AG百家乐在线官网

Thanks for following our updates, we're bringing our coverage to a close on this live page.

Before we go, here's a summary of the day's events:

It all began at the Court of Appeal this afternoon when Prince Harry lost his appeal against the ruling dismissing his challenge to the level of police protection he receives in the UK.

That appeal was regarding whether Ravec, the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, had made an error of procedure when assessing that Prince Harry should have his additional protection removed. 

Sir Geoffrey Vos explained that while the Duke of Sussex's personal arguments were both "powerful and moving", he concluded: "I could not say that the Duke's sense of grievance translated into a legal argument for the challenge to Ravec's decision."

Hours after the judgment was read out in court, a bombshell interview aired in which Prince Harry said he wants "reconciliation" with the Royal Family - but claimed the King "won't speak to me".

Prince Harry wants 'reconciliation' with Royal Family

In the interview with BBC News, Harry emphasised that he feels it's "impossible" to bring his wife Meghan and his children to the UK with his security arrangements unresolved.

He also expressed fears the King will never meet his grandchildren, adding: "I don't know how much longer my father has."

Buckingham Palace responded saying the case had been looked at "meticulously" by British courts. It's understood the King felt it would have been constitutionally improper to intervene.

'Basic duty of care was not and is not applied to me'

It wasn't the last we heard from Harry this evening.

He released a lengthy statement in which he attacked Ravec for failing to do an annual risk assessment, saying legal proceedings "have revealed to me that this basic duty of care was not and is not applied to me".

Harry accused Ravec of being "reckless", saying the lack of a risk assessment was a "dereliction of duty" and added his life was "knowingly put at risk".

He concluded by saying: "I remain committed to a life of public service. This has been and will always be my life's work, and when you strip away the noise, you'll be able to hear, all I've been asking for is safety."

We've been bringing you reaction to Prince Harry's bombshell interview throughout the evening.

But what do his words means for the royals? Watch this analysis from our royal correspondent Laura Bundock below.

Prince Harry's interview was "quite extraordinary" and came "completely out of the blue", a former press secretary to the late Queen has said.

Ailsa Anderson said she was "astounded" that Prince Harry gave this interview, and pointed out her "deep sense of sadness".

"The Prince Harry that I knew and I worked there with was a very different person to what he is at the moment," she said.

"This was the guy who was loved by the media, he was adored, he was almost more accessible that Prince William... Harry was the cheeky chappy."

Anderson explained that those inside Buckingham Palace will be "raising their eyes heavenwards" in reaction to the interview.

"Prince Harry is saying I don't know how long my father has, that's going to cause real concern and more speculation in the media and the wider public about what his diagnosis is, which is incredibly unhelpful going forward."

Watch the full interview below.

Prince Harry's interview came after he lost his Court of Appeal case over UK security.

Speaking after the judgment, legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg set out what the Duke of Sussex's next steps could be.

"He will obviously try to consider the question of an appeal to the Supreme Court," he said.

But he explained that you need permission for that.

"There wasn't an application for permission just now from the Court of Appeal. There might be one in writing. If permission is refused, then Prince Harry's lawyers could go and ask the Supreme Court for permission," he added. 

"But what the Supreme Court will look at is whether this is a case of general public interest, general public importance. It seems to me it's one of very, very specific importance to Prince Harry."

Rozenberg said he "wouldn't hold out much hope" for an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Prince Harry has released a statement after he lost his Court of Appeal case over the security he receives in the UK.

He's attacked the committee known as Ravec for failing to do an annual risk assessment, and adds that legal proceedings "have revealed to me that this basic duty of care was not and is not applied to me".

Ravec is the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (see 13.45 post).

The Duke of Sussex also says he will be writing to the home secretary to "ask her to urgently examine the matter and review the Ravec process".

"This process has only ever been about ensuring my safety and that of my immediate family when we are in in the United Kingdom, so that we may safely visit my home country with the same level of security that other governments deem necessary for our protection," he says.

Prince Harry goes on to say the legal action has been "a last resort, but one that has uncovered shocking truths".

He accuses Ravec of being "reckless" - and claims the lack of a risk assessment was a "dereliction of duty" that meant his life was "knowingly put at risk".

In what seems to be an aside attacking newspapers, he said: "This all comes from the same institutions that preyed upon my mother, that openly campaigned for the removal of our security, and that continue to incite hatred towards me, my wife and even our children, while at the same time protecting the very power that they should be holding accountable."

He concludes by saying: "I remain committed to a life of public service. This has been and will always be, my life's work, and when you strip away the noise, you'll be able to hear, all I've been asking for is safety."

