Two women claiming to be sisters of Simon Dorante-Day, who alleges he is the secret son of King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, have formed a research group to investigate and refute his claims of royal lineage. Tracie, aged 52 from Gosport, Hampshire, identifies herself as Simon’s “potential birth sister,” while Amanda, aged 56 from Buckinghamshire, is his older adoptive sister.
They operate a Facebook page titled “The Fake Prince Down Under – The Research,” which aims to counter what they perceive as Dorante-Day’s fantastical assertions about his purported royal parentage. The group appears to be dedicated to gathering and presenting evidence to disprove Dorante-Day’s claims of being the lovechild of the British monarch and his wife.
The situation revolves around a 56-year-old father of nine, originally from Hampshire but currently residing in Australia, who has persistently claimed to be the son of the late Princess Diana. He has even advocated for a DNA test to substantiate his assertion. However, the women, who have chosen not to disclose their full names, have repeatedly refuted their sibling’s claims, attributing them to a desire for “importance” and labeling them as falsehoods. When questioned about the motivations behind his unlikely claims spanning decades, Amanda, one of the women, described it as the “six million dollar question!”
She provided insights into his potential motivations, stating: “In my assessment, his primary driving force appears to be financial gain, but it is also accompanied by a desire for recognition and perceived importance.” She clarified, “I am not willing to definitively claim that money is his sole motivation; individuals can draw their own conclusions regarding that.” However, from her perspective as an adoptee, she believes he harbors an idealized perception of his biological family’s identity and background, which her family did not align with. She explained, “As an adoptee, I think he has cultivated an image of who and where he would like his biological family to be, and we simply did not fit that perception.”
“My six million dollar question is why Charles and Camilla?”
Simon Dorante-Day was born on April 5, 1966, in Gosport, Portsmouth. At the age of eight months, he was adopted by a local couple named Karen and David Day. Dorante-Day claims that Camilla kept him until he was eight months old, shielding him from the public eye. He asserts that when he was becoming too old to be hidden, Dorante-Day’s adoptive grandmother arranged for her daughter to adopt him.
The women in question refute Simon’s claims about his grandparents working for the Royal Family. In his televised interview, Simon reveals that he was informed of his adoption at 18 months old, stating there was no documentation available regarding his origins prior to that. Tracie and Amanda assert that Simon was born to a woman named Sandra Pinder, a detail Simon himself acknowledges during the 7 News interview.
The reporter states that Simon failed to uncover any evidence confirming the existence of the woman in question. However, Tracie provided proof that she had sent an email to Simon in 2011, shedding light on the situation after he allegedly located his mother. Tracie refers to herself as the potential biological sister, explaining that “until a DNA test has been taken and clarification sought, what else can I call myself?”
The ladies claim to possess Simon’s birth certificates and baptism records bearing Sandra Pinder’s signature, asserting that Simon is aware of the existence of these documents. The Daily Star has reportedly seen photographs of these documents. This information presents factual details regarding the claims made by Tracie and the other individuals involved in the matter.
Tracie said that after the 2011 email Simon never contacted her or her mum. “I know for definite the only member of our family he spoke to was my brother, his biological brother.
The email exchange reveals a concerning situation where contact information was provided but no response was received. Tracie speculates that Simon’s motivations could range from financial gain to seeking notoriety or even a personal belief, but the exact reason remains uncertain. Amanda emphasizes the importance of uncovering the truth to set the record straight and protect the reputations of those who cared for Simon but are unable to share their own accounts. She states that her primary objective is to tell her side of the story to preserve the memory of her parents and grandparents, who are no longer able to do so themselves.
The statement implies that certain individuals, if they were alive, would be deeply disturbed by the accusations and remarks made about them. It raises the question of why such statements were made, questioning the motivations behind them. The tone conveys a sense of bewilderment and a desire to understand the reasoning behind these actions, which are perceived as disrespectful or unjustified towards the individuals being referenced.