King Charles’ courtiers believe QEII has ‘a lot to answer for’ with the Andrew problem

It’s incredibly funny to watch King Charles try to thread this needle with his late mother’s memory: Queen Elizabeth II was the greatest monarch ever and everything she said and did is above reproach… AND the late queen was petty, negligent, short-sighted and she’s to blame for pretty much every problem plaguing Charles. You can’t have it both ways – either QEII’s words are the royal gospel or she made tons of horrible decisions which left the monarchy in terrible shape long-term. Which is it? All of this brings me to Roya Nikkhah’s new piece in the Times, where “insiders” and “sources” are basically complaining about how QEII should have taken care of this Prince Andrew situation during her reign, and why oh why did they leave this issue on the shoulders of Charles the Ditherer? Some highlights:

A stain on the Carolean era: Whichever way the saga of Andrew ends — and the end does not yet appear to be in sight — it has indelibly stained the Carolean era, a reign that has already been buffeted by the King’s cancer, for which he is still receiving weekly treatment. A friend of the monarch said: “He won’t be looking at it through the lens of ‘this is my brother’. He’ll be looking at it through the lens of ‘this is getting in the way of the royal family’s duty to serve the country and distracting from the public work’ — and that’s not where he wants the focus to be.”

The inherited problem: Charles and his aides have been firefighting for weeks, attempting to digest each new, tawdry revelation about Andrew that emerges to do with his links to the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein…But there is a growing feeling that too little is being done too late, and the Palace is playing catch-up because of mis-steps committed during the last reign. After his BBC Newsnight interview, Andrew was forced by Queen Elizabeth, with the support of Charles and Prince William, to step back from public life in the vain hope the scandal would fade. In February 2022, when Andrew agreed a multimillion-pound settlement with Giuffre, part-funded by his mother and Charles and admitting no liability, the late Queen enforced further punishment, removing his HRH styling, military titles and patronages. But she could not bring herself to fully strip him of his titles, or suggest that alternative accommodation might be more appropriate in the circumstances. He remained her weak spot, and Charles is now paying the price.

QEII has a lot to answer for!! A source who knows the royal family said: “It seems to me that Queen Elizabeth has quite a lot to answer for. It’s as if she left an unexploded bomb for Charles. The thing about the Queen was that everyone always said she was so dutiful, and she was — but this was a terrible dereliction of duty. She indulged Andrew all the time and always avoided confrontation.”

QEII the ostrich: Another royal source, who knew the late Queen well, said: “It wasn’t just Andrew — it was all the family troubles. She just didn’t want to engage. She was like an ostrich with her head in the sand. But I don’t think any of the family knew the full extent of what would come out.”

The advanced talks with Andrew: Talks between Andrew and courtiers, thought to be led by the King’s principal private secretary, Sir Clive Alderton, on the issue of where else he might live — and who would fund a move — are said to be continuing. The prince has so far dug in his heels and shows no imminent signs of moving. This is despite mounting pressure prompted by revelations last week in The Times that he pays the Crown Estate a “peppercorn rent” for the sprawling mansion.

Charles must stop dithering and confront Andrew directly: The source said: “Charles has to say to his face, ‘There’s no choice here, you must now leave Royal Lodge. Whatever the lease says. You say you always put your family and country first. Prove it. This is doing real damage to the monarchy. You’ve got to move.’ I think that would do a lot to assuage public anger.” Another royal source said: “The public are angry at Andrew, angry that he’s still in that house and angry at the disdain in that statement. Something else [beyond the dukedom] has to go.”

What is Camilla doing? Queen Camilla has so far kept a low profile on the matter, choosing to support her husband privately as he navigates the Andrew fallout. The Palace will not say whether Camilla — who, like the Duchess of Edinburgh, is a longstanding campaigner on raising awareness of sexual abuse — has read Giuffre’s book or expressed an interest in its contents, published posthumously. A friend of Camilla’s said: “Knowing her, she probably will. Set against the Queen and the Duchess of Edinburgh’s personal agenda, it is a very difficult backdrop to try and promote the issues they care about when they’ve got someone so close to home caught up in it.”

Endless scandal: Another former courtier says of the endless scandal: “If a story lasts more than nine days, you’re toast. It’s been 15 years now.” A friend of the King said: “The King has one of the best antenna for judging public opinion and he is keeping a very close eye on the mood on this matter. There is a genuine sense that he feels he has taken every step available and they have pulled all the decisive levers they can. If it isn’t enough, because the public outrage is still high, they will look again. But it is not an institution that is prone to knee-jerk reactions.”

