I said this at the start of the week and it’s worth saying again: everyone wants Prince Andrew to be dealt with until it’s time to deal with Andrew. Andrew and Sarah Ferguson’s sleazy behavior has been one of the big royal stories this week, with the revelation that Fergie wrote a groveling email to Jeffrey Epstein weeks after she claimed to have cut off contact with him in 2011. Fergie has been dropped by seven British charities over it, and I suspect more charities and businesses will be cutting their ties with her as well. I actually believe that the Yorks are being publicly flogged this week because of their appearance at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral last week. Andrew and Fergie just had to remind everyone that they were still invited to family events, and they could still stand alongside the king and Prince of Wales and no one would bat an eye. Well, Richard Kay got a big briefing from Buckingham Palace on the York situation. What’s really funny is that the basic gist is “well, we’re pretty much going to keep doing what we’ve been doing.”

Charles’s outlook on Andrew: Close friends of the King acknowledge that Charles’s Christian outlook and sense of fair play have taken a substantial knock as revelation after revelation of the sordid Epstein affair heaps yet more embarrassment on an institution that depends so much on public esteem. If anything, his position on Andrew since succeeding his mother as sovereign has become more intractable, not less. As Prince of Wales, he merely had his fraternal bonds – albeit the two are not close – to wrestle with. Now he has to balance those with his duty as monarch in doing the right thing for the country. His critics accuse him of dithering, a lack of grip and an absence of decisiveness. Mischievous voices suggest that Prince William would take a firmer line with his errant uncle. Friends of the King insist this is not the case and that father and son are ‘in lockstep’ over finding a solution to the Andrew and Fergie problem.

Banning Andrew from church: Removing Andrew and his wife from those few public–facing events he is permitted to attend seems the very least he can do. Church services would seem to be the most conspicuous. But an outright ban on the couple attending to their religious devotions might also trigger a backlash. As one of the King’s supporters says: ‘There is something uncomfortable about the head of the Church of England refusing to allow someone to say their prayers, and that’s before you consider that person is the monarch’s own flesh and blood.’

What if Andrew hadn’t gone to the Duchess of Kent’s funeral? ‘Imagine,’ says a courtier, ‘if Prince Andrew had been photographed riding a horse or playing golf on the day the rest of the Royal Family were saying farewell to the Duchess of Kent. Would that be a good look?’

Whether Andrew could be stripped of his ducal title: Opponents caution that Andrew, who has already lost his HRH style along with his military titles, would then simply resort to his birth title of prince. ‘In some eyes a royal prince sounds grander and more important than a mere duke,’ an insider tells me. ‘It’s a case of being careful what you wish for.’

Order of the Garter: There is one shiny bauble that has not been prised from Andrew, his membership of the Order of the Garter, the oldest and most distinguished order of chivalry. He has, however, been deprived of publicly displaying his association with the order and does not attend the annual procession of costumed garter knights in Windsor, although he is permitted to join the lunch that follows.

Royal Lodge: Perhaps the most troubling aspect – and greatest source of public disaffection – is Andrew (and Fergie’s) continued occupation of palatial Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park. To many the 30–room mansion symbolises his most obvious vestige of royal privilege and entitlement. As we have reported, the King has tried every available avenue, from cutting off his private funding and withdrawing his security, to trying to persuade him to downsize from the historic house. He has, though, stubbornly refused all offers of alternative accommodation. A figure close to the discussions says: ‘Like any private tenant he has rights and cannot be removed as long as he pays his bills and meets the obligations of ownership.’

Andrew won’t move into Adelaide Cottage either: Since he was last approached on the matter, another property on the Windsor estate has become vacant, Adelaide Cottage, until recently William and Kate’s home. Might it tempt the duke and thus take the pressure off the King? Not according to Andrew’s supporters. ‘He refuses to leave because to do so would be an admission of guilt and downsizing a punishment,’ says one. Part of the problem is that Andrew was insulted by efforts to persuade him to move into Harry and Meghan’s former house, Frogmore Cottage. William’s old home is a more prestigious address. But as one insider wearily put it: ‘It’s up to the duke. And he could save face still by graciously consenting to the move.’

What happens if Andrew is punished too severely: There is, however, one worrying aspect to the affair: if he is pushed too far how might Andrew react? Would he follow his nephew’s lead and write a memoir which could, potentially, be even more devastating for the royals than Prince Harry’s book? And then there is the issue of the duke’s welfare. There has been talk of the impact the controversy has had on him. At the same time courtiers are uneasy about how the Epstein scandal continues to poison attitudes towards the Royal Family across middle England. Even now, some still cling to the hope that Andrew will do the decent thing, withdraw completely from royal life and give up his luxury home and trappings. ‘It is not too late. If he started an animal sanctuary, for instance, he would, in time, begin to earn some public respect,’ says an old friend.

[From The Daily Mail]

When Kay and other Mail columnists write about Prince William, we get the sense that they all know more about the situation than they’re allowed to say, and that William especially has some really dark secrets, secrets which must only be referenced in the most oblique terms. With Andrew, it’s different yet the same. Like, the Yorks’ mess is out in the open, everyone knows all about their moral failings and criminality, and the only unknowns are about the extent of their depraved associations. Yet at the same time, reporters still have to talk about “the thing” which cannot be mentioned – that it’s a balancing act for Charles, because if he completely banishes Andrew, Andrew will sell out Charles and the family to anyone and everyone… and Andrew literally knows where the bodies are buried. That’s “the thing” – that Andrew knows enough to do irreparable harm to the Firm if he’s ever cut adrift. Anyway, all of this to say… my assumptions at the start of the week were dead-on. The Windsors aren’t going to do anything to Andrew and Fergie.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.