Harry and Meghan suffered TWO security breaches at their $13.8 million California mansion, with both Sussexes and their two young children home when the alarm went off in May this year.
- Meghan and Harry are believed to be at their home in Montecito with their children, three-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilybeth.
- Police in California were called to the $13.8 million mansion at 5:44 p.m. on May 19, the couple’s wedding anniversary.
- The May break-ins were recorded by police as trespassing, property crime and “suspicious circumstances”.
- Just 12 days later, on May 31, as Harry and Meghan returned from Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee, they responded to another warning
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle they had two separate alarms go off California home in less than two weeks earlier this year.
Meghan and Harry are believed to have been at their Montecito home with their children, two-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilybeth, during one of the incidents when the attackers arrived.
Santa Barbara police in Montecito were called to the $13.8 million mansion on May 19 at 5:44 p.m., specifically on the couple’s fourth wedding anniversary.
Just 12 days later, on May 31, Harry and Meghan flew back to California from the Queen Elizabeth Platinum anniversarythey responded to another trespasser alert.
The May break-ins were recorded by police as trespassing, property crime and “suspicious circumstances”.
In less than two weeks earlier this year, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle had two different alarms go off at their California home.

Santa Barbara police in Montecito were called to the $13.8 million mansion on May 19 at 5:44 p.m., specifically on the couple’s fourth wedding anniversary.

Just 12 days later, on May 31, as Harry and Meghan returned to California from Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee, they responded to another intruder alert
In the past 14 months, Santa Barbara authorities have had to deal with half a dozen security calls to their home The sun.
It happens on the same day Duke of Sussex won a High Court action against the UK government on security measures while staying at home.
Harry launched legal action over the decision not to allow him to pay for police protection for himself and his family while traveling from North America.
In the first stage of the case earlier this month, the Duke’s lawyers asked Mr Justice Swift to allow a full hearing for the judge to review the Home Office’s decision.
In a ruling on Friday, a High Court judge said the case could go ahead, allowing a judicial review of part of Harry’s claim.

The May break-ins were recorded by police as trespassing, property crime and “suspicious circumstances”.

Harry and Meghan were flying back to California from Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee when the second break-in took place
But in a blow to the Duke’s case, the judge refused permission to review some of his claims.
He rejected arguments put forward by Harry’s legal team that he should have been told who on the committee made the decision on protection and that he was not in a position to comment on the “appropriateness” of the process and the individuals involved in the blocking.
The motion for permission to appeal to the court is granted in part and denied in part.” said Swift.

The Duke of Sussex has won an attempt to take part of his High Court action against the Home Office over security measures while in the UK. Prince Harry has launched legal action over a decision not to allow him to pay for police protection for himself and his family during a visit from North America. Above: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pictured together in Brixton, south London, in 2018.
The Duke’s appeal relates to a February 2020 decision by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) over his security, after he was told he would no longer receive the “same degree” of personal protection while visiting.
Harry’s legal team are trying to argue that the security measures outlined in Ravek’s letter and their application when he visited the UK in June 2021 were invalid due to “procedural unfairness” because he was not given the opportunity to be “informed” of the submissions in advance ‘.
Advertising
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11044641/Harry-Meghan-suffer-TWO-security-breaches-13-8-million-California-mansion.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490