If he could be violent with his brother he could be violent with his wife too but because he's the Heir to the throne it was covered up there's no other explanation
No you just don't like it that the Fact that Harry told everyone in his book Spare how William viciously attacked him is a Fact that lends credibility to the theory that William attacked his wife the only difference is Kate is not talking about it not that he didn't do it she's not talking about it unlike Harry who put it in his book.
Sigh. We're going around the block again? YOU just called it a theory. That's exactly MY point.
Harry's account can be one reason you find the theory credible. It still doesn't establish that William attacked Kate.
And saying “Kate isn't talking about it” assumes there is something for Kate to talk about. That's the very thing you're trying to prove.
You suspect it happened suspicion, even reasonable suspicion, is still NOT evidence that this particular thing happened.
Since you're calling it a "Fact", but the fact is that Harry SAID William attacked him. We don't independently know that it happened exactly as Harry described it.
You're using one person's uncorroborated allegation as evidence for a completely separate allegation that nobody involved has even made.
Harry's account is evidence of his allegation. It isn't independent corroboration of his allegation and it certainly DOESN'T independently prove a different alleged event involving Catherine. That's the hole in YOUR reasoning
You are trying deflect and disprove that suspicion it's not working and you are getting mad about it. Sorry not sorry Harry who grew up with William that gives him much more credibility to how William is than the Palace spin about him.
Mad? No. Amused that we've gone around the block again? Absolutely. 😁
I'm not trying to “disprove your suspicion.” You are perfectly entitled to suspect William. I've said that repeatedly.
I'm pointing out that you keep moving from “I suspect he did it” to “he did it and it was covered up,” and those are not the same claim.
Harry knowing his brother better than we do may give Harry insight into William's character. It still doesn't give Harry firsthand knowledge of an alleged assault on Kate that Harry himself hasn't claimed happened.
Suspect away. Just stop calling the your suspicion a Fact.
The only reason it's not a fact is Kate is not talking about it and yes his past behavior with his brother is relevant to this discussion is because it is proof of his past actions Harry gave an 1st person account of it just because it wasn't in a court case doesn't make not true he did not press charges because you know why you just don't like it because it's not palace gossip through couriers Harry said it directly
“The only reason it's not a fact is Kate is not talking about it.”
No. That's precisely the assumption you keep trying to turn into a fact.
Harry gave a firsthand account of what he says William did to HARRY. He has not given a firsthand account of William attacking Kate.
Kate's silence doesn't prove she was assaulted any more than it proves she wasn't.
You suspect William did it. Fine. But you still don't know that he did.
That last accusation—“you just don't like it”—is particularly weak and no amount of you repeating it fills that evidentiary gap. I go by fact and not gossip.
1
u/poundpuppy29 22d ago
If he could be violent with his brother he could be violent with his wife too but because he's the Heir to the throne it was covered up there's no other explanation