion. We see and know their behaviour and can extrapolate from there just as we constantly do within our relationships and other social interactions.

          14. I addressed my initial comment to Laura and I apologize. I meant, Jessica.

            I’m in agreement with others who have written quite eloquently on the importance of giving the public a sense of connection with the Royal children.

            I also agree that William and Kate have every right to have their children’s privacy protected, but unfortunately, it comes with the Royal territory for them to be photographed at times.

            Surely, that makes sense, doesn’t it?

            And, as for people not knowing what little Mia is like, no, we don’t know her personally. However, the times we have gotten to see her, the child’s personality just shines through and we do feel connected to her.

            People have a fondness for George and Charlotte, too, but if that connection is not nurtured by William and Kate, a great deal of damage will be done to the future of the monarchy.

          15. “I also agree that William and Kate have every right to have their children’s privacy protected, but unfortunately, it comes with the Royal territory for them to be photographed at times.

            Surely, that makes sense, doesn’t it?”

            They are photographed ‘at times’ the debate is over how much. I think photos of them spaced out throughout the year is appropriate. Birthday, Christmas, Trooping of Colour, 1st day of school, major royal events and a royal tour here and there. How much more do you need? I don’t need pap pics because I find them intrusive.

          16. The demands W&K have made in the past 6 years are not only annoying, they are in many cases against the law. They have their RPOs take away cell phones when people legally photograph them in public places. They threaten the press when the press photographs them legally in public places.

            There is no such thing as privacy in a public place in the UK, not even for children. The games they play with the press have led to this ridiculous situation, and it is only made worse by their games around pictures of the kids.

  18. I hope Charlotte has a fun official birthday tomorrow and that she had a fun little party with family and friends this past weekend with lots of cake, gifts and games.

    I see a mixture of various women in Charlotte. I see HM, cousin Lady Sarah Chatto, Grandma Carole, and Auntie Pippa! I didn’t see any Spencer in her at all! It’ll be interesting to see who she resembles more once she gets a bit older and like others have said, I’m actually a bit happy that she’s not blonde because the comparisons to Diana would go through the roof.

    I love the smirk she’s giving because it shows she still has that spirit and spunk we saw in Canada in September! (What an alliteration I just typed LOL! Try saying that five times fast Hahaha!)

  19. I assume they spendy some time choosing this photo from a selection of other shots, which suggests the other options were even worse. It wouldn’t bother me if they weren’t so stingy and controlling with photos of the kids, and if we weren’t subjected to all the nonsense about what a keen photographer Kate is. Cute kid, but the photo is terrible. In addition to the bland colours, it breaks all the rules of composition (and not in a good way). As an art history major, surely Kate knows the characteristics of a successful portrait. That all makes this seem kind of disrespectful – “here, have this half-assed snap we put no thought into, plebs”. They probably expect us to be grateful for this little scrap.

    1. It’s the composition that bothered me as well. Her first birthday pics were so much better that I hoped Kate had moved forward. But here she is, smack in the middle without a balancing area.

      I do love the sweater though.

      1. I’m having a senior moment, although, I am barely 30. I cannot remember her first b’day photo(s) at all. Oh, wait, maybe I can. Was she pushing a cart filled with ABC blocks in one of the photos? I’m too lazy to google anything. My own little one is banging on pots and pans with a wooden spoon. Fun for her. Not my favorite part of the day! Still, I am smiling. Encouraging her, but also thinking of a way to have a bit more quiet fun in the very near future. Story time, anyone?

        1. The pictures I’m remembering had her wearing a pink, button-down sweater and holding a toy (stuffed dog?) in one pushing a little cart in another.

          Can someone help us out please? I’m 37 and on drugs that cause me to be forgetful! 😉

          1. No, holding the stuffed dog was when she was a baby. Pushing the cart with the blocks was for her first b’day. I cannot believe I am worked up about this! Or, that I actually care. And, yet, I seem to.

            The funny thing is, once Maddie is napping, I have to re-write an article someone else wrote for a local magazine about tips for photographing one’s kids. Too bad, I can’t interview Kate. She’s just perfect for such an assignment!

          2. Ha ha Jenny and Kimothy, you both made me laugh out loud.
            I’m more senior than both of you but yes, Jenny, I remember the photo of PC pushing the cart with the blocks for her 1st b’day.

            This photo is much worse I’m afraid. Charlotte is clearly adorable, she has beautiful eyes and hair but the picture is not exactly delightful.

            Kimothy, I agree that any of the women you mention can be traced on Charlotte’s face. But you forgot the most important man: for me it’s clear that Charlotte has her dad’s eyes. I can also see Auntie Pipa’s eyebrows. Other than that, one can say she’s an interesting cross.

            I wish we see more of her at Pipa’s wedding, but who can tell? Knowing W&K, I’d say there will be very little exposure of the kids.

            Jenny, give hugs from me to little -or not so little anymore- Maddie!

          3. Elina,

            Soon after I made my post, I *did* see the resemblance to William (the expression of all things hehehe). She’s got quite the combo, looks wise, of many people in her life!

          1. Elina, have not seen you around for some time. Or, am I not remembering? Oh, what is with me, today?

            Good to read your comments and I agree that little Charlotte has her father’s eyes. The looks she gives are similar to ones he gave as a child.

            I hope you are well. As I recall, you had a loss in your family. How are you doing? Other family members, too?

            Thanks for remembering Maddie. She took a late nap, which threw my day off. She’s up and raring to go now!