Prince Harry was showing signs of "muddled thinking" in his interview, a royal historian has told Sky News.

"Harry has many strengths, and I'm not sure that one of them is understanding the legal system," Dr Tessa Dunlop told Sophy Ridge after the duke lost his Court of Appeal case over UK security.

"It's easy to say it's an establishment stitch-up - I think it's more a case of the law," Dunlop said.

But she explained that Harry "falls down a bit" by "throwing his toys out the pram once again" and "blowing it off against his father".

"As long as you park blame at your father's feet, you're not going to have the reconciliation - which suggests he's not really ready for the reconciliation," she added.

Watch the full interview below.

Prince Harry appeared to be "pretty close to tears" at times in his "very emotional" interview, a royal editor has said.

Robert Jobson, royal editor at The London Evening Standard, said "the reality here is that he's a target".

"He was born as the second son of the now King. He served on the frontline, making him a legitimate target, and now he can't bring his family back to the country and to be part of his family," he said. 

"I understand that he's done things wrong, and I think he has made huge mistakes, but that was a very emotional interview."

Reacting to today's judgment at the Court of Appeal, Jobson said he has reservations even though he ultimately agrees with it.

"I agree... the fact that he left this country. I agree with the fact that he no longer is a working royal, but he is a very, very high-profile person through no fault of his own," he added. 

"I think that that brings with it, well, obviously the emotion you've seen there."

Watch the full interview below.

Prince Harry's interview has been labelled "completely extraordinary" by a royal reporter.

Jack Royston, chief royal correspondent at Newsweek, described it as "very jaw-dropping" and points out that the duke said he doesn't know how long his father has to live.

"It is such a different line than we're getting from the Palace at the moment," he said.

"The Palace have been very positive, not just with the things they've been saying, but with the whole mood."

Royston said the way in which Prince Harry delivered that line "does invite speculation that the King might be running out of time".

Turning to today's events which saw the duke lose his Court of Appeal case over UK security, Royston said Prince Harry has a "very binary" view of risk.

"He views it as if he has a police protection team standing alongside him, then he's safe," he said.

"If he does not, then he is facing an intolerable level of danger. I think in reality, risk is a much more nuanced thing than that."

Watch the full interview below.

Here's a quick recap of the key developments this evening, with Prince Harry dominating the headlines:

• He gave a "jaw-dropping" interview to the BBC, after losing a court case about his UK security arrangements;
• Harry said his father the King "won't speak" to him because of the case;
• He wants to reconcile with the Royal Family, and has forgiven them, he said. The security case is the "only thing" now preventing that;
• "I don't know how much longer my father has," Harry says in the interview. He expressed fears the King will never meet his grandchildren;
• But Harry emphasises he feels it's "impossible" to bring wife Meghan and his children to the UK with his security arrangements unresolved;
• Buckingham Palace responded this evening, saying the case had been looked at "meticulously" by British courts. It's understood the King felt it would have been constitutionally improper to intervene.

Read a full breakdown of the interview in our news story...

And here's the background to the legal row...

What's the security row about?

Prince Harry received full, publicly funded security protection until he stepped back from royal duties with wife Meghan in March 2020 and moved to the US.

Once he moved away, the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) - which has delegated responsibility from the Home Office for royal security - decided he would not receive the same level of protection.

Harry has argued that his private protection team in the US does not have access to UK intelligence information, which he says is needed to keep his wife and children safe.

He wants access to his previous level of security when in the country, but is willing to fund the security himself rather than ask taxpayers to foot the bill after he stepped down as a senior member of the Royal Family.

The first High Court hearing took place in February 2022 but didn't conclude until 28 February 2024, when retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane ruled against Prince Harry.

He ruled the decision to change his security status was not unlawful or "irrational", and that there had been no "procedural unfairness".

What happened today?

The Court of Appeal rejected Harry's bid to overturn that 2024 High Court ruling on his UK security. 

Judge Sir Geoffrey Vos said while the Duke of Sussex's safety concerns were both "powerful and moving", his "sense of grievance" did not "translate into a legal argument".

Watch the judgment below, and analysis from royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills:

Prince Harry's tone was "hurt but full of intention" in his interview, a royal historian has said.

Sir Anthony Seldon explained that the Duke of Sussex "wants to forgive, wants to move on and wants to build bridges".

He described the interview as being a "very significant moment in history" after Prince Harry signalled that he "wants to be back in a way that needs to be worked out".

Turning to the King's position, Seldon asked "what could be more painful for a father than to have such a public breach with a son?"

"I think it's easier and better to forgive," he added.

Watch the full interview below.