Skip to main content
CNN.com /TRANSCRIPTS

CNN TV
EDITIONS





CNN LARRY KING LIVE

'Royals' Experts Discuss Prince Harry

Aired January 15, 2002 - 21:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight, he's the spare for the heir. And he's dabbled with drugs. Is Britain's Prince Harry a hell-raiser? The latest on Princess Di's two boys and palace problems that could tarnish the Queen's golden anniversary.

Joining us in London, best-selling royal biographer Robert Lacey, his new book "Monarch" is just out in London, out in April in the United States; in Washington, Kitty Kelley, her sensational book "The Royals" flew off the shelves; back in London, the publishing director of Brooks Peerage, Harold Brooks-Baker; plus social historian, biographer Philip Hoare.

But first, American Taliban John Walker is coming home to the United States charged with terrorism. We'll hear from "Newsweek" correspondent Colin Soloway, who interviewed Walker in Afghanistan; former prosecutor Nancy Grace, now an anchor for Court TV; and former chief minority counsel for the House Judiciary Committee Julian Epstein.

They are all next on LARRY KING LIVE.

The Walker family released a statement today saying they were heartened by news reports that John will be coming home soon. They say we now hope we'll see our son and give him the love and support he needs. We are grateful to live in a nation that presumes innocence and withholds judgment until all the facts are presented. The United States decided to try Walker in U.S. civilian court on multiple charges, conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals abroad -- that could carry a life sentence -- two counts of providing material support or resources to a terrorist -- that could mean 15 years in prison or life if a death resulted -- and engaging in prohibited transactions with the Taliban. No charge of treason.

Are you surprised, Colin Soloway?

COLIN SOLOWAY, "NEWSWEEK": Well, we've been hearing for actually the past several weeks that the government was not planning to charge him with treason, although I think Nancy probably has some interesting points on that issue.

I think it seems to me that the government was probably going for what they felt safe in charging him with for what they could really get him for for sure based on his own statements that -- the rather extensive statements, surprisingly extensive statements, which he gave to them. But, you know, again, the attorneys may feel that this is probably the best -- the best that they can get 100 percent. Again, there may also be political considerations. But it's difficult to say right now. As...

KING: Nancy, none of these charges carry the death penalty. What do you make of that?

NANCY GRACE, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, I was very, very surprised, Larry. And I think it's more of a political decision than it is a legal decision because under the charges that the government is proceeding with, it describes a count of basically aiding and abetting. But if you look under the treason law, it says point blank to aid and comfort the enemy while you owe a duty to the U.S. which he did as a citizen, equals treason. So it's not about charging what you think you can win, charging the easiest charge. It's about charging the truth. And in my mind, he meets the qualifications for treason.

KING: Julian Epstein, what do you make of it?

JULIAN EPSTEIN, FORMER DEMOCRATIC COUNSEL, JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well, I think the attorney general, and I'm not one to give compliments to him. I think he was exactly right on the cameras in the courtroom. I think he is exactly right on how to proceed with this case.

I think the overwhelming consensus, Larry, I think, of legal experts in the area would tell you that try to get a treason charge would be very difficult because of the Constitutional requirement that there needs to be two witnesses to attest to each of the treasonous activities. So I think that he has made the right decision.

Now having said that, I think this is still going to be a very, very difficult case for him to proceed for two reasons. One is there is going to be a no-holds barred attack by the defense and the parents' statement today is the first shot over the bow to suppress the confession that was made to the government. And that's going to be a very, very interesting legal debate. It's not a foregone conclusion that they will lose that way.

GRACE: Never happen.

EPSTEIN: Well, I disagree with you on that. We can talk about that. Secondly, the statutes that the attorney general is forced to use here, and this isn't his fault, are statutes that were written -- and I was involved in the drafting of a lot of the terrorism statutes -- are statutes that were written without the contemplation of this type of fact situation. So I think he's got to kind of use a very almost uninviting statutory terrain to prosecute this case. Having said that, I think he will succeed with the prosecution. I think Mr. Walker will and should...

GRACE: No.

EPSTEIN: ... spend a lot of time in prison.

KING: No, what? GRACE: Larry, when the Constitution was written 200 years ago, I promised the founding fathers never envisioned a Talamerican that would have to be tried under the laws of the Constitution. But our Constitution and our laws are vibrant enough that they changed, that they can be interpreted to each fact situation. I don't think there's going to be a problem at all proving this case. Please, you have got the statement made to the feds.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: Hold it.