          2. Hi Jenny. Thank you for your concern. You’re right and your memory is still good, I haven’t been around lately, just dropping in once in a while, just to follow some posts.
            I suppose the conversation about children, Charlotte in particular, made me want to join in. It also reminds me the time she was born and also her last birthday and where I used to be at these times in the past. Time flies and nothing stays the same. In a funny way Charlotte’s birthday reminded me of that.
            Happy birthday to little Charlotte and warm wishes to you, Jenny and to the rest of KMRers.

          3. Very warm wishes to you, Jenny. Good to read your comments again. I agree that time does fly and the way kids grow certainly reminds us of that. It does not seem so long ago that Charlotte was born. She is certainly growing by leaps and bounds.

            Hope to read more of your comments down the road. Take care of yourself.

          4. I meant to say warm wishes to you, ELINA. Sleep deprived and on my second cup of strong coffee! Wishing you the best and hope to read comments from you again in the future. Be well.

    2. Chances are they probably picked the worst photo of the lot because god forbid the plebs can see more of the background and the grounds of Anmer or even what kind of toy is Charlotte playing with. It would infringe their privacy, lol!

  20. Maybe she got George’s weird baby teeth and that’s why they chose a non-smiling photo.
    I remember being startled when I saw George’s vampire teeth.

    1. Please don’t say he had weird teeth, you can’t change your teeth (at least nit until old enough for braces) and I think he looked adorably cute 🙂

  21. Charlotte is a very cute child. Very thoughtful and pretty. I think she looks a good deal like her father. As already posted above the expression in the eyes reminds me a good deal of William.
    The sweater is so very pretty, but the background of the photo is just so bland. Just like, Kate, though. I feel a bit mean saying that, but I think it is true.

    There is something so mediocre about the Duchess and all she does. Yet, she is glorified for her style, her clothes, her photography skills. Most parents capture adorable pictures of their children on a daily basis. There is nothing so special about this one.

    It’s sad that George and Charlotte appear so rarely. Nobody is asking to see them daily. Even monthly. But, it seems people wait for such moments as birthdays and other holidays and then, one very unspectacular looking photo shows up.

    Oh, well, the wedding is at the end of the month and little George and his feisty sister should be in their glory. I wonder how many photos of them will actually be released?

    1. The photo looks looks like a half hearted attempt to imitate the photos of the Swedish royal children. The colors seem to ape the spare headshot of Estelle on her birthday. This proves to me that KM really is a mediocre photographer and that she doesn’t care at all about the quality of whatever she releases to the public. I get that indifferent feeling about her at every appearance, except for extreme attention to her hair and the fit of her clothing.

      1. I am pleased it is not photoshopped. Charlotte looks adorable in that cardigan. I wonder if she choose it. Just a bit of information or trivia would be so welcome.

        1. For real! “To celebrate the princess’s birthday: here are some bits of trivia: her favorite toy is *blank*, she has already started riding a pony and that pony’s name is *insert name*, “blank* is what she calls her big brother, George (my sister used to say “Mimi” for Kimmy hence why I said that), *blank* is her favorite treat/color/whatever”

          You get the drift.

          1. Bwahahaha trivia about anything “personal”
            The same will and Kate who didn’t want to share the dog’s name??
            Same will and Kate who made tourism board delete tweet about the kids visiting after they already left??
            THe same will and Kate who won’t comment on any type of gifts they might have received??

          2. Fill in blanks, indeed. Too funny, Kimothy!

            Oh, if only Nanny Maria would find other suitable employment and throw caution to the wind and write a tell all!!!!!

          3. *great*idea!! It’s not intrusive at all and helps the public bond with her and get emotionally invested. I mean, I think she’s going to be a real pleasure to watch as she grows ❤️

    1. Charlotte has always had blue eyes (except in that shitty Testino Christening photo). George has brown eyes.

          1. Another vote for hazel, which are a blend of brown, green, and blue, so given tech devices bad color reproduction, explains all our confusion.

      1. I only saw hazel in the photo of her and Kate from the christening but that was edited as hell. Go back look at her 6months or 1 year pictures, there are some where she looks directly into the camera. Her eyes are blue.

        1. I think they’re hazel-green now.

          My son had blue eyes until he was almost two! I was shocked. Then they got kinda brownish.

  22. Haha delighted to share more like begrudgingly =)
    The positives love the little sweater
    Could they’d have picked a more boring background? Hay is great for fall pics when you have bright pumpkins next to it. They have it so tightly cropped you can’t see the bright object in her hand.

  23. She is adorable, love the sheep on the sweater. Nanny Maria should have taken the picture, she would have had a smile!

  24. She’s cute. However, it’s a fail as a picture. Boring background. Can’t see what is in her hands. Either crop it out, or you should be able to see what it is.

  25. She looks like a miniatiure, female version of her dad. Complete with scowly, grumpy face. It’s charming as a child, at least.

    The photo quality itself is mediocre. It’s funny they sell Kate as some amazing photographer but everything she touches is gold. It’s not a good photo, it shows no personality, no smiling and is bland as heck. I wish we saw pictures of her smiling. Playing with George. With her parents. But they never share those. Why?! They don’t exist?

    Happy birthday, Charlotte!

