Prince Andrew relinquished his ‘HRH’ as well as his military & royal patronages

Grenadier Guards medal presentation

December 2010: Prince Andrew is photographed walking with Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted pedophile and sexual assailant, in New York’s Central Park. During that visit to New York, Prince Andrew stayed in Epstein’s mansion, as he had many times before.

August 10, 2019: Jeffrey Epstein dies under mysterious conditions in his jail cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center. He had been on suicide watch, and guards were supposed to be checking on him every 30 minutes. The security tapes of the area in and around Epstein’s jail cell were never released publicly, and reportedly two of the cameras closest to Epstein’s cell “malfunctioned” that night, simultaneously, as his guards slept at their desks for hours.

November 16th, 2019: Feeling pressure from the British and international press to speak about his connection to Epstein, Prince Andrew gives an interview to Emily Maitlis at BBC’s Newsnight. The special program airs on a weekend. Immediately following the program, there are multiple reports that Andrew thought it went well, and that he told the Queen it went well. Over the span of one week, Andrew will be called into Buckingham Palace, and he is given the chance to “step down” from public life. Since then, he has been hellbent on “coming back.”

I bring up this timeline just to point out how long it’s been with all of these stories. This is how long Queen Elizabeth has been covering for Andrew. Even when he stepped down from public life, he didn’t relinquish anything, not his HRH, not his ducal title, not his military patronages, not his royal patronages. The Queen and her courtiers even forced many patronages to keep Andrew on as their patron for two years and two months following his “step down.” But now that Virginia Giuffre’s lawsuit is now going to trial, finally NOW, in the year of our lord Beyonce 2022, Andrew is finally getting his patronages yanked. And once again, Buckingham Palace framed it as Andrew’s choice. Apparently, Andrew is voluntarily giving up his HRH-style too (but he still IS an HRH, he just won’t use it).

Prince Andrew will no longer be known as His Royal Highness ‘in any official capacity’ in a stunning downfall as his family tonight abandoned him to fight his sex abuse lawsuit in America as a private citizen. Andrew, who remains Duke of York, also loses his military titles and royal patronages ‘with the Queen’s approval and agreement’, Buckingham Palace said in a terse statement that brought his 61 years as a senior royal to a shock end.

He is only the 5th royal in recent history to stop using the HRH title, with Princess Diana and Sarah, Duchess of York, losing the styling after their divorce, while Prince Harry and Meghan Markle agreed to lose theirs as part of their ‘Megxit’ deal with the Queen.

Buckingham Palace announced the Queen’s decision to cast Andrew out of the royal fold in a statement released this afternoon: ‘With The Queen’s approval and agreement, The Duke of York’s military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to The Queen. The Duke of York will continue not to undertake any public duties and is defending this case as a private citizen.’

A royal source said the issue had been widely discussed with the royal family, making it likely that the Prince of Wales, as well as Andrew, were involved in crisis talks over the matter. The source said the military posts would be redistributed to other members of the royal family.

The Palace said previously that the duke’s military appointments were in abeyance after he stepped down from public duties in 2019. But, prior to today, he still retained the roles, including the position of Colonel of the Grenadier Guards, one of the oldest and most emblematic regiments in the British Army. His other British honorary military titles are: Honorary air commodore of RAF Lossiemouth; Colonel-in-chief of the Royal Irish Regiment; Colonel-in-chief of the Small Arms School Corps; Commodore-in-Chief of the Fleet Air Arm; Royal colonel of the Royal Highland Fusiliers; Deputy colonel-in-chief of The Royal Lancers (Queen Elizabeths’ Own); and Royal colonel of the Royal Regiment of Scotland.

[From The Daily Mail]

Look at that long list of military appointments he still retained whilst simultaneously having his lawyers argue in court that the Child Victims Act is unconstitutional, and that Virginia already had enough money. He had all of those appointments even after the Newsnight debacle. Hours before Liz made her favorite son turn over all of his shiny military regalia, more than 150 veterans signed an open letter to the Queen, demanding that Andrew get stripped of his military positions.

Royal commentators are, of course, all in a tizzy. Dickie Arbiter swooned: “She is pragmatic. It is about protecting the interests of the institution. Andrew now is really out in the cold.” Penny Junor questioned the timing: “I think it was a huge embarrassment that retired serving military personnel were demanding that titles be removed. That just becomes embarrassing and it becomes damaging to the Queen because the Queen is then seen as protecting her son. I don’t know if the Queen was too slow to take them back or whether it lies with Andrew who was too slow to offer them back. But either way I think actually a bit of criticism has to fall on the Queen here… she, or her advisers should have seen that this was going to cause a problem and should have insisted that she take them back.” Well well.

My guess is that once again, Prince Charles was tasked with telling mummy that Andrew needed to give up his toys. This was not something the Queen came up with on her own, clearly, because she had done nothing before now.

Questioned for his connection with Jeffrey Epstein, Prince Andrew "puts an end to his public commitments" **FILE PHOTOS**

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

193 Responses to “Prince Andrew relinquished his ‘HRH’ as well as his military & royal patronages”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Laalaa says:

    Oh, wow, I gave her a tiniest amount of credit when I heard this yesterday, but I didn’t realize she was doing this only AFTER the veterans said theirs.
    Wtf is this world we live in, I just can’t anymore

    • Chloe says:

      That is a fact that the press is very conveniently obscuring from the public. Can’t stand Junior but i’ll give her some credit here for pointing it out and calling out the queen on it.

      • Tessa says:

        Junor was constantly slamming Meghan and Harry and only got on the Andrew Bandwagon when the Queen finally did something after a lot of pressure.

    • Concern Fae says:

      Something like this doesn’t come together in a few hours. I suspect the timing was coincidence.

      • Chloe says:

        How so? All andrew had to do is sent his patronage’s an email stating that he is stepping down and the deal is done. It really doesn’t take that long.

      • PrincessK says:

        @Chloe is referring to the Palace statement, which l believe has been ready and waiting for release if necessary.

    • ABritGuest says:

      Don’t give them any credit. This has happened for multiple reasons: 1) backlash to ANDREW’s terrible defence that he was covered by Epstein’s settlement agreement & the act Virginia was relying on was unconstitutional- people were openly criticising that the queen is paying for defence so they want to create distance especially in her jubilee year. 2) because Virginia’s case is going ahead so if she settles or wins they again want to act like the queen is distanced from it all. Plus some ugly stuff may emerge or Andrew’s defence may get even more aggressive & they want queen detached 3) because of Ghislaine’s conviction & it’s being reported today she won’t fight to keep various John Does secret anymore so who knows what could emerge. 4) with that military vets letter, people were probably going to be more vocal about need for him to be stood down. And guess it removes issues of Andrew being in uniform & part of trooping etc

      This is all PR/ face saving exercise after more than a decade of the firm denying sexual contact with Virginia, giving andrew special honours after her claims emerged, giving him messages to relay to ambassadors on behalf of the queen even after he stepped back in 2019 & allowing him to keep patronage’s & military honours with the queen reportedly making clear last year again that’s what she wanted despite the wishes of the military.

