[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

There were people on here foaming at the mouth when Meghan took her child out for a walk…

We are not discussing Meghan…did you not get the brief

[Cherry Christmas]

I don’t understand why he would take it in that way, he can’t be short of cash plus it was in euros

[Candy Annie Cane]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I don’t understand why he would take it in that way, he can’t be short of cash plus it was in euros

It does all seem odd. Apparently any donations are allowed but should be in the form of a cheque. It just seems a bit dodgy.

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

It does all seem odd. Apparently any donations are allowed but should be in the form of a cheque. It just seems a bit dodgy.

Yes it did look dodgy….and a crass way of doing business.

[jet]

I admit I would have accepted it too - a massive amount of money to benefit the people that needed it from his charities. I truly believe Charles would not have had a thought of pocketing any of it. There has not been any suggestion that he might have.

[jet]

It says the money was counted by 2 trusted courtiers before a person from Coutts bank collected it to deposit.

[Candy Annie Cane]

Originally Posted by jet

It says the money was counted by 2 trusted courtiers before a person from Coutts bank collected it to deposit.

Doesn't mean nothing was trimmed from it. Its wasn't declared through the proper channels, why is that?

I don't think Charles has his fingers in the till but definitely looks underhand, particularly being cash and the way it was passed. Its odd.

Obviously any money to charity is welcomed but it must be accounted for properly, otherwise it just seems underhand and seedy.

[jet]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Doesn't mean nothing was trimmed from it. Its wasn't declared through the proper channels, why is that?

I don't think Charles has his fingers in the till but definitely looks underhand, particularly being cash and the way it was passed. Its odd.

Obviously any money to charity is welcomed but it must be accounted for properly, otherwise it just seems underhand and seedy.

https://inews.co.uk/news/prince-char...se-row-1713735

……“[The money] was passed immediately to his charities and it was his charities who decided to accept the money – that is a decision for them. And they did so, and as they confirmed, it followed all the right processes, and the auditors looked at it.


“The Prince of Wales operates on advice. Situations, contexts change over the years.”
Clarence House said it had received assurances from the prince’s charity that the donations, first reported by The Sunday Times, had been the subject of “all the correct processes”.

In a statement, it said: “Charitable donations received from Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim were passed immediately to one of the prince’s charities, who carried out the appropriate governance and have assured us that all the correct processes were followed.
……..
It is said Charles will never again accept cash donations, (which was not illegal) and hasn’t for some years, lessons have been learned, so it’s a bit like beating a dead donkey. If it surfaces that there was indeed dodgy dealings going on, with Charles's knowledge, then that would be a different matter.