  26. Disappointed it’s only one picture – and such a bad one at that. I’ve said it before but for what they get from us (the British taxpayer) the very least they could do is hire a professional and get photos released on a regular basis. It in no way invades their privacy, this is the family who is choosing to inflict a 40+ min daily car ride on their son through central London for goodness sake, how private will that be for the lad? Getting used to photographers is essential for these kids, the sooner the better. It’s about time Wills realised we OWN him, and he’d better get his act together before it’s too late and we go Rexit on the whole lot of them. If he wants a private life he knows what to do, otherwise he needs to buckle down and stop behaving like such a snowflake. I’m sorry for the kids, they didn’t ask to be born into this mess, its all on their father to ensure they can cope with it.

      1. People wait so long for these photos of the kids and then nada!

        If that is the best Kate could do, I am sorry for her.

        And, it makes me remember the ghastly photos Mike Middleton took of Kate, William and baby George! Yikes, remember those gems?

        1. It was the picture where he was barely a month old. He was so wrapped up you couldn’t see his face! Kate was wearing a purple-ish dress.

          1. Oh, Kimothy, yes. George was wrapped tighter than a mummy.
            You are right about Kate’s dress, too. Those photos were just dismal. I guess like father, like daughter!!

  27. Charlotte is a total cutie-pie, and I adore her expression.

    Kate is the friend that we all have, the one with kids and a camera way too expensive for her abilities, whom you nod along with when she chats about how great a photographer she is and how naturally it comes to her. Meanwhile, you don’t follow her on Facebook so you don’t have to look at the many, many, many mediocre shots of her children and animals.

    So, I guess in that way, Kate is just like the rest of us.

  28. Once again a rare photo of the royal cutie…does William not want to follow his parents path & release photos of his Children on a regular basis (ie once a quarter)?

  29. Don’t think there is anything more I can add that hasn’t been said already except to wish Charlotte a very Happy 2nd Birthday! A toddler’s development really takes off here and she’s probably going to start speaking soon! Kids grow up so fast!

  30. The Windsor is strong with this one! 🙂 Happy birthday, darling little Charlotte! You are adorable!

    I don’t have anything to add about the photo itself, I just don’t understand the aversion to a real photographer taking official portraits of the children. I’m just so over these mommy snapshots!

  31. I agree, Charlotte is a cutie pie, but I’m I the only one who thinks her photos always look digitally enhanced? There’s something wrong with her right hand in this photo…like a finger was removed. The background looks fake and other parts look retouched.

    I wonder if Charlotte doesn’t like to sit for the camera and they are composing a portrait based on a couple of quick shots. It has an unnatural quality…not at all like Kate captured her in a cute moment.

    1. Tibi, you are on to something, for sure!

      I don’t know too much about photo shopping, but I went back and looked at the photo and I see what you mean. Her right hand is rather blurry and it does look as if a finger is missing!
      Also, I think the book, or kite, or whatever it is, may have been dropped into the photo.

      And, the backdrop looks fake, too. Rhiannon, didn’t you mention earlier in this thread that it looked like a backdrop in a Sears Family Package photo?

      Cathy, I hope you see this and will comment. You know a good deal about photo shopping. I think others do, too. Eager to read your thoughts.

      1. Thanks for your reply!

        I mentioned the missing finger to someone and they said Charlotte must have moved her hand as the shot was taken, making her hand blurry. That seems like a justification not a cause. Even if true, why.select a blurry shot? If Charlotte truly sat for this, there should be plenty of options to choose from. It just doesn’t add up, IMO.

      2. Hi Jenny
        Oh yes, this photo has been photoshopped! I wish someone would either delete the programme from Kate’s computer or give her some lessons as she’s not very good. Chris Jackson does photoshop some of his photos but he is good at it, could Kate get some lessons from him? There is one photographer I work with often who told me that the best skills with photoshop don’t count if the photo is crappy to start of with. (Thinking of that dreadful photo which was a composite here especially)

        I don’t know why she didn’t just let Charlotte run around and play and just take a bunch of action shots (like any other Mum), it would have looked way better and Charlotte would be happy and having fun instead of having to pose which was obviously starting to annoy the kid?

        Hugs to you and Miss Maddie!

    2. Very insightful, Tibi.

      I wish I were more astute about this subject matter, but I am in agreement with your thoughts.

      I also see that Charlotte appears to be tilting to her left with her body, but her head is straight on. That seems odd to me.

      Like Mother like Daughter with the tilting. Kate does that often. She cannot stand up straight!

      Thanks for pointing this out, it is making me think differently about the photo.

        1. Hi, Tibi.

          Another day and still more questions You are so right.

          Surely, there were more photos snapped that day. And, as others have said, why was this one chosen. Was this the best of the lot?

          Everyone really was eager to see this charmer and what we got was nothing of import. Charlotte appeared to have an amazing personality on tour in Canada. A real spitfire, as Ray so aptly said.

          Well, she cannot be a spitfire always, but this photo really didn’t show any of her personality. Even the so-called smirk was rather controlled.

          At any rate, I wonder how many photos we will see of Char and George at Auntie Pip’s wedding?!

          1. Tbh, the set released for her 1st birthday were much much much better. It showed her in different poses & facial expressions and even taking some of her first steps with a massive smile on her face! The 1st bday photos had more life in them.

          2. Interesting observation! Which makes this lacklustre offering reminiscent of someone with not much interest in the kid, or perhaps in photographing them.

  32. This appeared in the DM today…….

    And it’s now coming out that this chateau isn’t a private residence per se. It’s a hotel and the paps found WK by checking hotel listings.