      Even though Andrew hasn’t been a working member of the royals since 2019 apparently he’s still got taxpayer funded security & there’s suggestion that will remain the case even after this move “as a senior member of the family” & possibly because of security risk with the public at large thinking he’s guilty. So the home office/ police etc DO look at risk profile for royal family members who arent part of the working royals team but tell me again how Meghan was lying about security position for archie amidst all threats around him.

      • Alexandria says:

        What Britguest said. Don’t give any of these royals, courtiers and rota rats credit. They all knew what they had to do in the first place but they delayed and delayed until they were pushed. All of them. Instead they spent their energy, money and time to bully and ABUSE Harry and Meghan relentlessly.

      • Eurydice says:

        Well, there are a couple of kinds of credit. One is giving them credit for doing the right thing – and that is a hard NO. The other kind of credit is assigning a name to whomever actually brought down the axe – I’d say that’s Charles, with William as his henchman.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      I think the queen’s motivation was more the court’s refusal to dismiss the lawsuit on technicalities, than the letter written by veterans. The FACTS haven’t changed, but if the lawsuit was thrown out on a technicality, they could continue to hide the matter and pretend nothing happened. That shows me the royal family doesn’t care about the FACTS of what Andrew did, only the bad publicity that the trial brings. They are all about image, not compassion or concern for the victims.

    • HeyJude says:

      I give her no credit. Virginia just won the right and Ghislaine Maxwell withdrew her objections to naming the John Doe in the documents involved in Virginia’s first case with Epstein in the past few days.

      It’s blatantly obvious who that John Doe is by this move.

      Andrew is about to be exposed as the person named in a previous settlement with Virginia.

      This not at all the Queen finally getting a conscious. It’s a preemptive move because the US court is about to out him as a pedophile already involved in prior litigation.

      • TEALIEF says:

        As ABritGuest and others have said, she gets no credit for doing this now, it’s a clean up exercise. He should have been hoovered up decades ago. As the veterans said, this step could have been taken anytime in the past eleven years. Dutiful she may be, but her blindspot to her most favoured son has delayed action on what should have been simple on the arc of common sense, and right and wrong.  Is common sense lacking because she is royal?  What she did do 11 years ago was royally done: she gave him a medal, invested him with a Knightly insignia and had tea with him. She covered him with the power of her regal consequence and her maternal affection. She let him keep his “bag of sweeties”. I have no doubt she and Charles have been briefed with documents on Andrew’s many predicaments and predelictions.

        As an aside I feel for the York daughters. They should not be judged for their parents actions and behaviour.

    • josephine says:

      Some legal experts are saying that it’s an attempt to protect monarchy assets, that if he continued to hold his titles, the monarchy’s assets would be considered partly his, and thus available to settle his debts (and more importantly, potentially discoverable). I have no idea if that is true, but some legal experts seem to think so, and seem to think that the monarchy has vast and deep assets that they want to continue to hide from the people.

  2. ThatsNotOkay says:

    Anyone who actually served in combat in the military left in that god-ordained, god-forsaken family?

    So let’s be clear…they’re really only doing this in order to protect the Queen’s and the Crown’s riches and assets from being used in Andrew’s payout, since he is but a mere private citizen with no wealth of his own (on shore, anyway. Now offshore is another matter….).

    • Chloe says:

      I really want someone to dig into the Duke of Yorks finances. How is he going to pay for the trial. And since he’s now apparently a private citizen: how is he paying for his security?

      Never mind his residence at the royal lodge. Who’s paying that rent?

      • Chaine says:

        My personal assumption is that the secret will of Prince Phillip has set up Andrew with some kind of financial stability and in a way that his creditors won’t be able to reach.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        Follow the money!

      • Laura-Lee MacDonald says:

        I’m with Chaîne, Philip left money that we can’t look at and he has offshore finances. “Out in the cold”!?!?! Ughhhhhhh as if.

      • notasugarhere says:

        There is no rent at Royal Lodge, just as there is no rent at Bagshot Park or Thatched Cottage (Princess Alexandra’s Crown Estate property). That’s part of the deal with the Crown Estate. Andrew and Edward pre-paid those leases through spending millions on the restoration. Alexandra’s husband purchased an existing sub-lease decades ago with the same kind of deal.

        As I speculated yesterday, I think QEII paid for those leases with private funds as a way to give them their private inheritance early. It also means that 40 percent of that inheritance wasn’t paid in taxes.

      • Jan90067 says:

        Considering all the shady deals and kickbacks he got for himself as “Trade Ambassador”, you can be sure there are *tens of millions* of pounds in offshore, hidden accounts. I’d bet MY home on it!

      • Cessily says:

        I read awhile ago that the lease on the Royal lodge was paid in full. It was a ridiculously low amount of rent for the property that size and for a 70 or 75 year lease that can be passed on in his Will. So unless he can get a payout to break the lease I think PA will cling to the Royal Lodge because of his arrogance.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The Crown Estate reviewed the leases for both Royal Lodge and Bagshot, declared them legal and that they (Andrew, Edward) had pre-paid enough through their upgrades to get the leases they have.

      • PrincessK says:

        Most people feel that Philip’s will is secret because of things he left to mistresses and possible secret children. The will is secret for 90 years but once the Queen passes more rumours about it will emerge.

      • ArticCircle says:

        Epstein paid Sarah Ferguson’s debts , and still lives in a mansion paid for by the Queen , another hanger on like Maxwell that should be given the boot

    • Lolo86lf says:

      Just how much money can the victim get out of the English crown? Are we talking about tens of millions of dollars?

    • Courtney B says:

      Not in combat (most vets never do) but the elderly Duke of Kent and Timothy Laurence (Anne’s husband) had actual distinguished careers.

    • HeyJude says:

      The Queen tended to combat troop’s needs as a mechanic. That’s about it.

      The actual war hero was Chucked out like garbage for loving his wife.

  3. MY3CENTS says:

    For once they actually made a smart PR move.
    I’m happy this has happened, but it’s not as though these people were suddenly enlightened, and saw the error of their ways.
    Actually a bit surprised they acted so quickly.

    • Robyn says:

      The sudden haste makes me think something else is about to drop – the details to emerge as the case goes forward will be very damaging.

      • HeyJude says:

        It is- John Doe’s name in the prior case documents is about to be released. Maxwell withdrew her objection to naming the person.

      • Feeshalori says:

        It’s going down, this is just the tip of the iceberg and I’m here for it.