GRACE: ... then there's the statement to a news outlet.

KING: You are prejudging this, right, Nancy?

GRACE: Excuse me.

KING: You're not presuming innocence?

GRACE: I am basing my opinion on what I know now.

KING: That's what I mean.

GRACE: I have an open mind and what I know now, the statements that I've read and what the journalists have stated, is very obvious that he knew there were suicide attacks going on beforehand.

EPSTEIN: I think that the statements that were made to the government were very damning. I agree with that. Here's the problem in terms of the suppression of that. The Supreme Court and the circuit courts and federal courts have held that the mere fact that he waived his Miranda right may not be dispositive as to whether that confession can be introduced in court. They've held in cases where people have been on drugs. They've held in cases where people have been denied shelter and food for many days, that conditions that were said to be voluntary were then later suppressed for that reason.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: The man was not being tortured. The statements coming in...

KING: Nancy, let him finish.

EPSTEIN: I disagree with the argument that the defense will make. However, I think the defense will make this argument. I think the other argument the defense will make is that he wasn't Mirrandized at the first point of contact which was with the CIA. Now on the other hand, there's plenty of precedent which suggests that given the fact that he -- this was a voluntary confession, and most importantly, the surreal thing is when the news organizations that are reporting this actually become part of the story...

GRACE: That will come in too, Julian.

EPSTEIN: The most dispositive thing is the CNN interview. And I think the fact he gave that CNN interview...

GRACE: Julian...

EPSTEIN: Nancy, if I can really finish the point, the fact that he gave that CNN interview I think will indicate, in fact, that the confession was voluntary and that will work very much against him and I hope that it will.

KING: Colin, do you know how he's getting here, when he's coming, what conditions he's coming under?

SOLOWAY: Well, I -- we really don't at this point. We don't know when he's coming. I would imagine he'll be coming by plane, otherwise it would be a pretty long trip. But again, I don't think they're going to let us know on that.

As we're told, the military are basically waiting to cut the orders to fly him back. But again, we just don't know at that point. And again, from what your other guest was saying, I think it will be very interesting to see how the CNN interview is treated in evidence, since it is the best sort of corroborative evidence, you know, that matches with what John told the feds. So -- I mean, I think, you know, there are already some questions about the nature of this interview in terms of, you know, was he given morphine or what?

GRACE: Hold on. Hold on. Larry, everybody knows the Constitution protects a defendant from the state. The Constitution doesn't protect you from blabbing to CNN or other news outlets. If you want to talk to journalists, that's your problem if you spill the beans. So that statement will come into evidence.

EPSTEIN: That's right. In fact, I think the most significant aspect of the case to suppress the confession and that -- right now that's pretty much the ball game at this point in my opinion. If that confession comes in, I think he is going to have a difficult time notwithstanding the fact that the statutes are a little bit clumsy for this fact situation.

If the confession gets in, he's in a really, really difficult situation. The fact that he gave -- and CNN is going to be very involved in this case now because CNN got that interview -- the fact he gave that interview to CNN I think is the most dispositive argument for the fact that it was a voluntary confession. But remember, the Constitutional standard is voluntary. And this is a terrain that has been litigated for many, many years, many decades right now. And it's not very clear.

KING: We're going to be doing lots more on this as the judicial processes approaches with Colin Soloway, Nancy Grace and Julian Epstein. We thank them all.

The Royals are in the news again, and this time it's a young prince, dabbled with drink and drugs this past summer when he was 16 years old. We'll talk about that with a great panel coming up. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL: The complaint alleges Walker knowingly and purposely allied himself with certain terrorist organizations with terror, that he chose to embrace fanatics and his allegiance to those fanatics and terrorists never faltered, not even with the knowledge that they had murdered thousands of his countrymen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Let's meet our panel. In London, Robert Lacey, the best- selling biographer, veteran royal watcher, his new book for the queen's Golden Jubilee is "Monarch: The Life and Reign of Elizabeth II." The book was just out in Britain. It will be out in the United States in April.

In Washington, Kitty Kelly, the best-selling biographer, she wrote that book, "The Royals." Currently working on a book on the Bush Family dynasty.

In London, is Harold Brooks-Baker, publishing director of "Burke's Peerage."