    That in itself is stupid if they used their own names to book into it even if the chateau belongs to a family member.

    And the DM is being snarky by using unphotoshopped images from recent engagements in their reports.

    1. “And it’s now coming out that this chateau isn’t a private residence per se. It’s a hotel and the paps found WK by checking hotel listings. ”

      That might be what changes the nature of the case. Photographing people on hotel property in France is different than at someone’s private home.

        1. Not just sunbathing topless, but changing your bikini whilst facing the road!!

          We all saw her bikini situation because she is completely nude in some pics as she changes.

          Ps: if i recall, in some of the pictures, she is standing up whilst bent over, bikini bottoms pulled down as William rubs suntan oil into her bottom.

          The press is pretending she was only topless.

          She was also smoking in some images.

          And if i recall, there was talk of x-rated moments in other images though the bottomless pics i’ve described are the ones i remember seeing before all were removed.

          I will say this, at the first hearing in January, the defence lawyer said they caught tyem in the ‘intimate act of marriage’. Exact words. ?

          1. To add: it was as if they were challenging or taunting the RPO saying (via their actions/behavior): “you may be obligated to physically protect us but you can’t stop us from doing what we want to do….watch and see!”

            **rolls eyes** if kinky sh!t gets you off, fine, but don’t do it when you’re expected to be doing something else entirely.

          2. I am unaware of the defence lawyer having said that, but intimate act of marriage is more than just kissing. This is all going to come out in trial. No defence worth their salt is going to hold back on a couple doing something like that not far from a road and expecting complete privacy.

          3. You know it is gross that photographers caught photos of them in an intimate act of marriage! C’mon why are people so prudish on whether Kate was giving Will a head or not & why should such a mundane act be turned into a controversy? Yes, I get the controversy that WK lied and skipped out on their duties for Paralympics and go vacation instead- that should be the real story here! Them skipping out on work, not whether Kate was in the nude and sex acts between a married couple

          4. Sexism. That’s why. Sure, W&K lied and some people would have still been upset about that, but if Kate weren’t ‘being immodest’ by being naked outside and potentially having sex outside then it would not have blown up into such a big deal as it has. Even now, the conversation is mostly focused on Kate when William lied just as much and vacationed just as much and was potentially participating in sex outside just as much as Kate, yet the conversation is almost exclusively about Kate.

          5. Because that’s their deflection, Red Tulip, that their privacy was invaded rather than focus on the fact that their big lie was exposed. If the photos had only shown her in a bikini, the resultant conniption fit would be the same, IMO. They got caught.

        2. I have no sympathy for their plight. How many times has Kate flashed her bottom to us yet her topless sunbathing pics are too much??? Riiight ok
          she can sunbathe topless to her little hearts content on her own property

          1. But please think about the staff and your POs and don’t sunbathe in front of them? Or where they could see? That’s just gross!

        3. Jen, not only sunbathing or having oil rubbed on her naked bum or changing from one bikini into another, all in view. No, Kate was also on her knees in front of William; even he had sense at that point to then move inside where they continued, in an ‘intimate act of marriage’.

          The UK press is being coy in its description of these pics as being merely topless. I hope the range of photos is at least described in court and that the UK press has the guts to locate this pleasure trip accurately ie that W+K lied about their reasons for ditching the Paralympics. They need to learn that they will not always get away with their lies, waste a court’s time and pursue people because it suits them.

        4. And then demand to be paid 1.3 million euros for them taking photos. Hmmm. What will they do with the boob money?

    2. Wowza! The trial begins today!

      No wonder there’s been a sainted PR onslaught these past few weeks culminating in the holy girl child.

      I’m hoping for juicy, scandalous details.

      ETA: They invoked the martyred Diana!

      1. Ah yes, the sainted PR. Great insight you have there, Maven!

        Scrolling through the article, I was once again taken by how different Kate’s face looks after work. In the pink gown, she is more like Pippa in appearance. The work she had done is really quite good. One can hardly tell what was done . Nothing dramatic, just subtle enhancements. Great plastic surgery. Or, injections, or whatever.

        I find it funny, btw, that a woman who shamelessly flahed her butt in public so many times — especially while on State Visits to foreign lands is so frantic about those nude photos. Only kidding, before others jump down my throat.

        1. As I recall, Kate ‘Middlebum’/Kate the Exhibitionist didn’t seem fazed by the photos; following publication, nothing changed in her behaviour and the exhibitionism continued apace. I imagine it was Willy who threw a total fit as is his wont. In effect, for the first time, they both were exposed in fact for the lying slackers they were (dodging the Paralympics to indulge their hedonism and lying about it); I hope that is resurrected (so to speak, ha!).

          1. Ah, yes. The wrath of William! If Kate had been dismayed, her flashing would not have been so ongoing.
            What a train wreck these two are. Their behavior, I mean.

          2. I remember photos of W&KM in Malaysia the morning whethe photos appeared. W looked extremely peeved and KM had the crestfallen, meek expression that she has so often after W has berated her.

          3. We got stories in the press about how the photos didn’t phase her, she didn’t care, carried on fine. We even got spin about how it made her feel good about herself, to know she looked good in the photos.

      2. One of the things that annoys me about all of this is playing the Diana card. This is not akin to when Diana got into a car driven by a drunk. This is not akin to her being chased by paparazzi.

        It is akin to when Diana was also photographed sunbathing topless. Because she had cultivated the press (even with all of her games) instead of antagonizing them, the pictures went away after she made a deal/appearance in exchange.