[From The Times]

“The King has one of the best antenna for judging public opinion” – no he doesn’t??? LMAO. Charles married Camilla, for God’s sake. Charles doesn’t have a feel for public opinion, but he believes that he can manipulate public opinion to get his desired result. Andrew Lownie – who wrote the book on the Yorks, published this past summer – pointed out that the public is way ahead of the monarchy and the government on the Andrew situation. There’s HUGE public support for formally stripping Andrew of all of his titles and forcing him out of Royal Lodge and launching a criminal inquiry into him. Charles and the Starmer government look out of touch for attempting to slow-walk these half-measure punishments.

As for all of the stuff about blaming QEII… lol. Charles really is his mother’s biggest opp, and always has been. Charles is disrespecting the dead queen! Punishing Andrew is a slap in the dead queen’s face! Sorry, do we only reserve that kind of hyperbole when it’s about the Sussexes? The thing that makes it even funnier is that Charles is actually right, QEII should have punished Andrew during her reign and yes, this was always going to explode during Charles’s reign. But QEII didn’t force Charles to put Andrew front-and-center on the Christmas walk and Easter walks. QEII didn’t force Charles to dither and slow-walk the Andrew situation for three years.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Instar.

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

67 Responses to “King Charles’ courtiers believe QEII has ‘a lot to answer for’ with the Andrew problem”

  1. Tessa says:

    Camilla is now touted as a champion for abused women. She did not condemn Clarkson verbal abuse of Meghan. She gaslit Diana and enabled Charles bad treatment of her. The queen indulged Charles and he got to marry Camilla. She did nothing to help Diana. Now she is being slammed. And Charles trashed his parents already through his authorized biography. The queen should have not indulged will she enabled his laziness. The family is dysfunctional. They turn on each other. Andrew should have been held accountable but the royals scapegoat ed harry and meghan.

    • Advisor2u says:

      It’s funny how all the UK “roya experts”, UK royal media mouthpieces, ánd the international (digital/news) media, keep framing this saga as “punishment for Andrew’s relationship with Epstein”, and not calling it for what it is ,”Andrew avoiding and frustrating investigations and prosecution for the accusations of sexually abusing of under-age children, for about 6 years”.

      This is not about Epsteins crimes, it’s about holding Andrew accountable for the alledge same crimes.

      • Heather says:

        Thank you! This! They pull up short of the fact that Andy was not just a friend, he’s also a criminal who raped children. Just say it out loud!

  2. Tessa says:

    Charles ousted the Sussex family from their home. A pathetic attempt to set the media on the sussexes to distract from Andrew. Charles and scoot keep talking about removing titles from sussexes instead. What phonies they are. Charles is next. When scooter takes over he will play the blame game on charles

    • Advisor2u says:

      Look who’s briefing/talking.
      The queen also didn’t do anything when Charles himself was in the news/ in trouble for his years-long friendships with pdfiles. He too was never held accountable or punished for his very close friendship with known sexual predators/abusers of vulnerable and underaged boys and girls, such as Jimmy Savile, Bishop Ball, and Laurens van der Post, who is Prince William’s godfather.
      And let’s not forget his closeness to his beloved sexual predictor uncle Lord Mountbatten.

      • DK says:

        Yeah, I would love to see the media frame it more accurately as “House of Windsor = House of Pedophiles,” and that this is all just pedophiles protecting other pedophiles.
        Of course, we know from Andrew’s aristo friends and their staunch claims that they will remain loyal, etc., that they too seem cool with pedophiles, so it seems like – just as with wealthy white Christian nationalists in the US – the whole upper echelons of society are pro-pedophilia.

  3. Sure lets lay the TOTAL BLAME on dead QEII. Now she does have some responsibility for how the pedo problem was handled that is for sure. She protected her favorite son at all cost. However Chuckles has been protecting the pedo at all cost too. The Met swept it under the rug and at whose behest? They paid millions of dollars to Virginia who the pedo claims he never met or knew nothing about her being trafficked. He never would respond to the FBI wanting him to be questioned. The family seemed to close ranks and protect him and be seen with him and now that the Epstein files are floating around and Virginias book has come out suddenly the palace is on fire. This is what you get for protecting an abuser and all his chickens are coming home to roost. No one is more or less to blame in this f**ked up family of abusers and cheaters and colonizers. May they all go up in flames.