    • Marilee says:

      I’m excited to see Will&co be dragged out to report, “We are very much not a rapist family.”

      • lanne says:

        It’s what he meant to say the first time, when he said racist. Because they very well are a racist and a rapist family. That’s not exactly news. Evidence: history.

      • Veda says:

        At the very least he should send his staff to give evidence about Andrews finances. After all, there is precedence with Knauf.

      • Jay says:

        @Veda, how fantastic would that be if royal aides were called to give evidence based on the precedence of Knauf trying his best to hurt Meghan.

      • Lady D says:

        I’m living for that day, Jay.

  4. Noki says:

    I saw the list of JUST Andrews patronages,they were as long as my arm. This royal charity work is a complete FARCE. There is no way any of these entitled people are doing anything useful for even a third of their so called partronages. I wish someone would do an investigation and then audit of the royal funds designated to charity and show us what monies have truely gone to these organisations.

    • Eurydice says:

      Yes, I lost count at 110.

    • Lili says:

      I saw a detailed report on twitter the other day and the conclusion was they had no impact on the charities. and that there was no benefit to having a royal patron

    • Becks1 says:

      Someone did that for the patronages (not the royal funds part, remember that having a royal patron does not mean that you are getting any money from the royal foundations or anything) and found that there was no benefit. I think it was from summer 2020.

      There is also a difference between royal patronages and patronages. I’m assuming he’s giving them all up, but he might not be at this point.

      • harperc says:

        I remember this from when Harry lost his patronages.

        Royal patronages are granted by the queen. She takes them back, but the org with the royal patron can’t get rid of the patron without going through the queen.

        A regular patron is not granted by the queen, so Andy may still be able to keep those. But OTOH, those can get rid of their patrons without having to go through the queen. So who knows if he keeps them or not?

        The regular patron situation is why H and M still have their patronages with orgs like African Parks and Smart Works. *Those* charities weren’t going to give up H&M without a fight, and since they were personal patronages, TQ has no say.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “There is no way any of these entitled people are doing anything useful for even a third of their so called partronages.”

      Wiglet did very little real work for EACH which was one of the bones of contention between her and “Rose Who?”.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Many royal ‘patronages’ are smaller things like ‘Royal Patron of the West Wales Village of Snide fund to restore the historic churchyard’ type things. They aren’t things that require more than 1-2 visits a year.

    • josephine says:

      A financial reckoning from these people is long overdue. I cant believe that they’ve been allowed to hide so much. I’m obviously not English but I don’t get the strangehold these people have on the nation.

  5. Bebe says:

    I have a feeling that more horrifying stories are about to come out and even the worst people in the British Royal circles won’t be able to ignore them. And that is why this is happening now.

    • Chloe says:

      I don’t doubt that more shit will come out but like Penny Junior said, it follows after veterans wrote an open letter to the queen calling for andrew’s military honors to be stripped. She finally felt pressure from either the public or her advisors who felt pressure from the public. Which is why she took this step.

  6. AppleCart says:

    it’s just a band aid once things are settled with Virginia he gets it all back like nothing happened? And I know the US want to talk to him about a criminal investigation. But I just don’t see them charging him with anything they always protect the Johns.

  7. Chloe says:

    I actually think it was more her advisors who for once said the right thing to her and put proper pressure on her

    • Jais says:

      Kind of surprised she was actually convinced to do it. Thx, Kaiser, for a reminder of the timeline. The queen is pretty terrible here. I know a lot of people love her but man, she is the head of it all and it rots from the top. The monarchy system just twists people. They may have good parts but everyone in it gets twisted and poisoned to varying degrees.

      • Becks1 says:

        I’m surprised that Penny Junor actually came out and said that the Queen deserves come criticism here.

      • Ania says:

        The Queen is like the beloved pope John Paul II who apparently knew nothing about pedophilia in Church – he too was a nice elderly man who could be your grandpa and people liked to believe him. The both knew very well what is happening or actively tried to close their eyes which makes them as guilty.

        And I am sure this is just an attempt to protect the money and claim that poor Andy living in a palace has actually no money to pay Virginia. Nothing more, not even PR. I think Betty was refusing to do anything untill someone finally told her that her fortune might be touched.

  8. Lily says:

    The shit hath finally hitith the fan.

  9. Oh_Hey says:

    Ugh. Noncy Drew kept his titles, his patronages (against their will), his HRH, all of it while being a known trafficker and worse. While the other untitled royals, including his complicit ex, only lost theirs in divorces or for being/marrying someone non-white.

    It’s even more gross when you think about it.

    • AppleCart says:

      When you’re the Queens favorite son nothing else matters.

    • notasugarhere says:

      As part of the Diana debacle, the Queen changed the rules regarding divorce. Anyone who divorces out of the family loses their HRH. That’s why both Diana and Fergie lost theirs. Originaly Fergie was getting to keep hers.

      As for the titles? The royal titles given when they get married aren’t aristocratic titles, they’re royal titles. Weird but different. They don’t mean or signify anything other than a made up name she gives them as a wedding gift. In that odd way, it isn’t government-controlled.

      The royal prince title is different, which is the one thing I could see being removed later through Act of Parliament.

      • Tessa says:

        As for other married ins, Mark Phillips had no title to lose and Armstrong Jones got to keep title of Snowdon. Fergie was caught cheating (on vacation with financial adviser) and was in the headlines (this while she was at Balmoral with the Queen and family were there and the Queen told her to leave right away) That doomed any chances she had of keeping an HRH. IMO. And she was not liked by Philip. There were rumors that Andrew and Fergie would reconcile prior to the headlines about Fergie and her financial adviser.
        I think in the future, there could be exceptions to the rules of losing the HRH. Depending on circumstances.

  10. Harla says:

    Once again the queen must be forced to do the right thing. #abolishthemonarchy

  11. Dlc says:

    And this is NOT the top news story on the Daily Mail, which says so much.

    • Bros says:

      Colbert even covered it. It was all
      Over cnn last night. If it’s not front page in the soppy british tabloids, that’s nuts.

    • Eurydice says:

      It was front page yesterday, I think.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Yes! It was “Front Page” at the Mail Online.

      • Rapunzel says:

        It was top story/front page for a very short time though. Compared to negative stories about the Sussexes, it was especially shorter. Are there just more important stories? Maybe, but …

    • Jane says:

      It is a big story but there are bigger things going on in the UK just now. Andrew deserves everything that’s coming to him but in the grand scheme of things he’s a complete irrelevance in the face of our government’s serial incompetence and misbehaviour.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Like The Met refusing to investigate criminal charges against BoJo and the party until the internal (non-criminal) investigation is completed. He broke the law, if he was anyone else he’d be charged. But nope, no investigation.