        1. The comments section is remarkably unsympathetic to W+K, the overwhelming opinion being that Kate should have kept her clothes on, that both she and William are greedy and lazy, and that any compensation be donated to charities they champion. A few comments also ask why Diana is being invoked by them so often. If the DM is a barometer of sorts, the public is not with them on this matter.

          1. If this trial had come up in 2012/2013 when thry were still loved by the public, it would have been a different reaction.

      1. If it’s awarded to them, I hope they are “encouraged” (read: required) by the queen to donate it to Paralympic charities to make up for skipping the closing ceremonies in the first place.

        1. I doubt that they would ever be awarded so much. I am frankly surprised that French courts allow such an amount to be claimed in a criminal trial. In common law courts if would require a separate civil action against the photographers and media companies.

          Kate has shown more for free on state visits so what are the damages here? Not as high as she thinks.

          1. As Herazeus pointed out elsewhere, the Cambridge’s were riding high in the popularity stakes in 2012/13, hence confident in their worth and public adoration. But here we are five years on and their popularity waned considerably, and let’s not forget Kate’s documented history of public flashing. Hard to take claims of ‘damage’ seriously when the woman is aching to show her body to the world at any opportunity.

          2. Indiana Joanna, the Express article said a judgement was expected ‘later in the year’. Didn’t mention the trial length. You can bet we’ll hear about it if it’s open to the public.

          3. I read in a French article that they expect to be done July 4th. That said, sometimes witnesses take longer than they are expected or other unexpected delays.

    3. I’m surprised we don’t have a flurry of activity to detract from these stories.
      France has some strict privacy laws so it’ll be interesting to see how this turns out.
      If they’re smart and they win they should donate whatever compensation they get to one of their charities.

      1. Perhaps to the paralympic athletes, considering that it was their event that Kate and Will skipped to go frolic naked on that French balcony.

      2. I expect it to be appealed, no matter which side “wins”. Caroline won her initial claim years ago, but that was later overturned by another court. That would be precedent for Closer and the photographers to appeal.

        Tomorrow is World Press Freedom Day

    4. 1. Do you think they would have been as involved with Heads Together if they didn’t have this press trial coming up?
      2. The flurry of distracting activity makes sense, but I’m still trying to figure out how they benefited from the article about Kate at the super secret hen party.
      3. Do you think the press is trying to get all of the snark they are capable of out right now in case W&K win the trial and go on a press hunting power trip?
      4. I still cannot get past the fact that when this whole debacle happened, Will and Kate were supposed to have been at the Paralympic closing ceremonies, joining in the celebration of the hard work others put in to be able to be at the games in the first place. That to me is to most offensive aspect of this. If I’d played hooky from work and had someone post on the internet a picture of me sauced on the beach, I’d be fired before anyone asked me about privacy violations.

      1. Quinn, I agree that W&KM’s craven contempt for the Paralympics infuriates me the most.

        I would have sympathy for anyone else (well, for most people). But KM’s exhibitionism (probably sanctioned by W) continues well after this scandal. I think she has a serious problem/addiction to exhibiting her body to the public. It’s a Middleton party trick to entice others. Pips has been photographed wrapped in only toilet paper at parties for aristos and the focus on her bum enhancing bridesmaid dress clearly delighted Pips. She mentioned it in every interview she did post-wedding and every magazine article that she wrote, including her disastrous book Celebrate. Carole most likely encouraged this exhibitionism as one way to titillate the socially appropriate boys and men.

        W&the Midds are disingenuous at the very least.

        1. Not only to titillate, but to entrap. The trim, taut, available body is all. I feel for Charlotte if this is the message she’s going to receive from that insular trio of Middleton women. Let’s hope she has a strong will to resist and access to great role models.

          1. I feel for Charlotte too. The Middleton mindset is truly appalling. And their public protestations of modesty, a complete 180 of who they really are, is laughable and false.

          2. They are predators, all of them. I don’t excuse Mike at all. He didn’t say no, or say it enough.

          3. Mike is complicit in the Midd women’s obsession with flaunting bare bodies in pursuit of status and money. Given his penchant for dressing in a sumo wrestler costume at Christmas parties he’s probably just insipid, but he doesn’t seem to have had the backbone to step and demand that his daughters develop some substance.

        2. @Indiana Joanna – you are spot on about the flashing used as an attention seeking technique, which doesn’t say much about William’s depth as a person that this is what reeled him in. After all, how long did he and Kate know each other before she sashayed down the runway in that sheer skirt? OTOH, Modestly Well-Off James comes from a sordid set himself so I can’t imagine anything Pippa has done shocks him.

          I tried to find some sympathy for W&K initially, in spite of my disdain at them skipping work, but it’s not there. What these two get up to in their own bedroom is absolutely their own business and I respect their privacy up to that point. However, even if there hadn’t been any paps on that road, they were getting up to hanky panky in a visible area for anyone else at that chateau. Other guests, hotel workers, and the RPOs most likely could have seen them as well. That’s just distasteful. I’ve worked in the tourist/customer service industry and had to deal with some weird crap – guests like W&K are the ones who think everyone else is on their time and breathing their air which gives them license to do as they please.

          When it comes down to it, Will is mad because he got caught. The privacy violation is just a convenient smoke screen.

          1. I guess William thinks that what happens in marriage should be judged differently because he was perfectly fine with Kate parading down a catwalk in semi-nude dress/skirt.

