Prince Harry’s security breached by stalker as ex-police chief warns lack of protection is ‘a mistake’

Two days later, she was spotted again, this time near the Centre for Blast Injury Studies in west London, security sources told the People's Channel.

She is understood to have previously followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex abroad, including to Nigeria last year.

A member of Harry’s private team recognised her and physically blocked her from approaching him, despite not knowing if she was armed. There were no police officers at the event.

The woman is listed among so-called “fixated individuals” monitored by a private intelligence company for Harry’s personal security.

The Duke reportedly feels “enormous guilt” that his public profile puts others at risk, with a friend saying: “It should not be left to two office staff to act as extra eyes and ears or provide a physical barrier.

“That should not happen. It is only going to take one motivated, lone individual for this to go south very quickly.”

Harry has continued to push for a full risk assessment of his security while in the UK after losing his legal challenge against the Home Office earlier this year.

He has not had a formal threat review since April 2019, when he was ranked in the highest risk category alongside Queen Elizabeth II and then-Prime Minister Theresa May.

Neil Basu, the former head of counter-terrorism policing and a former member of the royal security committee, Ravec, told the Telegraph that it was a “mistake” not to have reassessed Harry’s threat level.

“The most common nature of threat to a member of the Royal Family has been fixated individuals,” Mr Basu said.

“The only way of stopping those kinds of people is to be close to the principal and to smother them if they get approached.

“I wasn’t aware that that happened, but that should underline immediately how high risk he is when he’s here.”

Mr Basu said Harry’s relationship with his father, King Charles, was “key” to resolving the security row, suggesting that the King’s private secretary, Sir Clive Alderton, has influence over such matters.

“The fact is this. If the Met had been asked to protect the Duke of Sussex, by either the head of state – whether it was the Queen at the time or the future King – we would protect that person.”

However, Buckingham Palace strongly rejected the idea that family relations played any role, insisting that Ravec operates independently of royal influence.

A source said it was “false and damaging” to suggest otherwise.

Mr Basu said the Duke’s legal case was unwinnable but argued that removing his automatic protection was ethically wrong.

“Well, they’ve made a decision not to protect him; they have a rationale for that, they’re entitled to that rationale. I just happen to think it is wrong.”

He added that Harry’s security had become entangled in “a family dispute” following his decision to step back from royal duties and move abroad.

Since leaving his working role, the Duke has only received full police protection during official royal events such as the late Queen’s funeral and the King’s Coronation. On other visits, his team must rely on private security and call 999 if incidents arise.

Mr Basu warned that assessing each visit separately “doesn’t work” and leaves the Duke “exposed”. “They’re giving him the protection at the events where he least requires it, and not when he actually needs it. You’re either at threat all of the time or you’re not.”

Harry has written to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, urging her to review his situation. He has said he will not bring Meghan or their children to Britain until they are given adequate protection.

“The Duke remains as determined as ever to fight the perceived injustice and will keep plugging away until he feels the issue has been treated with a straight bat,” The Telegraph reported.