And in London, Philip Hoare, the biography and social historian working on a magazine piece about Princess Margaret. The news is that Princess (sic) Harry, this Sunday news broke that Harry had dabbled with drink and drugs this past summer when he was 16. After Prince Charles discovered what his younger son had been up to, he sent him to visit a drug rehab facility in London. Marijuana is illegal in Britain and the drinking age is 18.

Robert Lacey, the same question for all of you, we will start with you. What do you make of this story?

ROBERT LACEY, ROYAL BIOGRAPHER: Well, I think it's been very well handled by the royal family. I actually think in the -- given the recent history of the royal family this does not count as a disaster. I think actually quite the contrary. One of the things we are getting used to in Britain is giving up the old idea that the royal family has to be perfect. It's actually quite a model idea, a 20th century idea.

What we've seen with the news of Harry experimenting in the summer is that they are a family like any others and also that they can make mistakes and there's been quite a national debate here, which I myself think has been very fruitful about whether or not Prince Charles handled it well, how a parent should react and the royal family has been remarkably open in disclosing. There is an interesting comparison. Our prime minister's son fell down drunk in the street a few years ago and there's been a blackout about that. The royal family don't actually have that right to privacy.

KING: Kitty Kelley, what's your read?

KITTY KELLEY, AUTHOR, "THE ROYALS": Well, it is probably a parent's worst nightmare, the fear that your child will get involved in drugs of some sort. But I think there's been excessive publicity over it. The poor kid, if it was just experimentation, it's probably what you'd expect of a 17-year-old.

KING: So you think too much coverage?

KELLEY: Actually, the head of the press -- the press complaints commission is saying that it's a matter of public interest. I don't know. They set up rules a couple of years ago that the princes were off limits to the press. And there was an understanding that the press was going to give these two young men a chance, after their mother's death, to grow up with a certain amount of privacy.

But once the incident became public, it's now in the public domain, and so I guess he's fair game. I just have a problem with underage children. He's a minor. I know that he's third in line to be king one of these days, but he's still under age.

KING: Harold Brooks-Baker, what do you think?

HAROLD BROOKS-BAKER, "BURKE'S PEERAGE": Well, I think the whole situation has, has Robert Lacey said, been handled very well by the royal family, especially Prince Charles and indeed Queen Elizabeth II. However, the members of the royal family who are in line to the throne cannot take the chances that our children and grandchildren would take.

The public eye is on them, and they are no longer able to be as princes were in the past, free from scrutiny. It's sad, and Robert Lacey also brought up the subject of the prime minister's son who was found drunk in Trafalgar Square a couple of years ago. That is something that a prime minister's son can do, but a monarch's grandchild cannot do.

The greatest problem here really is that since the beginning of time, the person who is second or third in line to the throne has no job. He's very much like the traditional vice president of the United States in years gone past. Nothing on his mind except the health of the president. These people should be given jobs, duties and briefed in case one day they actually have to take a throne, and you saw, sadly, what has happened to Princess Margaret, Prince Charles of Luxembourg and many others who were not prepared, but who were brilliant, loved, appreciated and their lives just fell apart. If this boy is not given a chance to have a significant role in life, it will be a disaster.

KING: Philip Hoare, what do you think?

PHILIP HOARE, SOCIAL HISTORIAN: I tend to agree with Howard there. It is a dangerous thing. I think it's an appalling thing that this came out anyway. I was very depressed when I saw the headlines, and was very depressed when I saw it break on the news.

I thought, and as Kitty mentioned, that we were supposed to have an embargo on this sort of thing. There is a suggestion today in the independent newspaper that there is actually something more behind this story and that some sort of deal was done between the palace and the "News of the World" that this story would be released in the way it has been.

I must admit I just found it very depressing that this poor chap, who has just really done what a lot of us have done in our teenage years in one way or another, suddenly is on the front of the newspapers. I think, yes, maybe there's been a good spin put on it and there is a serious debate to be had here, but I kind of don't think we should use someone of his age to launch that debate.

KING: Well said. Robert, why is it our business if a young 15, 16-year-old boy does something wrong?

LACEY: Well, it's because this, like it or not, is the new function of the modern function of the royal family. If you are cynical, you will say that it's the national soap opera. I'd actually say, while agreeing with what everybody said about the strain and affects of this on a kid who is underage and indeed I think the last time we were all here we were talking about an American book which all of us thought here in Britain thought was revealing too much about William and Harry, and it's quite right there are all these rules in place.