  12. equality says:

    The military personnel were correct. He should have been treated just as any other military officer would have been in the same circumstances. It proves QE was the one who pulled all PH’s honorary titles also because apparently only she can do that and if PC were able Andrew’s would have been pulled before now.

  13. Eurydice says:

    The Guardian has a great article that ends with a very pointed paragraph comparing Andrew to Harry – noting that Harry was protecting his wife and child and wanted support from his family, yet the RF continued to support Andrew instead.

  14. Remy says:

    Pretty sure it was the lawyers that told her she had to “cut ties” and protect the assets.

  15. Snuffles says:

    A lawyer on Tik Tok made an argument that this was just a move to protect the royal family’s US assets.

    • Chloe says:

      They have assets in the US? What are those assets?

    • apollocat says:

      Royal family doesn’t have assets in USA and rest of the world. They barely hanging onto Scotland castle because what happen in case of Scottish independences.

      • Snuffles says:

        A Google search turns up that the Crown Estate has “holdings of 287,000 acres of agricultural land and forests together with minerals and residential and commercial property.”

        It was in the Tik Tok video.

        Another Google search on the IRS site:

        “In some situations, a foreign government will seize assets located in their country and initiate a forfeiture action under their laws.”

        So the US can seize those assets.

      • apollocat says:

        Thats not in usa. Its duchy and crown estate in uk. You said USA. Plus those estate wont be able to sell it because they are in trust hands and only heir controls the money. They cant be sale it and every single member of the brf have right if they want to sell. It will be messy and in fighting will be glory, that’s why they put these properties in trust and board members to manage them.

      • Snuffles says:


        Ok. Let’s say that’s true. But I’m pretty sure the Queen privately owns some US assets. Rumors are that includes a Kentucky horse ranch and prime real estate in New York City.

        This trial can uncover details of her finances if there is a default judgement and Virginia’s lawyers go after their assets to get them to pay up.

      • apollocat says:

        snuffles I saw in twitter thread that us and uk doesn’t have that kind of bilateral agreement . Plus like i said that property doesn’t belong to single member of brf. Every single royals in British throne have right to that property and its hard to sell and all of them in trust . Even those castle like Balmoral , heir can have it but everyone has the right in that property because it was purchased by I think king George so all his line get their fair share.

      • Ainsley7 says:

        @Snuffles- The government owns the crown estates not the Queen. If they seized crown estate assets it would be like seizing the assets of the company the person works for.

      • Becks1 says:

        I can’t click on the link right now, but there is a big difference between the assets of the royal family and the Crown estate. Any settlement couldn’t touch the Crown estates. the personal assets though are a different story, and yes, we know the Queen at least has assets outside of the UK. I’m sure they all do.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Yes, Snuffles, the Kentucky horse ranch is one. She was also said to have privately purchased a Manhattan apartment for Beatrice and Eugenie when they were living in NYC.

    • Truthiness says:

      This I can believe easily. Cutting all ties so that Andrew is an unemployed private citizen could protect their assets. Especially as Boies has been unshakeable, getting closer by the day. They’ve finally cottoned to the fact that they are losing on all fronts and everyone has been discussing how the Queen’s been funding this.

  16. Amy T says:

    Really, the surprise is that it happened at all. I wonder if Charles thought he could wait to do this between the funeral and coronation ceremony, thereby sparing Mummy the heartbreak of having to acknowledge what the rest of us have been able to grasp from afar. But the one-two punch of the veterans’ letter and the lawsuit going forward made that impossible. Also, if any of you royal experts can explain the connection between the title/patronage stripping and it’s potential impact on payouts and the royal treasury, thank you in advance.
    Happy Ignonomy, Andrew.

  17. Lili says:

    I wonder If Andrew is now exposed to criminal investigations, will other victims now come out and will maxwell sing like a canary and implcate him further. This could get really messy

  18. apollocat says:

    It took this long to strip his title? I think something is going on behind the scenes that Maxwell gave up few names and bill gates is getting investigated for his sexual harassments. This year is not good for white men. I think they only do this because his trail is getting close to queen celebration. I don’t know how they will avoid those. Queen is probably on her way and Charles being in charge of brf now.

    After queen die its going to be shit show because tory wont be in power and labor doesn’t like William and his racist view. Tories hate Charles for his liberal view. Willyboy and kant will be burnt of it.

    Plus I think York’s girls , Andy and Sussex wont be there to get the fall of Cambridge’s laziness and for next coming decades its going to wild and Cambridge’s kids wont be barred from scrutiny either. They will throw charlotte and louis under the bus.

    • Lady D says:

      …but first they will throw Lady’s Louise, Isla, Savahnna, and Mia, along with James, Viscount Severn to the wolves. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Zara and Mike move to Oz to avoid William’s rule. What will be interesting, is the reaction Sophie has to her daughter being tossed under a bus repeatedly. Louise is a lot older than the Cambridge children, she might escape relatively unscathed.

      • Tessa says:

        Louise should go to University, work after the degree and maybe find an aristo or wealthy man to marry. I think it’s better to be independent of royals.

      • Tessa says:

        Supposedly Peter Phillips is one of the Queen’s favorites. I wonder if she gave him a large settlement that he can depend on.

  19. BrickyardUte says:

    Uh oh…more work for the Other Brother and Keen. If only they had another Royal with actual military experience to step up.

  20. Becks1 says:

    I’m seeing so many comments on WaPo and NYT here in the US praising the Queen for making the hard decision to do this and I’m like….she didn’t do it. I mean she finally signed off on it, but she dragged this as long as she could and hoped it would go away. She should have pulled all his military honors etc in 2010 when he was photographed in NYC with Epstein, or even a few years ago when the photos resurfaced of Andrew actually inside Epstein’s house.

    the funny thing is, the family’s shabby treatment of H&M is coming back to bite Andrew in the ass, isn’t it? You can’t have the Afghanistan veteran lose all his honorary military appointments while the sex offender gets to keep his. You can’t have the black duchess not allowed to use her HRH while the sex offender gets to stay HRH. I think many, many people, even those who aren’t the biggest H&M fans, saw that inconsistency as a HUGE issue and so here we are.

    • apollocat says:

      Queen always won the respect of people because of her hard work and she is known for putting her work before family. I know this is tough but this and Sussex case I don’t think she really know what is truly going on. She only take advice whatever her courtiers says. Sussex striping comes from courtiers and ch and kp. I dont think even she knows it. These people taking advantages of queen old age and doing things in her name. I dont know they wont show the papers of sussex related news to the queen. Its like left vs right news where both sides get completely different news. She only knows what her courtiers say and show her.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think that’s pretty close, about what she knows, and I think its why H&M are able to forgive her and not blame her for their treatment. I mean the buck stops with her, she’s in charge, she’s the head of the Firm and the family, but she’s also 95 and may be more out of it than I think many people realize.