            He was also perfectly fine with the pap photos of the middleton family in 2006/7 where Pippa and Kate are in white bikinis. The full set of photos from this vacation show Pippa and Carole changing their bikinis right infront of William. Iater, Carole sunbathes topless infront of William.

            This isn’t to say that Carole, Pippa and Kate shouldn’t sunbathe topless or nude if they want to. It demonstrates that they are OK with parading their naked bodies aroubd other people, William, staff and strangers included.

            For him to gave a hissyfit over this particular time is ridiculous especially when his wife continues to flash us at every tour.

          2. I didn’t know about the mother-in-law episodes while on vacation!! I’m about to sound like a kid but….ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *makes grossed out face*

          3. I agree that what they do in their own bedroom is their biz, but does anyone remember the comment that William made to some visiting dignitaries during a visit the couple made to London several years ago?. Didn’t William say, “You can see our bedroom form are here.” What was that all about?! I’m thinking the dignitaries were from Japan and I do recall it was Kate’s first public appearance after being hospitalized with her “illness” when she was expecting George. Or, was it Char?

            They are shameful and shameless at the same time. I agree that Kate and Pippa seem to enjoy flaunting their bodies. Ok, so be it. But, when you are the future Queen Consort and the sisterr of the future QC, isn’t some modesty expected?

            The fact that William and Kate shunned the Paralympics and then were “caught in the act,” so to speak, shows that perhaps there may be some sort of justice after all. Or, should I wait until the trial is over before saying that?

            If they do win some financial bundle, I sincerely hope, as previously posted, it is donated to that cause . But, I”m not holding my breath.

          4. Wow, Carole sunbathed topless in front of William? And, Pippa and Kate changed their bathing suits in front of him?

            If my sister took her clothes off in front of my husband, I would not be happy. And, I would never dream of taking mine off in front of my brother-in-law. As for my mom sunbathing nude in front of my husband…..

            Please, get me a glass of cool water, now! I feel faint.

            Different strokes……..

          5. I get that Europeans have a blasé attitude about nudity but it’s another when your now sil has seen all the family’s breasts! Would they all sunbathe topless in front of mike? It’s creeper status
            Again do whatever you want when no one is around to see what they’re doing. I liken what they did to the people who masturbate (2 incidents of sex) in the hospital. First time I walked in on a guy I was a nursing student and absolutely mortified. Now I tell them to wrap it up in 5 and I’ll be back. They do it usually for the thrill of being caught.

          6. My issue with Carole is that she entrenches herself into her children’s lives to the point that she assumes their identity. Nude sunbathing with boyfriends–Carole joins in. A night out with a boyfriend–Carole sidles up in a trendy maxi to fit in with the 20 somethings.

            She has been photographed time and again looking at her daughters’ boyfriends/husband in a hungry, proprietary way. She has assumed a motherhood role with KM’s children. James Middleton is not even allowed to have girlfriends attend family events. She does not see her children as separate, fully functioning adults because she covets their lives and access to young men.

          7. Sarah, “Would they all sunbathe topless in front of Mike?”

            Yes, they would because yes, they did. That holiday in 2006 or 2007 with Pippa and Kate changing bikinis in front of everyone, and all of the Middleton women topless, included Mike and, I think, James, too. Also, I believe there were a couple of friends of the family (or rather, probably friends of William’s) along, too. The Middleton women just let everything be all too available, IMO. And there’s Mike, going along with it all.

          8. Ugh this family is beyond creepy! No wonder they didn’t think anything weird/creepy with those frolicking in the water pics I saw last yr between James and pippa.
            It’s one thing when siblings tease like that when they’re young another when they’re in their 30s ?

    5. I wonder if people will mention how they went on holiday when they were suposed to be at the Paralympics, citing they were prepping for their tour.

      I doubt Kate minds about being seen naked. Honestly, it’s not even a big deal to me and I’m kind of prudish. William pulling the Diana card is ridiculous and he needs to shove it.

      Because it is not private, then, they have no case really do they?

    6. I noticed the article said nothing about the photographers being on a public road when they took the pictures. Isn’t that a key detail? Or is it untrue?

      1. I’d think it would be pertinent, but it depends on the niceties of French law. The UK articles are selective in what they disclose, presumably in fear of retribution by the Windsor family, especially its litigiously inclined Cambridge wing. But it’s done at the expense of full disclosure. No mention of the full range of photographs, from topless to ‘intimate acts’; no mention that the chateau is not a private home but rather accommodation able to be rented; no mention that the photos were taken from a public road.

        1. The article does not disclose the nature of that accommodation ie that it is rented out in whole or in part, and is not private property in the sense of being a home. It is coy in disclosing that William was rubbing lotion on Kate’s skin rather than on her bottom or her fully undressing from one bikini to another on the balcony (who does that?). It did not disclose the full array of photos, just the topless ones published. It does mention the pictures taken from a public road.

          William invoking the Diana card yet again is just irksome. He seems to feel the public will accept anything at the mere mention of his mother’s name. I note some of the DM comments were scathing about both sons using her name to gain sympathy in order to excuse their latest poor form. The ‘boys’ may find to their horror that the public is on to that distasteful game and well and truly over it.

          1. W is misusing his mother by dragging Diana into the story. How is he any better than the press he blames for hounding her? Diana seems to be used as a convenient distraction for bad behaviour by a lot of people, including Willie and Diana’s scumbag brother.