But having said that, the kid did make a mistake. It's the same mistake we've all made. I myself am rather actually encouraged to find out that he's experimenting, that he's like ordinary kids. And to come back to the main point, whether we like it or not, one of the functions that the royal family plays in Britain is to act out ordinary human dramas on the big screen.

And I think this has been well handled in the circumstances, and that the national debate that has ensued and indeed the international debate has been very good for all of the identity societies involved.

KING: We'll get back with more. We will be including phone calls. They are our guests the rest of the way. Tomorrow night we are going to do a major program about "Black Hawk Down," the book, the movie, we're going to meet the actual people who fought the battle in Somalia.

On Thursday night, Barbara Walters and her new co-host John Miller. They'll co-host the now back to Friday night version of "20/20." And then on Friday night Russell Crowe will join us. You're watching LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TONY BLAIR, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: And I think that the way that Prince Charles and the royal family have handled it is absolutely right and they've done it in a very responsible, and, as you'd expect in a very sensitive way for their child.

(END VIDEO CLIP) KING: That was Prime Minister Tony Blair. Kitty Kelley, do you agree with him? Have they handled this well?

KELLEY: Yes. I do agree with him. I think what Prince Charles did was terrific. He suggested to his son William to tell Harry to go to a drug addiction house and to meet with real addicts who could talk to him about not doing drugs and what's happened to their life.

And from the news reports, Prince Harry left that place feeling quite shattered. I do think it's quite interesting, Larry, something Philip said earlier about the way this story came to the public. We are talking about an example of Prince Harry during last June and July experimenting with marijuana more than once, being drunk on several occasions, drinking in a bar, drinking at private parties.

This never came out until last Sunday, and it came out through the "News Of The World." And there is obviously palace cooperation with this tabloid that's given them so much grief in the past, and there would never be palace cooperation unless the tabloid had much more than they ran with. It's very interesting how the story came to our attention.

KING: But when you say something like that, Kitty, earlier you said we are putting too much attention on this young man. Now you imply there is something larger.

KELLEY: No. I do think we are putting too much attention on it. As a matter of fact, I think the British reporters that are chasing after the young man that he did drugs with, is a terrible thing. Nobody should be chasing after this young man who is 17 years old and already being accused in the public press as leading Prince Harry astray.

Yes, I do think that the publicity is helpful. It's just that if there are rules set up, where do you draw the line?

KING: Harold, what do you make of how well Prince Charles has dealt with this?

BROOKS-BAKER: Well, he's been extraordinarily gifted in the way he's handled it. I do agree with Kitty Kelley that there are almost certainly is more to this story than we've been given. That's the sad part of it.

The good part of it is that if you look at previous generations of princes in the last couple of hundred years in this country and, indeed, even more so on the continent of Europe, you will see that these people behave very, very well indeed.

The heir to the throne, the prince of Wales, is outstanding in his contributions to life and society through the prince's trust. He hires 60,000, 64,000 people who probably wouldn't have jobs if it weren't for him. And certainly his sons have behaved extremely well.

Prince William is an extraordinary person who, at his young age, is admired around the world and apparently has over 100 fan clubs throughout the western world. The fact that this fellow has fallen from grace is not surprising, but it pales to the activities of people like Edward VII , who participated in every debauchery known to man and died at a young age not too long after he took the throne. We are very lucky. The world is very lucky and the commonwealth, all 54 nations of the commonwealth are very pleased with this royal family.

KING: Philip, do you think this is the end of the press embargo on coverage of young princes?

HOARE: Terribly depressing if it is. I think the comparison with an older generation is very interesting between the queen and Princess Margaret because you do have this strange sort of nether world that the younger -- the younger son in William and Harry's case, is put into. And in a way, the problem is something about this coming out is that it is a blight on his career very early on in his life.

If that happens, one does worry about what will happen later. With Princess Margaret she had the terrible problem with the marriage proposal to Townsend. And I think the trouble is that the same thing could happen with this -- with Harry.

KING: Robert, what about the protection issue, the role of the young princes' body guards. Similar questions asked about the Secret Service role when the Bush twins had problems.

BROOKS-BAKER: Well, this is interesting. I would like to actually disagree with Philip there. I think this is not a great blight on his life. And I think he is now, actually, Harry, in a better position than William because William is considered as absolute perfection.

Again, I disagree with Harold. I mean, William is a young man. He's got all sorts of faults. We saw him the other day drive his horse at a photographer and push him into the ditch and utter a stream of four-letter words at the man. I think seeing these royal people as unduly perfect is difficult. Now you ask about the royal protection officers. They have been criticized here for saying, well, why didn't you tell your -- the prince, that -- Prince Charles, that is -- what's going on with his son?

