Buckingham Palace is on red alert over fears Prince Harry could be writing a second book over his legal battle for security, sources say.
The Duke of Sussex last week attended a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, where he claimed the removal of his security in the UK was a ploy to ‘trap’ him in the Royal Family.
And after the two-day proceedings were over, Harry said his ‘worst fears had been confirmed’ by secret evidence heard at the hearing.
The Prince was left shocked after his taxpayer-funded police protection was removed once he and Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, announced they were moving to the US and stepping back from royal public engagements.
The Duke also spoke of his hurt at the treatment he and Meghan had received and implied it would be difficult to heal the divide.
Speaking outside the court, Harry said he and Meghan were trying to ‘create a happy house’ and reportedly believed that establishing a life of their own would help thaw relations with the Royals.
But in the aftermath of the dramatic hearing, Royal sources say they are growing increasingly concerned over the Duke’s next move if the hearing goes against him, sparking fears that he is writing a sequel to Spare.
A Buckingham Palace insider told The Sun: ‘There’s a lot of worry that Harry could tell all in a book deal or even follow Meghan’s lead and make a podcast.
The Duke of Sussex last week attended a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London , where he claimed the removal of his security in the UK was a ploy to ‘trap’ him in the Royal Family
The Prince was left shocked after his taxpayer-funded police protection was removed once he and Meghan Markle announced they were moving to the US and stepping back from royal public engagements
In the aftermath of the dramatic hearing, Royal sources say they are growing increasingly concerned over the Duke’s next move if the hearing goes against him, sparking fears that he could be writing a sequel to Spare
‘He’s hinted he has discovered secrets during the hearings, particularly regarding the treatment of him and Meghan, that would shock us all.
‘It is a veiled threat essentially that he will tell all if it doesn’t go the way he wants it to.’
The couple saw the removal of their police protection as a way of trying to strongarm them into returning to the UK – since they felt that without security, visiting Britain would paint a target on their back.
Harry took the decision to take legal action against the Government to have his official security reinstated.
The Duke said that the case was even more significant than his legal battles against the tabloid press that he once called his ‘life’s work’.
Speaking last week, Harry said what he had experienced during the legal process had crossed a line – and suggested he was upset with elements of the evidence that had been heard behind closed doors in court.
Harry took the decision to take legal action against the Government to have his official security reinstated
The Prince told The Telegraph: ‘People would be shocked by what’s being held back.’ He added that his ‘worst fears have been confirmed by the whole legal disclosure in this case and that’s really sad’.
As legal proceedings came to a close, Harry said he was ‘exhausted’ and ‘overwhelmed’ by the case.
Even if Harry wins the appeal, the Royal and VIP Executive Committee may not be compelled to grant the Sussexes their wish to restore their security.
The Duke said he was ‘driven by exposing injustice’ and would continue to fight regardless of the outcome.
But he was accused of hypocrisy after meeting dozens of wounded soldiers in Ukraine last week despite claiming he and his family cannot be safe in Britain without taxpayer-funded police bodyguards.
An insider told MailOnline that it is ‘incorrect’ to suggest the Ukraine trip contradicts Harry’s UK safety concerns or undermines his High Court case, claiming the team protecting him was ‘more robust’ than in Britain.
The Duke was accused of hypocrisy after meeting dozens of wounded soldiers in Ukraine last week despite claiming he and his family cannot be safe in Britain without taxpayer-funded police bodyguards
Harry talking with Olga Rudneva (right) during a visit to the Superhumans Centre in Lviv, Ukraine on April 10, 2025, where he toured the centre and met with patients and medical professionals
However, a source close to Harry has claimed that the level of protection on his Ukrainian trip was better than what he receives in the UK.
‘He can go to Ukraine – a country with an active warzone – because he has a robust security detail, one that he does not have in his home country’, they said.
MailOnline reported last week that Prince Harry did not make arrangements to see his father, King Charles, after flying into the UK for the legal hearing.
The Duke of Sussex landed from Los Angeles last Sunday but his father spent the weekend at Highgrove, his private Gloucestershire home, resting ahead of this week’s busy State Visit to Italy.
The Duke of Sussex claimed he was ‘singled out’ for ‘inferior treatment’ when the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) stripped him of his top-level security in February 2020, following ‘Megxit‘.
But Sir James Eadie KC, representing the Home Office, has said it had discretion to strip his guaranteed full time police security without consulting the Risk Management Board (RMB) quango.
MailOnline reported last week that Prince Harry did not see his father, King Charles, after flying into the UK for the legal hearing
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex the day before ‘Megxit’ – the couple’s decision to step down as senior royals – was announced in 2020
‘RMB risk analysis is the usual approach in usual cases,’ he told the High Court earlier this week.
‘But there is nothing about the appellant’s [Prince Harry’s] announcement in January 2020 that he was to step back from his role in the Royal family, and spend most of the time abroad, that was usual.’
Prince Harry’s lawyer Shaheed Fatima KC insisted that Ravec failed to follow its own guidelines and should have commissioned an assessment of the Duke’s security needs from the Risk Management Board (RMB).
Ms Fatima said: ‘The appellant [the Duke of Sussex] does not accept that bespoke means better – in fact, in his position, it means he has been singled out for different, inferior treatment.’
She added that the judge who previously ruled Ravec had acted correctly was mistaken.
The ‘Royal Bombshell’ edition of the Daily Mail which broke news of the couple’s dramatic decision
But barrister Sir James, speaking for the Home Secretary, told the High Court that his extremely unusual withdrawal from Royal duties changed everything.
He said it was ‘hard to imagine’ someone more experienced and better placed than the chair of Ravec to make a bespoke decision about how the Duke’s security arrangements should change to accommodate ‘the unique and unusual circumstances of the appellant [Prince Harry]’.
And Sir James denied the Duke was treated unfairly and said: ‘He was not being singled out – on the contrary, the process being adopted had positive advantages for him.’
MailOnline has approached both Prince Harry’s representatives and Buckingham Palace for comment.