          2. It’s the utter disrespect for Diana I find appalling. The scumbag brother is awful, but her own sons disingenuously mention her when it suits their agenda. You’re right; how are they better than anyone else wanting to use this woman again and again?

          3. And I guess he wants people to forget all the times Diana used the paparazzi to her own advantage?
            Just as they have done themselves
            I think what they were really upset with isn’t the topless photos (again Kate’s numerous flashing) per se but the fact they were caught lying about what they were doing. Thus waking people up from the fairytale slumber and begun the realization that this duo are actually layabout liars =)

          4. Sarah, true… but then why risk a court case when it will all most likely come out? People had forgotten about the photos, which were badged as merely topless. Now, far more could (and should!) come to light.

          5. They didn’t start this court case recently. They filed back in 2012 right after it happened. It’s taken this long to get to trial.

          6. I think they were still counting on the good will of the general public to cry poor will and Kate such victims! At the time I think almost all articles were still very much pro will and Kate so also banking on that.
            I don’t know how long trials usually take in France but it’s been what 4-5 yrs since?? Things have changed. They’ve squandered almost (if not all) all of their good will bestowed upon them and now many people see them for what they are. newspapers still write favorable articles but they now also call them out add in some snarky passive aggressive stories too.
            So it’ll be interesting to see how the U.K. Press writes up the trial

          7. I was looking through French articles to see what they said about the trial and found a 2012 article in Le Monde which said they would not be seeking damages. Interesting that they changed their minds.

          8. Nic919, would this decision to seek damages perhaps be a way to cover their legal expenses, should they win? I thought I had read somewhere that the royals’ legal team used to provide services for free until recently–post-Kate–or am I mistaken?

          9. Normally a criminal action is paid for by the state because the prosecutor is not the victim’s lawyer but acts on behalf of the state. The fact that Will and Kate have their own solicitor taking part and requesting damages makes this very odd indeed. I am not familiar enough with French law to explain that. In common law courts a criminal prosecution is entirely separate from a request for damages. In cases where restitution to repair damage (like theft or vandalism) it is the crown prosecutor that makes an request for compensation and only to cover actual damages.

    1. Oh, Lauri, so funny! Not only did I laugh when reading that W and K are resourceful with money, but this sentence had me on the floor: “And it seems that Kate has a knack for photography, with the experts saying she is a natural behind the lens who ‘really captures her children’s spirits in the photos.’

      Looking back at photos she has taken of her kids, I don’t see anything but blandness coming through. We’ve seen from other photos and videos that both children have personality! When Mummy photographs them? Not so much!

      Ah, the building up of Kate Middleton continues. But, so does the tearing down of the Duchess!

      1. So true Mary Elizabeth, so true. I find it fascinating how the press spends so much time and energy building someone up to atmospheric heights only to start tearing them down. Not saying of course that some don’t deserve it but it’s gotten so predictable, that I rather dread the build up of Meghan (or who ever Harry marries) because you know the tearing down will follow.

      1. Woo hoo! Nothing says Happy Birthday like drab blurry hay and ill fitting clothes! Kate nailed this one. I’m sure they hired a professional photographer for the party and the unreleased photos. The only time I have seen these children remotely having fun was at the party Canada gave them when they visited last summer.
        Charlotte is adorable!!! I hope she had a magical, fun birthday party fit for a princess.
        Happy Birthday Charlotte!!!

        1. Well, if you have drab parents with no imagination, intelligence or sense of style then this is as good as it gets. Charlotte is cute, but I would have loved to see a picture of her with a big carefree smile. In my opinion, the majority of the pictures that are chosen for us plebes to see of Charlotte and George always show them just not looking 100% happy. There is this very closed off feeling to the pictures, but again, this is controlled by their parents so that speaks volumes.

    2. “According to Gina Jones from Bumpkins, The Baby Show’s lead experts in baby photography, it is all down to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s desire to be ‘resourceful with money’.

      Bless their hearts!

      And yet we see Kate stepping out in something new practically every time she has an engagement?

      1. I think the important word is ‘desire’. They would like to be, but for various reasons can not be.

        A different way to say they are ‘keen’ with no corresponding follow through.

      2. “Bless their hearts!” Haha, that was a catch phrase we had fun with a while back on KMR. So apt- especially for Wills don’t you think? Every time we see him channeling Oscar the Grouch or making a not funny joke- oh honestly- bless his heart, right?!

        1. “Bless their hearts”

          I learnt it right here on KMR!

          Thanks to the ladies who shared this saying with us all 🙂

  33. A little question : when people publicize photos of Charlotte taken by Kate, does Kate win money?

    1. I don’t think so, because they are published by KP.

      However I think the Middletons got money for the picture of George Mike took with W&K.

    1. Ooh thanks. I actually wondered awhile back when their wedding was. It seemed like forever ago they announced the engagement.

  34. Unfortunate…

    ‘If you don’t like the royals just do one and stay quiet!’ Overwhelming response after vile internet trolls posted hateful comments about Princess Charlotte’s birthday portrait
    The new image of the young royal was taken by the Duchess of Cambridge
    Charlotte can be seen with glossy dark hair and wearing a floral blouse
    But hateful commenters left nasty messages about the photo on social media

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4467138/Internet-trolls-post-comments-Princess-Charlotte.html#ixzz4fxfCQPWV
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    1. Jessica this particular (Katemiddletonreview.com) site is run by a woman who has class. It’s happened before here, sadly, but KMR, put a stop to it. I agree that no child should be criticized like that. It is just wrong.