Well, this is a human issue. Both young men are suspicious of their -- naturally, of these police officers who follow them around and stop them having a good time. These men apparently took the decision that if they were to sneak, that this would destroy their main function, which is to protect the princes. They didn't want the princes sneaking off to enjoy drink and drugs. It's better for them to be there.

It's a very difficult situation we actually saw, didn't we, when Diana was having an affair with Hewitt (ph) , the protection officer following them on their dirty weekends and walking down the beach behind them. Because their main job is not to be moral arbiters, strange as it may seem, but actually to protect these people's lives. KING: The police have said, Kitty, that Harry will be treated exactly the same way as anybody else. Do you expect he might be charged with something?

KELLEY: No. Come on. This is the grandson of the queen. I don't think so. The rules are different for this young man. And I think that as far as the protection people go, I do agree with Robert. They are there to guard the corpus, as they say. They are not there to be Sunday school teachers and tell them what to do.

Although there were occasions last summer when Harry's protection people did drive some of his friends home after they had had a little bit to drink at that inn not so far from Prince Charles's house.

KING: We're going to take a break. Our panel remains. We'll spend a few moments when we come back, with Bill Puddicombe. He is the chief executive officer of Phoenix House U.K. Phoenix House is in many countries dealing with drug addiction. We will ask him about the involvement of Phoenix House in all of this and Prince Charles' connection with it, then get back to the panel and we'll be including your phone calls. This is LARRY KING LIVE. Stay right there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): The world's media have been invited this morning for a quick photo call. Now watch out for Harry, giving Prince Charles a sharp nudge with his elbow. He was impatient to be off. William doesn't find these occasions easy. But his younger brother went further giving a sharp order to father.

PRINCE HARRY: Oy!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oy! Not exactly an official royal term, but all dads have to accept that teenagers can be very demanding.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Before we continue with our panel we'll spend a few moments with Bill Puddicombe. What is Phoenix House, Bill?

BILL PUDDICOMBE, PHOENIX HOUSE U.K.: Good evening, Larry. Phoenix House is an organization that works with people in the UK who use -- mostly use elicit drugs, heroin, cocaine, and so on.. We run a number of residential programs, some programs in prisons and some programs working with people in their own homes.

KING: What is Prince Charles's connection with that group?

PUDDICOMBE: Prince Charles is our patron, so he supports us by visiting occasionally, by supporting our causes, sometimes through public events, and also financially.

KING: So when he knew about the problem with Harry, he brought Harry to, what, Featherstone Lodge? Is that one of your buildings? PUDDICOMBE: That's correct. That's a building that we have in south London that accommodates people who are looking to stop using heroin and cocaine and other drugs. When Prince Harry came to see us, all we knew is that we were setting up a visit for the young prince to see one of the good causes that his father was involved in and also to see what the consequences of drug use can be.

KING: So you had no knowledge of Prince Harry's problems. What were your impressions of him during the visit?

PUDDICOMBE: We all liked him very much. He was terrific with the people that he met. He was -- he was able to walk into a room full of people who were going through the really tough end of recovery and handled the situation very well. He was interested in the people he met. He was interested to hear what sorts of lives the folk there were living. And as I say, we all liked him very much, and we felt the visit had gone well.

KING: In the United States, when they do visits like this, a lot of it is assumed to be a "scared straight" visit, that you take someone in and, hopefully, they see the results of their actions and it works to scare them. Do you think that was effective here?

PUDDICOMBE: Well, that wasn't -- that wasn't what we thought we were doing. But our experience is that for people who haven't visited a drug rehab before and haven't spent time talking with people about what happens when drugs start to control your life, it's usually pretty scary to find out about it. And I guess for a young person who, as is now -- as we now know has maybe started a bit of experimentation with some forms of intoxicants, to discover what the end process of -- the end of that process has been for other people, would certainly have given him some, you know, great pause for thought.

KING: The visit, Bill, was private. No press, no pictures. How did the story get out?

PUDDICOMBE: I have no idea. I have no idea, Larry. We've been cooperative because we feel it's a good story, in the sense of it -- it puts the issues about drug rehab in front of the public. But how it got out, I don't know.

KING: Do you favor the lessening of criminality laws regarding marijuana?

