Previous Message

Interesting. Thanks Sam.

What interests me most is how the press is using this to generate sales.

It seems to me the vague details (what I have read are only vague details) are taken for (a) fact and (b) a breach of security.

Why would anyone be surprised that the palace has a large vault? It is not just the Queen's jewels which have to be stored securely; the palace has innumerable precious objects ranging from the gold plate and silver used for state banquets to smaller items, which would not be left around various rooms on a day to day basis. Why on earth are journalists zooming in on the lighting? Why would anyone be surprised that the space has good lighting? And why would that be seen as evidence of "insider" security knowledge?

It seems to me that the description of how the jewels were presented comes straight from Angela Kelly's book on dressing the Queen, where photos were included of the pink fabric lined trays and how jewellery was presented for the Queen to select.

We know that the Queen has lent each of her granddaughters and granddaughters-in-law a tiara for their wedding day.

Yet, the quote from the book states that the tiaras with their matching necklaces, earrings and bracelets were laid out.

As far as I know none of the tiaras used (except for the Greville emerald) has matching necklaces, earrings, bracelets. Insider details? I somehow doubt it!