    • Eurydice says:

      Well, QEII has 65 years worth of blame and Charles only 3 – but, in general, there’s been 1,000 years of covering up for the monarchy. I’m happy to bring matches to the bonfire.

  4. Josephine says:

    This partial sentence strands out: “it is a very difficult backdrop to try and promote the issues they care about when they’ve got someone so close to home caught up in it.”

    Andrew is NOT “caught up in it.” He was not in the wrong place at the wrong time. He is a predator.

    And let’s stop pretending that Cammie cares for a single woman besides herself. She is the worst kind of woman, she hides behind abusers and eggs them on, gives them ideas. Another vile member of a vile family.

  5. ParkRunMum says:

    Yes, they all brief against each other & throw each other under the bus whenever convenient. But I would be willing to bet that Charles’ greatest liability is his lack of ruthlessness. As Kaiser says, he dithers. And what he’s dithering over now is how to pay his brother off. I really do wonder what QEII would have done under the circumstances. More from Norman Baker: “ “In 2010, the Queen decided to cancel the biennial Christmas party for staff, and the Palace presented this as a response to ‘the difficult economic circumstances facing the country’. Yet as the party is always paid for by the Queen herself, the only result of this magnificent sacrifice was to personally save her £50,000”… After Princess Margaret died, “Ten long-serving staff were told they no longer had a job and to vacate their royal lodgings without delay. The Princess’s personal chef, Kevin Martin, employed for twelve years, was reduced to applying to the local council for help for somewhere to live… Princess Margaret was revealed to have left an estate of some £7.6 million, and that was after she had apparently previously disposed of some £12 million of assets to her family, including her house on the Caribbean island of Mustique, to minimise death duties… The Queen Mother throughout her life exhibited an extravagance when it came to her own enjoyment, especially if the taxpayer was footing the bill, and a meanness when it came to parting with any of her own money. She protested bitterly to the Treasury that the tips given to Royal Marine bandsmen and to other staff on the royal yacht Britannia on the occasion of her visit to Tunisia in 1961 should be met from public funds, and not from her enormous civil list grant. The tips came to 2/6d (12.5p) per day for the bandsmen, 3s (15p) for stewards, and 5s (25p) for some other staff. In total, this came to just over £78 for the entire trip, which was hardly going to break the royal bank.”

    • JT says:

      Charles’ dithering nature certainly didn’t stop him from releasing the hounds on H&M and it didn’t stop him from evicting the Sussexes from a home they paid to renovate, paid market rate rent, and had a lease on. To this day all palaces continue to brief and lie on H&M to distract from their failures, while they cover for Andrew’s and their own depravity and uselessness.

    • bisynaptic says:

      The family is a golden ratchet, always taking in.

    • Eurydice says:

      QEII was ruthless toward those she really didn’t care about. No need to wonder how she would have dealt with this Andrew “problem” – the same way she did with all the other of his “problems.” Probably, she’d set him up in luxury at Balmoral and continue to support him financially.

    • Calliope says:

      Yet Charles has been ruthless when it comes to punishing Harry – stripping their security and cutting off funding suddenly and against their agreement, kicking him out of Frogmore, telling countries not to provide security to Harry or his family.

      He’s been ruthless about Camilla too – the continued cheating, attacking his first wife in the press, throwing his sons (mainly Harry) under the bus to make himself look better and Camilla more palatable. And he got what he wanted with “Queen,” not QC or princess consort.

      He is (or he allows the people who work with him to be) ruthless when it benefits him. Andrew didn’t affect him (or made him look better), and they thought bringing Andrew to the forefront again would punish Harry, so they did. QEII only paid for a short-term NDA, Andrew was supposed to keep a low profile (yet I remember him pushing himself on QEII on public where they didn’t want to make a public scene). Charles bears responsibility for the last few years (if not longer, if he was asking over his mother’s office).

  6. Miranda says:

    “But I don’t think any of the family knew the full extent of WHAT WOULD COME OUT.”

    That wording seems to suggest that they always had at least some idea of what Andrew was doing, and their current consternation is not about his crimes, but the fact that the full story became publicly known. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but they don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt.