PUDDICOMBE: I try not to have a view on it, but I know that there are a number of different views here about that. I think it was interesting yesterday afternoon, some of our service users, some of the people who are going through rehab, were talking to the press. And the press asked them whether they thought -- whether they thought cannabis should be decriminalized or whether the law should be reduced, and they all said no.

KING: Bill, thank you for that information. Bill Puddicombe, chief executive officer of the Phoenix House, UK.

PUDDICOMBE: Thank you.

KING: OK, Harold, based on what Bill said, how did that story get out? You know the British press. How -- how did anybody learn of this? Harold, do you hear me? OK. Harold doesn't hear me. Philip, did you hear me? Do you know how the British press found out about this visit?

BROOKS-BAKER: I did. I don't know how they found out about the visit. But the story, it seems, was possibly coming from -- supposedly from friends of Harry's ringing up the newspapers. Who can tell? Who can tell where those things come from? It is -- it is strange how it's come out. The fact is that it is out there now, and they have to sort of deal with the fallout. It's a difficult question.

KING: Robert, what are your thoughts on this story getting out and the effect of the prince taking his son there?

LACEY: I don't think it is that strange. I mean, it's obviously a talking point. Prince Harry out in the country there in Gloucestershire, goes around pubs under age, has been seen by lots of people. In a way, it's surprising it hasn't been come out before.

As I understand it, Bill's charity was contacted by St. James's palace and was told it was all right to talk about this because, obviously, it would have normally have been considered...

KING: Yeah.

LACEY: ... confidential. There is a thought here, a different thought. I mean, there is the sinister thought that it was being brought out to hide something worse. I don't know whether that is the case or not. What I do know is the case that I think it was considered in St. James's palace, which, of course, is in Charles's -- Prince Charles's headquarters, as opposed to Buckingham Palace, which is the queen's -- that this story was bound to come out some time, and it's better that it should come out before the jubilee year of Harry's grandmother, the queen, begins in February, and that as a piece of news management, it's better to get the news out now and handle it in the way it has.

What's interesting is "The News of the World," who was spearheading the whole exposure, actually ran an editorial which said that what this shows above all is what an excellent parent Prince Charles is. And so the whole thing, it seems to me, has been very well spun.

KING: Let's take some calls. Richmond, Virginia, for our panel. Hello.

CALLER: Hello. I would like to know how Prince William counseled his brother about this.

KING: Do we know -- Philip, do we know how Prince William dealt with it with Harry? HOARE: I think he told him he was being rather stupid in probably less polite terms. I think William is -- William is very well aware of all these dangers. I mean, William -- because he is that much older, is certainly in contact with worlds in which drug use happens. Certainly, William would know the dangers of that and would also know the dangers of drinking. So -- well, we do know that, yes, he -- a short, sharp...

KING: Kitty...

HOARE: ... retort, I think.

KING: ... do we know of any problems in William's young days?

KELLEY: No, not really. We really don't. But one thing those two young men have learned and learned the hard way is that they have no friends, that the people surrounding them are constantly on the telephone, calling papers like "News of the World" to report what is being done. And that's how the story finally came out.

KING: We're going to take a break and come back. We'll be back with more phone calls for our panel. This is LARRY KING LIVE. Don't forget that on the Friday night, Russell Crowe will be here. Saturday night, we're going to repeat our interview with Bill Maher. And Sunday night, a look at the life and times of Howard Hughes.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAY LENO: Oh, what else? As you know, we were off last week. I was over in England, partying with Prince Harry. Yeah. Or Harry Potter, as they call him now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Bridgewater, New Jersey. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Larry. My question is for you and the executives mostly at CNN, as well as your panel. I'm just wondering why, after the events of September 11th, you think this topic is so newsworthy.

KING: Well, why are -- Kitty, I'll ask you as an American, why are the royals news?

KELLEY: Because they're still a monarchy that's in place, and they seem a throwback to old times. I think the question is very good. It's a distraction for us from the events of September 11th. But the royal family plays a very important role in many people's lives, and I think there are many people who are fascinated by it.

KING: Harold, is that interest still true in Great Britain, at the level it's been? BROOKS-BAKER: Well, I think that things change constantly. But certainly, the queen, who is head of the commonwealth and is head of state in 16 countries of those 54 countries, remains one of the most important heads of state in the world today. She has far more power than most people realize, but she uses it in a very judicious way. No question that there are not many other people in the world who have the importance that she has, and that's why there is this emphasis on the close members of her family.

