The King was reportedly blocked from contacting his long-time friend, the adventurer Sir Ranulph Fiennes, after concerns were raised about the 82-year-old’s declining health and isolation.
The Press Association reports that Charles was left “most concerned” after fellow explorer Anton Bowring wrote to him in February last year asking for his help. The Telegraph revealed the correspondence, according to the report.
Sir Ranulph has not been seen in public for two years. The Press Association understands that Bowring sent a letter to the King’s principal private secretary, Sir Clive Alderton, saying the explorer was “in a very poor state”. Bowring reportedly wrote that Sir Ranulph had been in the care of his wife, Louise Millington-Cotes, since the previous September and that his friends were worried.
Later that month, the King’s then-equerry, Commander William Thornton, contacted Bowring. He said Charles wanted to write to Sir Ranulph, Millington-Cotes and their daughter, Elizabeth, to express his concern and ask whether there was anything he could do to help.
Thornton also asked for Millington-Cotes’ telephone number. However, she was reportedly angry after Buckingham Palace was given her details and sent text messages to Bowring. The newspaper said she subsequently blocked the King’s attempts to reach out.
The report comes as several of Sir Ranulph’s well-known friends have spoken publicly about the situation. Bear Grylls, Ben Fogle, Joanna Lumley, John Simpson and Monty Don are among those who have raised concerns in recent weeks.
Grylls wrote, “Ran we are coming!” and described Sir Ranulph as a “true British icon”. He also said reports about the explorer’s isolation and treatment in care homes were “deeply disturbing”.
There have been growing calls for an investigation into Sir Ranulph’s wellbeing by both police and the Office of the Public Guardian. The supplied report does not state that either body has opened an investigation.
Sir Ranulph is said to have been moved to care homes in Wales and Cheshire during the past year under an assumed identity. His current whereabouts are unknown, according to the report.
The accounts of his health, care and isolation remain attributed reports and statements from people concerned about his welfare. The available evidence does not establish the full circumstances of his current situation or explain why contact with him was restricted.