        As for putting work before family – she did, which is part of why the royal family is such a toxic wasteland right now.

      • Alexandria says:

        She is a fraud who puts her family and firm first. It’s PR for survival. If she put her work first, why is she meddling with 1000 laws? Why is she fudging her books instead of being a professional organization with accountability and transparency? Why is she not appraising WK work?

      • apollocat says:

        Alex like i said queen is not smart cookie and she was know to be dumb. I hardly doubt she is driving for these law but her adviser is the one doing it and she always listen to her adviser. She is known pr disaster , only thing that save her for all these year is she never shy away from work. I think queen and courtier washed their hands on wk long time ago. The current courtier is not looking for future in brf. They will leave as soon as queen dies. BP has one guy who is her private secretary who was strong willed and he was very much into futue and they constantly leak to press about how kate is being lazy. But charles and andy staged a coup and send him and result is this mess.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        i agree it is very easy to manipulate seniors, by controlling their access to people and media and having specific people only whisper in their ears. Can you imagine if Angela Kelly were the sole source of social gossip available to the Queen.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The person you are referring to is Lord Geidt:

        Christopher Edward Wollaston MacKenzie Geidt, Baron Geidt, GCB, GCVO, OBE, QSO, PC, FKC is a member of the House of Lords and Chairman of the Council of King’s College London. He was Private Secretary to Queen Elizabeth II from 2007 to 2017. He currently lives and farms in the Minches, in the Scottish Outer Hebrides.

      • windyriver says:

        Harry pointedly said said TQ gets bad advice in the Oprah interview, which lines up with what you’re saying.

      • Alexandria says:

        @Apollocat good point. If she’s smart and also not arrogant about her anointed by God status, she should have abdicated way earlier. She’s human and she should have planned ahead because her faculties in her 90s would likely be different.

      • apollocat says:

        Yeah thats him. He was credited to making harry and william to work together . Whenever harry and william have problem , he is the one interfered and smooth things over not Charles. But also he is the one who insist the monarch should be in bp not Clarence house and he and charles is often at odds and he made andy to cut ties to Epstein. In the wake of sussex leave many royal reporter not usual ones but less deranged ones says if he was there this smear campaign wont take place. Plus rest of courtiers in kp and ch are afraid of him. With him gone bp is not powerful and ch only look out for themselves and kp is moron.

        Queen and royals is like the character from sunset Boulevard that actress has max and believe whatever he says. Same as royals they live in the bubble that’s why they thought that bbc interview is good and smearing your own brother is good.

      • windyriver says:

        @RoyalBlue, the other factor is, by TQ’s age, most if not all of close friends and family – people whose private advice and opinions you relied on – will have passed away. So she’s already been increasingly isolated by natural circumstances, before any behind the scenes manipulation that’s going on.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @apollocat – I agree with you. I have read many times in many non-deranged publications that if Geidt was still at BP then Meghan & Harry would have never left as the problems would have been solved before the problems got completely out of hand. I have read that GEIDT always told QEEII the complete unvarnished truth with regards to important matters.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Geidt advised her create to the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and likely advised her to give the presidency to Harry. That would be a way of keeping him in the fold but giving him freedom from William. Which is one of the many things that made William incandescent.

        Geidt isn’t free from being manipulated himself. He openly advocated to keep Edward and Sophie on, which is what resulted in his firing by Charles. Was it QEII who was manipulating Geidt? Philip? Sophie?

      • Gabby says:

        @apollocat that is highly generous of you to state the queen has done hard work. Too generous perhaps.

        I don’t think she made this decision, Chuck and Billy made it for her and managed to get her to nod in affirmation. This broad’s decision-making days are behind her.

      • PrincessK says:

        The Queen definitely prefers Harry but because she puts the succession and saving the monarchy ahead of everything she has to keep Billy happy.

    • Eurydice says:

      I’ve seen stories that Charles and William weren’t just “involved” but made the decision, which makes sense. They’re the ones who cast Andrew into the shadows after the BBC interview, right? And they were in solidarity about H&M. I wonder if this notion of CH and KP being at odds is quite right – it looks to me like Charles and William are solidifying a core of power (whatever passes for power in the monarchy) – Charles as King and Will as his hatchet man.

      • windyriver says:

        I question William’s involvement in the Andrew situation, beyond pontificating to look kingly as per the usual Cambridge style. Charles has wanted to do this for a long time. Harry & Meghan’s situation though? Will was all over that, from making it impossible for them to be part-time in the first place, to the thread of absolute nastiness throughout until their final exit (and beyond). Charles can be a bastard, and used hardball tactics to try and prevent Harry from leaving, but he wanted Harry to stay, knew he was necessary. Will, on the other hand – if Harry wasn’t going to let himself continue to be used to prop up the Cambridges – just wanted him gone. And Will was so sure with Harry out of the way, the world would see that he, Will, was truly all that. Charles knows better.

        But he and Will are stuck with each other now in the name of preserving the monarchy. Good luck to them.

      • apollocat says:

        @alex abdication is not brf style. Only one who abdicate was edward that nearly got brf in shambles. Plus all monarch in brf will see through end of light and queen doesnt have any faith in next two kings and she doesnt want to see what the disaster is king charles and prince of wales william will be . thats why she is hanging on to her dear life.

      • Alexandria says:

        I know it’s not BRF style, I’m just saying it’s the wrong decision in these modern times. Chuck would have benefited from her earned goodwill if she had abdicated and lent a guiding hand beside him. Other monarchies have done it. And it’s the 21st century, modern PR can manage a peaceful, stable abdication. It doesn’t need to be a crisis. They’re not that big a deal, people are getting less religious to care about the head of the Church of England and the idea of a god-anointed monarch, and the premise of monarchy is that there is a line of heirs ready to take over. And the men in grey are precisely there to make it work, if not what’s their purpose of being paid by taxpayers? So now, Britain has to deal with Brexit, a fumbling BoJo and the Queen being dead. How stable. She played herself.

      • Tessa says:

        William should be kept out of major decisions. Just to try to instill some humility though it is a losing battle IMO.

      • PrincessK says:

        William knows that people are coming after him too. The Rosegate stories are increasing. At one point the media cancelled any comments referring to Rose for fear of legal action but now they let them stay.

      • Tessa says:

        I think William wants more power and influence. He may not be happy just being a hatchet man.

  21. Amy Bee says:

    The Queen is very reactionary. Had the judge thrown out the case and the veterans hadn’t spoken out, Andrew would still have all his titles and patronages. Of course the British press is centering the Queen in this mess and KP attempting to make William seem he had a hand in this decision. It will be interesting to see which royals will get Andrew’s patronages. I know Kate had no plans to work but she will have no choice but to do more now.