It certainly is unfair, but life isn't fair. As the Americans say, good guys don't win ballgames. And I think that Prince Harry needs to be given a full-time job as soon as he finishes his studies and be prepared for the chance that he one day might be king, and not just sit and wait, as poor Princess Margaret has and as many other members of royal families around the world have, with absolutely nothing of importance to do, as far as politics is concerned.

KING: Philadelphia, hello.

BROOKS-BAKER: This is a difficult role.

CALLER: Hi, Larry.

KING: Yes. Go ahead.

CALLER: I wanted to ask you, what does your panel feel that Princess Diana would make of all this?

KING: Kitty?

KELLEY: I think Princess Diana would be very, very upset. But I do think she'd be very proactive and she'd do exactly what Prince Charles did. She'd have Prince Harry working at every drug addiction clinic in the place.

KING: Do you agree, Robert?

LACEY: Yes. But of course, Diana was famous for taking her boys to AIDS hospices and to take them -- and bring them in contact with the more difficult side of life. She was also actually a much stricter parent -- it's not generally realized -- than Charles. I mean, when they were young, she'd clip them 'round the ear, to use an English expression. I mean, she was not afraid to threaten them with a good smack.

Charles has been always a softer sort of parent. And this, I think, perhaps derives, if one's going to speculate, from the fact that he was brought up quite briskly by his own parents and is therefore more indulgent. But I think in this, Diana would have done exactly what Charles has done. And I think a lot of the approval now accruing to Charles comes because people see it as being in the Diana mold.

KING: Lewiston, Montana. Hello.

CALLER: Hi. Larry, I wanted to know, does Prince Harry have anyone that he's close to? He was so close to his mother. And does he have any female mentor in his life now that he can visit with and feel he can trust?

KING: Good question. Philip, do you know?

HOARE: Yes, he does. He has -- I mean, I think he's probably actually quite close to Camilla now. I think she's -- I think that's quite a good relationship and quite a stable relationship.

It's very -- it's important to realize this is a boy who lost his mother at a young age. And you know, I mean, yes, he was doing drink and drugs, but, you know, a lot of people have reacted in that way to grief. You know, we have to put these things in context.

So a good question, and I think, you know, he does need that stability. I think Charles gives it to him. But Charles is, after all, a professional person who is busy and cannot be with him all the time. So I think the lack of a stable figure in Harry's life is something which is possibly behind this story.

KING: Harold, are there still tensions between Prince Charles and Prince Edward over Edward's doing that documentary TV series?

BROOKS-BAKER: No. I think you would overestimate this if you looked at it too carefully because, certainly, the disagreement is well known, and the company that Prince Edward is head of has not behaved very well at one time. But no, there is only love and appreciation, and certainly, these things can be overemphasized.

The royal family is under a magnifying glass the whole time. Every single member is looked at from night until morning, and they simply must have a chance to escape from time to time, just as all of us do, and rest from this intrusion. I mean, the intrusion never stops. And after all, they have jobs to do. They have to be holier- than-thou, but they also have to be able to rest from time to time.

And I think that you'll see that the newspapers of this country, after the "News of the World," are going to be less difficult in their day-to-day lives unless something really goes wrong.

And there is far more to this story than has been revealed. And I think that Kitty Kelley has really hit the nail on the head by examining that aspect of it. And that is what really worries me, that newspapers have that kind of power today. After all, the "News of the World" is not the "Times." It is not "The New York Times" or "The Washington Post." It is a paper that specializes in digging the dirt on others. It's ruined the lives of more politicians than any newspaper in the United Kingdom. And I'm certain that poor Prince Harry is in for it, if he makes one wrong move in the next few years. And that's a difficult position.

KING: Let me get a break in. We'll come back with more.

This is LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) KING: We are back. Scottsdale, Arizona. Hello.

CALLER: I'd like to know if the liquor laws are strictly enforced in the countryside in England at these pubs.

KING: Robert?

LACEY: Much less strictly enforced than in America. It's not -- I mean, people worry about this, but it's not a social issue to the degree that it is in America. You don't have this whole business of IDs and that sort of thing. And thus, it's really quite common for -- you know, Harry is certainly underage, but he's a big strapping kid of over six foot tall. It's quite common to see teenage kids in pubs who are clearly under age. Nobody asks too many questions. And rightly or wrongly, it's not a matter of great concern.

KING: Philip, Princess Margaret seems to be the saddest of the royals. Is that correct? I know you're doing a magazine piece on her.

