I’m wondering that also. He’s been hiding away in Scotland pretty much full time since before his mother died. I wonder if he’s kept up there by WHs as I get the impression he’s not in control at all. It’s struck me that he may have been neutered and was allowed the show of the coronation but it’s a pretense. Through the coronation William seemed to be calling the shots financially and he is now richer than his father (the duchy of Cornwall that he controls has more money than the duchy of Lancaster that funds the crown). I always got a vibe that his mother wasn’t in control that she was a figurehead. I think Diana’s murder was possibly done by BHs to keep Charlie and the Queen in line - sort of a “look at what we can do if we can kill your biggest star without pushback none of you are safe”. I wonder if GEOTUS offered QE2 a deal and she took it? Charlie had proven himself a weak selfish venal man who’d make a poor monarch but she was powerless to prevent him succeeding to the throne. Maybe the BHs took Diana out as a way of controlling Charlie because let’s face it if it came out that Diana was assassinated no one would ever believe Charlie didn’t k ow it or sanction it would they? After Diana’s death the Queen sort of wrote Charlie off and concentrated on William and latterly she seemed to rely more on him than her actual heir which was quite telling.

Tbh I think there’s a schism between KC and PW as the way the story about KC was put out kinda seemed like a “look at me too!” thing when it was announced hot on the heels of Catherine’s surgery. Charlie is a narcissistic POS who was noted for his jealousy about Diana being more popular than him and he seems to have a similar sort of hang up about his son and daughter in law. I wonder if the plan was for big ears to be crowned then to be taken out a short time later then for William to work to dismantle the system? Who knows?