    • Lili says:

      I think PC had plans to reduce the number of patronages in line with the slimmed down monarchy, so i doubt many of them will get redistributed

      • apollocat says:

        I dont think that is Charles plan. His plan to slim down because York’s are sucking off the queen and reduce brf member with hrh. He thought his plan will help among younger generation. Those patronages will get celebrities because charles , camila and anne are old and Cambridge’s refuse to work and bully sussex away.

      • Jan90067 says:

        PC did not. This was SAID by W&K, that THEY would reduce their patronages to just a “handful they want to concentrate on” ie: LESS WORK.

    • Alexandria says:

      She is not going to work more. She will do bare minimum.

    • windyriver says:

      @Amy Bee, agree. The corollary to “don’t explain, don’t complain” has always been “If you wait long enough, people will forget”. That’s why the cozy press relationship has been so important, they need the media to not cover, or else deflect, things “inconvenient” to the family. That was the hope by letting Andrew continue as he was. But the judge’s decision and the veterans’ letter, on top of Maxwell’s conviction, gave them no choice.

      People have speculated about TQ’s physical condition the last few months, some going so far as to say she’s either close to death, or already gone and it’s being hidden. Based on a surprising number of 90+ year olds in my family’s orbit, though, my guess has been she’s got one or more conditions (e.g., cardiac) common for her age, and recent challenges have had to do with adjusting to a new medication regimen (hence, no more alcohol), or increasing orthopedic/balance problems.

      Regardless, as cold a fish as she might be, having to agree to this for her adored and favorite child, on top of Philip’s death, Harry’s leaving, and Will’s general uselessness (which she’s well aware of with her Scotland re-do) – this could really hasten her final decline.

  22. MangoAngelesque says:

    This is 100% Charles lowering the boom in some way and saying “enough’s enough.” Not that I’m giving him credit for anything, because it purely comes down to embarrassment due to the vet’s open letter and dawning awareness of Just. How. Bad. it’s going to be when Prince Andrew, son of the Queen, is dragged into court and the Royal Family is mentioned every other breath throughout the trial.

    This is face-saving *at best*, but it STILL didn’t come from the Queen. She’d have let Sweaty Andy drag them along with him if he just asked Mummy for helpsies.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      100% this. Once again, Regent Charles is calling the shots and cut Andy loose. He does not want this looming when he becomes king, and since we are hardly seeing Old Brenda these days it could be any time this year.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @MangoAnglesque: Lowering the boom? He’s at least 2 years late on that. Charles is worried about his ability to reign after the Queen dies nothing else.

      • notasugarhere says:

        He’ll also do the friends close, enemies closer thing with Andrew. He’ll find a way to fund Andrew as a means to keep him under control.

  23. ML says:

    The city of York wants his title removed as they feel it reflects poorly on them.

    • Rapunzel says:

      Wow! I hope the town takes this all the way to parliament and gets them involved.

      • PrincessK says:

        It is a non starter the majority of people in York have more important things to worry about. Remember some anti Meghan people from Sussex also tried to get the title removed from Harry.

  24. Slippers4life says:

    He’s so gross. This whole thing is gross. About time he had all of this stuff removed, but it’s too little too late! This family is evil. I don’t know why I did this, but after hearing about this I re-watched Andrew’s news night interview….maybe I just can’t look away from a train wreck. Anyway, the level of knowledge that this disgusting human being has regarding the autopsy for Epstein is bone chilling. It gave me hope, though, that, he will definitely purger and incriminate himself on the stand. I think that the BRF knows that.

  25. Seraphina says:

    Liz dragged her feet for a looooooong time on this. One story I read claimed she saw Andrew as “not important” and thus did not strip him of his titles. Which made no sense because if he is of no importance (when compared to the heirs of the throne) why give him titles and HRH???
    I think the straw that broke the camels back was the letter from the veterans. I think that is where Chuky had a vision of him losing everything he waited this long for and pressed for this to happen.
    NO WAY NO HOW would Liz have done this on her own.

  26. Alexandria says:

    Thank you to the veterans for forcing their hands. We all know that family and firm were forced, and not because they have integrity. Royal values much. Can’t wait for The Crown to cover this.

    I’m not a religious person but I thank God and the universe for showing there was a bright, silver lining behind the relentless torment and abuse of Harry and Meghan. They left and are so much better for it and are THRIVING AND LIVING. If Meghan had stayed, we all know she would be the one questioned by the press for Nonce’s deeds and trial. We all know she would be called hypocritical for championing girls’ and women’s issues and the rest would just be coddled and protected. We all know she would feel helpless and miserable, wanting to help girls and women because the Nonce would undermine her work. Both of them are now far from this clown show, smoke and mirrors pathetic theatre that is the royal family. And fuck these rota rats for now trying to criticize the Queen for acting slowly. None of them cried for Nonce to be stripped of his honorary titles the way they screamed for Harry and Meghan to be stripped and punished. None of them blasted Nonce on the front pages for these allegations. None of them! But ya Meghan closing car doors, eating avacado and their Montecito lawn etc are scandalous and a shame to the monarchy! These rats have no humanity.

  27. Heather says:

    I predict the monarchy will collapse within the next 5-10 years.

    • Gabby says:

      That will be fucking glorious

    • Sid says:

      I definitely don’t think Willileaks will be king. It just comes down to whether it’s because everything will fall apart before it’s his turn or because whatever he is hiding gets exposed and ends up bad enough that he is forced to step aside in disgrace and George becomes Charles’s heir.

  28. Kiera says:

    I give the Queen no credit here. I feel pretty sure that story the other day about how taking the patronages away etc was a tester to see how people would react and they vehemently were pissed off. I find it way to coincidental that within a day, less, of that story he lost the patronages.

    They used the article as a way to gauge the public and it epically backfired once people realized how much Andrew still had. This was damage control on a damage control.

  29. Miranda says:

    How fucking infuriating is it that Betty can cover her eyes and ears for the longest time, then when she finally does the right thing (mourning Diana; taking away her paedophile son’s honors and patronages) in the feeblest manner possible after being publicly prodded to do so, she gets praised. Disgusting.

  30. MerlinsMom1018 says:

    Ohhhhh to be a fly on the wall for THAT meeting between Charles and QE2 and Andy…

  31. SarahCS says:

    And yet the BBC is framing this around how tough it all is on ANDREW.

    It’s nauseating. I know they’ve shown their position clearly in recent years but having grown up believing them impartial this hurts. As a non-British delegate explained on a programme I was running a few years back ‘the BBC is like a religion to the British’.

    Prince Andrew: Why the military titles and royal patronages meant so much

  32. Seaflower says:

    Interesting tweet from one of the ex BBC correspondents on this

    “What does the palace know that we don’t yet know? It’s a pertinent question each time they issue a statement and it’s particularly pertinent in the wake of these 42 words defenestrating a duke.”