      I hope you will agree that the comments here — except for one — all mentioned how cute, darling, sweet, etc, Charlotte looks. Criticizing her mother’s photography skills is a different subject and those comments can be agreed with or not, but should be allowed.

      So, may I ask quite respectfully, why you chose to post the DM story link here? Why not just add your own feelings on the DM site? You seem to have very strong opinions and so do others here. If we are polite and not hateful to one another — and toward children — then, opinions are to be shared, even if differing from our own. Am I misreading your reason for posting the link? Are you just pointing it out? So many of us go to the DM often, so we’ve seen it, I think. I ask with respect. I am just wondering if you are criticizing any of us. Or, am I reading you wrong?

      Easy to jump to opinions when we are just reading words and not hearing how they are being said.

        1. I wouldn’t want to publish a lot of photos if I were in their position either–the nastiness is just one good reason.

          The media loves to do “end-of-year” photo galleries of the royals, and I found several devoted to Prince George – and now I’m even more bewildered by this (seemingly) widespread opinion that W + K are withholding their children from the public. In 2016, we saw George attending his first day of school, posing in the snow with his parents on a ski vacation, meeting President Obama, sitting for a portrait with his great grandmom and cousins, watching the flypast at Trooping the Colour, greeting crowds + inspecting airplanes + attending a garden party during his family’s Canadian tour, and feeding his dog ice cream sometime around his 3rd birthday.

          That’s 9 photo ops. I mean, how much more of the boy does one need to in order to feel properly invested in him? Now, I agree that these children will need to get use to public life, but the tour appearances and trouping the color alone provided more than enough exposure for one year–does there really need to be more than that?

          1. The problem is how strictly controlled by W&K it is. Their paranoia–more like his paranoia and privacy issues–cloud the whole thing. Other royals release little tidbits when they want to or feel a picture is cute, or whatever; W&K release photos to deflect criticism. Like Charlotte’s picture coming right when the trial started, versus on her actual birthday.

            C&D did photo calls regularly with the boys with media and didn’t hide them away or act petulant that people wanted to see their children.

          2. Charlotte’s 2nd birthday pic came the day before her 2nd birthday, just like her 1st birthday pics came the day before her 1st birthday, so no change there at all. It’s not W&K’s fault that the France trial started the day before Charlotte’s birthday.

          3. I think the idea that W&K hide their kids comes from the first couple years of George’s life when we didn’t get 9 photo ops a year, but also because we live in an age of the 24 hours news cycle. We’ve seen more of George than people saw of William when he was the same age. But because there wasn’t the 24 hour news cycle that we have now, it seemed different.

          4. I would say last year was anomaly for a couple reasons. Queen’s 90 celebration and it was the year the media started calling them out for their work shy ways thus queue photo of kids.
            Even their Christmas pap stroll had the kids to guarantee to pull the media to theirs and distract from the the Queen’s
            It’s May how many times have we seen them this year?

          5. My issue with them hiding the kids pretty much is they trot them out for good PR more than anything else. Get called out for stuff? Pics of the kids. HM isn’t at church for Christmas as she’s ill? Rival court, with paparazzi approved pics of the kids… They use their children like they are their pawns in a game between the press and them and it’s really disconcerting.

          6. I agree. The photos they release are enough . And I also agree that, if I were William and Kate and read some of the disgusting comments made ( on other sights) I would be tempted to release no photos!

      1. Fionamarie, I do not find fault with Jessica posing this link, I merely think she was pointing out that it is really awful how people make disparaging comments about a child. I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish by your remarks.

        1. Yes, anybody saying anything that cruel about a child should probably be punched in the face. But they’re probably awful people who you shouldn’t waste energy on at all.

  35. I see the copyright symbol/Duchess of Cambridge is on the photo. Copyright is automatic but she’s using the symbol to assert that. I doubt she would licence the image for payment but Kate taking the photo gives her control over its use, ultimately, should she wish to exercise that (outside of fair dealing for review etc). It’s sold as Kate being a doting mother, a talented art history scholar/photographer, privacy etc. But really it seems to be about control and a bit of spite.
    The Cambridges are real control freaks, this trial is going to be very interesting.

    1. There’s talk all the RF has been summoned to BP.

      More talk Prince Philip has died.

      I hope not. 🙁 I hope it’s overzealous media.

    1. Why would they speak to the NZ media but refuse to speak to the British media? I don’t buy it.

      Something big has to have happened, a 3am meeting call out is very unusual.

      1. Due to time differences we get up earlier than a lot of other countries, for example New Zealand standard time is 12 hours ahead of Greenwich standard time (UK time). So our news sources would be showing stories earlier than other countries?

    2. Perhaps Charles to be made Regent? Though why call people together at 3.00am for something – anything – that can be dealt with during daylight/business hours.

      1. This could have to do with the palace renovations and having to move things around. That will be quite an endeavour.
        It is odd to publicize calling the staff, but nothing so far about the family going to BP.

      2. I’ve read from Royal reporters on twitter that the meeting was /not/ called at 3am. So I correct myself! But we’re not 100% sure I guess.

        Could be anything. BP refurbishment? I can’t see Charles ever being made Regent, HM wouldn’t make that official step I don’t think.

        1. If the meeting wasn’t called at 3 am then I definitely lean toward it being about BP renos and moving some furniture about.

Comments are closed.

Back To Top