HOARE: She's had a remarkable life. She's had a lot of disappointments in her life. I think the key, really, to Princess Margaret is really what Harold was talking about earlier, the lack of a role. She never really had a role. She resents that and has resented it. I think she resented it even from the very beginning, when she really didn't receive the same education as her sister, which is a big problem. And I know she's said this to people close to her, that she's resented that fact that she wasn't educated and she wasn't given the same chances.

She hasn't been able to blossom there. Princess Margaret's great retort when asked, you know, what she does, is, "My duty is to help the queen." And this does have a bearing to the current question. What will Prince Harry's retort to that question -- "What's your -- what's your relationship to Prince William, King William?" Same thing.

KING: All right. This -- Kitty, this is incredibly boring life, isn't it, for someone like this? You do nothing.

KELLEY: Well, Larry, there are a lot of people who would like the palaces and the yachts and the open entree and the parties and the glamour of it all. But I do agree that a life without any kind of expectation or worthy work, without a sense of responsibility, is quite sad.

And Princess Margaret is a very smart woman. She probably is, IQ-wise, smarter than the queen. But she never got the education that Elizabeth got. There were no expectations for Margaret. And yet, at the time that she could have opted out and married Group Captain Peter Townsend, she said no. She did not want to give up her title. She did not want to give up her royal allowance, her palace or anything else.

KING: So she made the decision.

KELLEY: She made the decision.

KING: How do you think -- Harold, how do you think Prince Harry is going to come out?

BROOKS-BAKER: I think he'll come out of it very well indeed. The problem here is that this has happened generation after generation. George VI, the queen's father, was in a similar position. He wasn't prepared to be king when the Duke of Windsor, as he became, went off to France. And if it hadn't been for the queen mother, who, thank God, is still with us, it would not have been a very good act.

He was an outstanding king, a much-loved king, but he certainly would not have been without the queen mother guiding him all the way. She taught him how to speak. He could hardly utter a word, certainly couldn't speak in the beginning on the BBC. She taught him to review troops. He had practically a nervous collapse every time he did it in the beginning. And he died being loved, respected, stayed in London with the queen mother during the Blitz.

This is what can come of the right tutoring. Everything now depends on whether Prince Harry is given the right tutoring and the right job to follow, so that he has a full life and is not just sitting, waiting on the health of his brother and his father. This is a tragedy that must not repeat itself.

KING: Philip, how do you think Prince William will turn out?

HOARE: I think he could turn out very well. He has a wide range of interests, which is, quite honestly, heartening because -- I like the fact he's doing history of art at university because sometimes one of the great allegations made against the royal family is the sense of Philistinism. You know, they're not really very cultured. So it's good, I think, that he's expanded his interests in that way.

I think having that wide range of interests means he will be able to speak to a new generation. And that's so important. That's what he's going to have to do. And I think, you know, like his father, he is sensible. I think, you know, he will learn by his mistakes. There are going to be mistakes. He's going to face an awful lot of problems when it comes to marrying. It's just something he's going to have to ride through.

KING: I thank you all very much for an illuminating hour. Appreciate your being with us. Robert Lacey, Kitty Kelley, Harold Brooks-Baker and Philip Hoare, Kitty in Washington, Robert, Harold and Philip all in London.

Before we go to a break, I got to do something very special earlier today, and I'd like to share it with you. I had the great honor and privilege of carrying the Olympic torch on its route through downtown Los Angeles. It was really one of the thrills of my life. The torch is on a 65-day journey to the 2002 winter games in Salt Lake City. And I am proud to be one of the 11,500 people to help carry it. It was a hoot.

And you can get one of these as a symbol. This is the one I carried. They light it, and for 5 or 6 minutes, I was the only person in the world holding the Olympic flame. That was really nice.

We'll be right back and tell you about tomorrow night right after this. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Tomorrow night, we'll have the "Black Hawk Down" story. Great book, a terrific war movie, and we'll have the people who were actually there in Somalia at the time of this now horrendous event.

Russell Crowe will be aboard on Friday night. Thursday night, Barbara Walters and her new co-host, John Miller, on ABC's "20/20."

Saturday night, we'll repeat our interview with Bill Maher, and Sunday night, the life and times of Howard Hughes.

The life and times of Aaron Brown! Guess what? He's here! He's in -- he's right over there! Aaron, you're on!

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com


 
 
 
 


 Search   

Back to the top