    • Becks1 says:

      I think the palace is preparing for this trial to be an absolute disaster for Andrew and the Firm and are trying to distance the royals as much as possible. Too late for that, that picture of the Queen riding to church with Andrew after Epstein died will live forever.

  33. Veda says:

    It’s disgusting. BM should do some real journalism and put together a timeline of events from when Virginia’s allegation was first made. In any case the Queen would have known from 2008 that Epstein was a convicted peadophile. Epstein and Maxwells saga has been widely publicised at least since 2018. Ghislaine’s father also moved in royal circles, which is how Andrew met Ghislaine. There is no way that the Queen and her handlers didn’t know about these characters and Andrews relationship with them. In spite of it all the Queen kept mum, awarded Andrew medals and promotions even after Virginia made her allegations. All because she thought her anointed family didn’t need to answer for charges by plebs. She is absolutely at fault here.

    I’m also appalled by the reaction of a section of the British public to this news. It’s all ‘poor Queen’. How about expressing some sympathy for the real victim, Virginia? Andrew is symptomatic of this section that has no self awareness. No wonder he thought that his Newsnight interview went well!

  34. Jezz says:

    Watch out Meggie, I shudder to think what they are going to plant on you to bury this story.

  35. Jay says:

    You just know BP think this will be enough – sure, he was involved in unethical business dealings, consorting with the worst of the worst, and raping a trafficked teen, but can’t you see how HE’S suffering?

    The man has stopped using his HRH and can’t wear his favourite fancy uniform any longer, what more could he possibly give???

  36. Serena says:

    The Royal Family: a history of shame and embarrassment.

  37. Lizzie says:

    I wonder how much Philip influenced the queen in this matter before his death . He certainly seemed to feel the royal men were entitled to do as they pleases where women are concerned. He was probably the one who quietly led the ‘she was 17 so no laws were broken’ chorus.’.

  38. Over it says:

    Everything Kaiser said.

  39. WithTheAmerican says:

    Thank you Kaiser for never letting up on this story. Virginia and all of the other victims deserve the benefit of the doubt so freely given to this horrible criminal.

    I hope more come forward and bankrupt this whole “royal” family.

    • Liz Version 700 says:

      Agree 💯 thank you Kaiser. You stayed on topic through a tornado of PR BS. It is outrageous that it took so long to remove Andy’s toys from him after that interview. They were fine with an alleged rapist, but not a mixed race Duchess. This family 🤮🤮🤮

  40. Lorelei says:

    I mean, on the one hand, yes, it’s somewhat satisfying that he finally had all of his patronages and military titles removed — especially because of what was so wrongly done to Harry — but really, this is still not anything approaching justice. Andrew will never have to testify in a court of law or spend so much as a moment in a jail cell or even an interrogation room, so if he’s sulking about over the loss of these honorary (aka fake) titles, he needs to get a grip.

    The worst “punishment” he’s facing is that he will no longer get to play dress-up for the BRF’s parades anymore, breaking out all of his elaborate costumes covered with medals, tassels, and his various assortment of flair. Obviously, that crap is important to *him,* but he lives in a completely unrealistic little bubble of entitlement; the titles are really all just made-up nonsense— he’ll never face true justice or consequences proportional to what he did to Virginia (and probably to other girls as well who chose not to go public with their stories).

    Also, I was rolling my eyes so hard at all of the “How is poor, destitute Andrew going to pay all of his exorbitant legal fees!?” articles published yesterday and today. WE ALL KNOW that Mummy is going to fund every penny of it. They’ll have to employ some “creative” accounting so that it isn’t easily traced back to her, but come ON — she’s one of the wealthiest people on god’s green earth, and he’s her favorite baby boy, so of course she’ll be paying for all of it, it will just be done shadily and quietly under the table. The BRF *really* seems to think that their subjects are so unintelligent that they’ll lap up whatever nonsense a palace spokesperson says, no matter how obviously ludicrous it is.

    • windyriver says:

      All of the silly media “poor Andrew”ing aside, this is probably the worst thing that could happen to someone like him, outside of being behind bars. His whole arrogant sense of self has always been so completely bound up in his status and ability to lord it over pretty much everyone else, this is a devastating and excruciatingly public humiliation on an international scale. I’ve also read, regardless of the outcome of the trial, his titles and appointments won’t be restored. It’s done. It’s a victory of sorts for Virgina (and others). He was never going to face criminal charges/jail time, and money is just money. This permanently drags him, and his princely name, down to the gutter level where he belongs.

  41. Jessica says:

    My first thought yesterday was that the Queen is in worse shape than we know and this is Charles stepping into the void. I very strongly doubt she yanked titles willingly, but I think Charles realized it can’t be ignored any longer. Especially after being called out publicly by the veterans.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      we can count the number of times the Queen has been seen in the past month on one hand. all is not well.

      • Heather says:

        I agree. I fully expect her to pass this year.

      • Becks1 says:

        When was the last time we even saw her on zoom or the like, meeting an ambassador or anything like that? I know those events aren’t that common this time of year bc she’s usually at Sandringham , but still.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Something is definitely up.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        The Christmas message was filmed perhaps the month prior, and there was also an article that noted she was seen out driving, but the interwebs discovered it was an old picture that was used for the story. She met mainly with ambassadors in early December and not much has happened since. The court circular has several other people representing her at events.

      • PrincessK says:

        There is nothing seriously wrong with The Queen apart from she is 95 and has slowed down. She was busy in the Autumn because there was a need to get public and international support for the monarchy and she over did it. They are keeping her well rested for the Jubilee celebrations, and then there will be a further cut back in her duties. I see no reason why she won’t live to be 100.

        More importantly What will Katy Do Next …..we have not seen her do anything this year yet and it’s almost mid January.

      • windyriver says:

        @PrincessK – I’ve thought along similar lines: 1) that TQ/courtiers overestimated her energy level coming back from relative inactivity during the pandemic; but also 2) suspect she has some medical conditions (back issue, cutting back on alcohol, overnight hospital stay) appropriate to her age which are being managed, and not particularly serious at this time.

        But – I do think having to agree to this re: Andrew could become very hard on her emotionally. Wouldn’t be surprised if she got assurances from Charles that Andrew will be taken care of – which he’d want to do anyway, as Andy on the loose is capable of all kinds of trouble.

        As far as Catherine Keen – she’s had write ups in the media for the last ten days. Maybe she sees that as equivalent to having done her job; after all, the final output is the same, whether it’s a visit to a patronage, or her birthday – a picture of her, and an article about her in the paper. She probably thinks she’s worked hard and now deserves a vacation.

    • swirlmamad says:

      Will they blame her passing on heartbreak from what Andrew did, much like they tried to blame Philip’s hospitalization and then death on Harry and Meghan’s Oprah interview? Methinks not.

