This week, King Charles, along with senior royal family members, including the Prince and Princess of Wales, paid tribute to those who lost their lives in WWII and the veterans who continue to share their courageous stories.

However, the commemoration of Victory for Europe day was somewhat overshadowed by a shocking interview Prince Harry gave to the BBC after the Court of Appeal in London dismissed his attempt to reinstate 24/7 police protection during his visits to Britain.

The Duke of Sussex, 43, expressed feeling ‘devastated’ about losing the extended court struggle and alleged that he had been subjected to a ‘classic establishment stitch-up’.

He also chillingly spoke of a ‘pretty dark’ conspiracy theory where he appeared to suggest shadowy figures want him and his family to suffer the same fate as the late Princess Diana, who died in a car crash in Paris in August 1997.

The father-of-two went on to launch a blistering attack on King Charles, saying he ‘won’t speak to me’ and that he doesn’t know ‘how much longer’ there was left for his father, who is battling cancer.

‘Life is precious,’ he said. ‘I don’t know how much longer my father has, he won’t speak to me because of this security stuff. It would be nice to reconcile.’

On the latest episode of Palace Confidential, the Mail’s Royal experts gave their damning verdict on Harry’s interview, with Royal Editor Rebecca English describing it as a ‘monumental hissy fit’.

‘Some aspects of it are really very disturbing,’ Rebecca said. ‘He effectively said that he believed there were people who actively wished him harm and he felt those people would see what happened as “a win”, as he described it.

‘Where Harry goes from here, I don’t know,’ she continued. ‘He has obviously had a monumental hissy fit on television afterwards, to put it mildly.’

Charlotte Griffiths, the Mail on Sunday’s Editor at Large, joined Rebecca on the hit YouTube show alongside series regulars Richard Eden, the Daily Mail’s Diary Editor, and host Jo Elvin.

‘In the interview, Harry just seemed beyond furious,’ Jo said.

‘He really did,’ agreed Richard. ‘I am going to have to be careful with how I phrase this but I thought he didn’t look well in his expression, his demeanour.

‘Often if you are angry about something, people say you should sleep on it but this seemed to be something, and I think the BBC would confirm that it was done in a hurry.’

Richard goes on to explain that Harry’s representatives allegedly contacted the broadcaster to arrange the interview and that it wasn’t a case of ‘people demanding an interview from him’.

‘It was very much his decision,’ Richard said, ‘and I think a very rash one.’

‘He said a series of very unpleasant, provocative and dark, disturbing things, frankly.’

‘Where to start?’ Richard asked. ‘The suggestions that he doesn’t know how long his father had to live which obviously increases speculation about the King’s cancer.

‘He was portraying the decision as an “establishment stitch-up” and then you think well “why did you go to court and spend £1.5million in the first place if you thought it was a stitch-up and it wouldn’t make any difference?” so that was odd.

‘He was hinting at evidence which he had seen which wasn’t made public which he suggested showed that dark forces were out to get him and they wanted the same fate to befall him and his family as did his mother Diana.

‘Really dark and certainly got me questioning his state of mind, frankly.’

Offering her own analysis, Charlotte said: ‘I was so shocked and I was also really worried about him because he just seemed like a broken man.

‘I just seemed like he was utterly utterly broken and desperate and I think that’s why it was such a surprise, as you say, that he just decided pretty much on a whim to have this hissy fit.

‘He made it clear he can’t get a hold of his father. It felt like the only way he could speak to his father or something, that might have been the motivation behind it.’

Although Harry said he wanted to reconcile with his family, Charlotte pointed out that he did not offer an apology.

‘Of course, some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book. Of course, they will never forgive me for…lots of things,’ Harry told journalist Nada Tawfik.

Reacting to the Duke’s words, Charlotte said: ‘Well, you have to start with saying sorry if you want forgiveness, I would have thought that would open the conversation.

‘But there was no sorry was there? He didn’t seem contrite. 

‘He did clearly want to reunite with his family but he just doesn’t know how to do it because he would have to swallow so much pride to get there, I think.’

‘I think the reason why he didn’t say sorry is because he doesn’t believe he has anything to say sorry for,’ Rebecca added. ‘I think the family and the people around them believe he does.’

But Richard was concerned that this bombshell interview may be a ‘preview of what is to come’.

‘He talks about reconciliation and how he wants that with his family but if he did genuinely want that he would never do that in a provocative interview on the BBC,’ Richard argued.

‘That’s what puzzled me,’ Jo agreed.

‘You would do it privately,’ Richard continued, ‘because he knew that this would upset his family even more and antagonise them so then I am thinking, “what was the real reason?”

‘I do worry that it is paving the way for what we are going to see in the future which may be more about this subject. It may be another book.

‘There is more that he wants to say and this is his way of justifying it. It is a taster or preview of what’s to come.’

The BBC admitted it failed to properly challenge Prince Harry’s claim he is the victim of ‘good old fashioned establishment stitch up’, calling it a lapse in ‘our usual high editorial standards’.

The broadcaster also admitted it failed to reflect the statements from Buckingham Palace and the Home Office in its Radio 4 coverage of the interview on the morning afterwards.

In response to the failed legal challenge, a Buckingham Palace spokesperson said: ‘All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion.’

The Home Office said: ‘We are pleased that the court has found in favour of the Government’s position in this case.

‘The UK Government’s protective security system is rigorous and proportionate. It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.’ 

For more fascinating insights from the Mail’s team of unrivalled experts, watch the latest episode of Palace Confidential in full now and subscribe to the Daily Mail Royals YouTube channel.