  42. MsIam says:

    My thought is this was done in preparation for the default judgement. Can’t have Andy prancing around like its all good if he’s a debt fugitive now can we? Behind the scenes it will be business as usual especially as long as mummy is alive. Penny Junor said as much, that it will have minimal effect on the family if Andrew just disappears from view and doesn’t pay. However, there is this thing called the law of unintended consequences…

  43. notasugarhere says:

    Oh the Bitchy Fail just had to get in another inaccurate dig about Harry and Meghan.

    ‘while Prince Harry and Meghan Markle agreed to lose theirs as part of their ‘Megxit’ deal with the Queen.’

    Which is a lie. They didn’t lose their HRH, they continue to have them. They choose not to use them in their business endeavours, but they maintain their HRH styling.

  44. Sofia says:

    I definitely think HM was pushed into it. Andrew’s titles and all should have been taken away when he stepped down yet it took two years. Anyways, it’s a little too little too late. Again, this should have happened 2 years ago. Not because Andrew’s going to trial and over 150 veterans had to write the queen a letter.

  45. D Mac says:

    “The Duke of York was the honorary colonel-in-chief of: the Royal Highland Fusiliers of Canada, which has its armoury in Cambridge, Ont.; the Princess Louise Fusiliers, based in Halifax; and the Queen’s York Rangers, which has armouries in Toronto and Aurora, Ont.

    Rideau Hall and a spokesperson for the Canadian Armed Forces have confirmed that those titles have now been “relinquished” by the prince…”

    There is also a Prince Andrew High School in Nova Scotia, which is considering a name change. I’m sure other Commonwealth countries are considering wiping his face and name off their maps.

  46. Ace says:

    According to the Guardian he still keeps the Vice Admiral title, in case anyone was in doubt this is just ass covering.

    IMO this is a way to avoid having the Queen’s money available for any possible payment, and in case that Andrew wants to go ahead with the trial to keep the crown as far away from it as possible. Now the lawyers won’t call him HRH when asking him about having sex with trafficked minors.

    • Lady Digby says:

      I newspaper raises questions about his KNOWN income and lavish lifestyle. Apparently his only publicly acknowledged source of income is a modest 20 thousand a year pension from the Royal Navy. It goes onto to quote experts in Royal finance surmise that TQ has been available to financially support her son No sh1t Sherlock!?

  47. aquarius64 says:

    The buck stops with the queen as head of state and commander in chief of Britain’s armed forces. She slow walked this decision for over two years while doing the same to the Sussexes in much less time. (That’s part of the pushback too.) Too little too late; the damage is done.

  48. Teddy says:

    And don’t forget the photo of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell at the queen’s favorite fishing cottage at Balmoral. So much has been ignored for Andrew’s sake.

    • MsIam says:

      I think that’s the picture they should use whenever they mention this story. That and the picture of Ghislaine in the royal chair. Let them try to sweep that under the rug!

  49. Tessa says:

    Apparently he won’t lose the Order of the Garter and he will still be Counselor of State.

    • Pinkosaurus says:

      You know, I’m glad he won’t lose the order of the garter because what a stain on the event when they all go out to parade in their giant feathered hats, as a reminder of the type of people being honored. Even if he does not attend, it will still be a chance to mention that he didn’t come.

  50. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    By the way, since this article mentions Epstein’s suicide — I think most here remember that photo of Ghislaine Maxwell and Kevin Spacey sitting on Queen Elizabeth’s thrones? Well, one of Spacey’s accusers ALSO committed suicide, and another of Spacey’s accusers was killed after being hit by a car (no information about the accident was released, and no charges were ever brought).

    Andrew runs in an ugly circle, and has for years. The royal family enabled his lifestyle, and shares in the blame.

    • Tessa says:

      The Queen could have threatened him much earlier and prohibited him from going anywhere near the traffickers, OR Else. I don’t doubt she knew about them and how her son was friendly with them.

      • atorontogal says:

        She knew all about Jimmy Saville, they all did. But none of them opted to move away from him either.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        Ah yes, Saville, Charles’ good friend. Almost forgot about him. I should amend my post from “Andrew runs in an ugly circle” to “the royal family runs in ugly circles.”

      • Tessa says:

        And Charles also associated with the controversial Van Der Post.

      • Jan90067 says:

        They knew about Mountbatten as well. Didn’t matter at all. Charles’ “favorite uncle”. Charles’ best bud: Savile. Charles’ mentor: Van Der Pelt.

        They. Don’t. Give. A. Shit.

        As long as it’s not “public”.

  51. Steph says:

    My favorite part of the vets demand was that they wanted him not just stripped of his appointments but wanted a dishonorable discharge.

    • Feeshalori says:

      They really didn’t pull any punches. If only something was as strongly written on Harry’s behalf when his titles were taken away because the military has such respect for him.

  52. ML says:

    Ugh, I thought Harry and Meghan were a blueprint for the royal family. Apparently not. Pedrew still has his state funded housing and security.

  53. Sid says:

    I still want to know why this sex offender is QEII’s favorite child. I do not buy the idea that it’s because he arrived after she had settled into her queen role and was more comfortable balancing work and parenting. I saw that cold greeting she had for toddler Charles when she and Philip arrived home at the train station after being away on tour. Hadn’t seen that boy in months and all she did was a halfhearted hug and pat on the head. So why is Andrew so special?

    • Julia K says:

      Prince Edward is probably wondering the same thing.

      • PrincessK says:

        Apparently when Edward was young he was having breakfast and a courtier had to whisper to remind the Queen to wish him Happy Birthday.

    • Sofia says:

      It’s been widely accepted/stated that she had Andrew at a time where her and Philip’s marriage was more stable, she was comfortable in her position as a queen and was older so in general enjoyed motherhood and therefore Andrew a lot more. Especially since Charles and Anne were heir and spare (although Andrew and Edward jumped ahead of Anne) so Andrew was a kid she could love fully without having the burden of the Crown I suppose.

    • Tessa says:

      Anne is her father’s daughter and was able to cope better even though she knew she was not the Queen’s favorite.

  54. CC says:

    Wow, he even had to give up his Least Likely to Perspire award.

  55. jferber says:

    Sofia, I truly believe that Philip is not Andrew’s father. I think it’s warm memories of her lover that made Andrew her favorite. Lord Porchester: pictures of him with Elizabeth in her yellow dress and hat and him at 29 holding a hunting rifle. Also, Andrew does not have that long, lanky body that Philip, Charles and William has. I also think Elizabeth was getting back her own while Philip had his mistresses and possible children with him (remember his will is not to be shown the public for 90 years). Sorry. Duplicate.

    • PrincessK says:

      I keep wondering about that but l do think Andrew has a bit of the Mountbatten look about him. I very much doubt he is Porchy’s son, but the Queen is very close to that family still.