    • JT says:

      Of course Charles and the royal institution knew, we all knew. Andrew and Epstein is not brand new information. These “insights” are over a decade old and nobody gave a damn. Not the RF, the BM, or the British public. But somehow Harry and mostly Meghan are the most horrible people to ever be a part of the royal family. All of this outrage is performative. The palace and government are just hoping the that the press and public will get tired of talking about Andrew.

    • Tiffany:) says:

      Yes, and this part:
      “It wasn’t just Andrew — it was all the family troubles.”

    • BeanieBean says:

      No, I absolutely agree with you. They’ve emphasized that Chuck is irritated that this makes the monarchy look bad rather than his having any real concern for the victims of Epstein & Andrew & Maxwell & all the others.

    • Mtl.ex.pat says:

      @miranda – I caught that too. They don’t care what he did or who he hurt. They care that he was caught. Disgusting the lot of them…

  7. Eurydice says:

    According to Lownie, Andrew’s involvement with Epstein is the most straightforward of his scandals and most easily understood. Andrew’s financial dealings during his 10 years as trade envoy are much more complex and difficult to untangle – layers of illegalities in multiple countries, to the point where government authorities were constantly lodging warnings and complaints to BP. All were suppressed. QEII has a lot more to answer for than people think.

  8. seraphina says:

    This reminded me IMMEDIATLY of government work – staff blaming those who left on problems that exist. Except here, we have a spoiled man king blaming mummy. Move on Charles this makes you look bad.

    • Kirk says:

      That kind of CYA behavior is not limited to “government work[ers].” Nor besmirching limited to staff who leave vs those who stay. Chuck and Betty probably shared many of the same courtiers who will trash either principal in due course.

    • BeanieBean says:

      As a former federal employee my experience is that we usually blamed the Washington Office for everything. 😉. In this case, I guess it would be Charles because mummy is no longer around; but boy, they sure are working hard to shift the blame to a dead woman rather than the man currently occupying the hot seat. I mean, throne.

      • SURE says:

        That man was de facto regent for many years so he would have been intimately involved in the most significant decisions QEII made during the last decade or so of her life. He cannot shift the blame so easily.

      • Unblinkered says:

        Exactly that – that Charles was de facto regent for some years before QEII passed. For me, the wheels came off when Philip announced he was retiring/stepping back c10 years ago and Christopher Geidt, the last strong personal secretary, was ousted. It left them rudderless at a time when they most needed a super clever, powerful hand to manage them.
        Now their ‘troubles’ have overwhelmed them.

  9. Dee(2) says:

    Outside of his failings as a husband, father, and grandfather, Charles is the worst kind of leader. He never wants to make a hard decision and stick by it and defend his own choices. It’s always make it easy for me. How come this person didn’t handle that for me? How come this person didn’t do this instead, now I have to be the one who makes the final decision?

    I always think about what Harry said at the beginning of Spare about him asking William and Harry not to make his final days difficult. It really is a Windsor trait. His mom preferred to pretend stuff just wasn’t happening that was, “unpleasant” until she couldn’t hide anymore. See her kids’ various affairs and divorces, her reaction to Diana’s death, William’s laziness and anger issues. He’s just the same. Can this just go away until I don’t have to deal with it anymore.

    • Mightymolly says:

      The Crown gave me some sense of who QE2 was. I know it was factionalized, but I believe the historical elements were accurate. Lizzy grew up completely sheltered from the world, barely even schooled. Later generations at least went to school. She had nothing to challenge the narrative of her divine right to the throne. But she was still just a woman. She didn’t have the boys will be boys luxury of a prince/king to so her life was even more restrained.

      • Mightymolly says:

        Oops I had more to say on that point but ran out of time. In brief , I think Andy was her indulgence. He was the rascally spare she could live vicariously through. She did marry a handsome bad boy, but it was love for her and financial need for him. And he cheated. A lot.

        ETA “fictionalized”

  10. Blubb says:

    Hypocrisy your name is Charles. Being a worse parent than QEII and clearly the worst grandparent ever.

  11. Mightymolly says:

    The crazy thing is that maligning the reputation of their deceased and once beloved matriarch isn’t even close to the grossest thing they’ve done of late. Besides, it’s absolutely true that QE2 coddled and protected her big boy. But they all live by the code that only their family matters and the rest of humanity exists at the pleasure of the BRF. Diana was from an older and even more well established family, but she was still just a married in. What hope do actual commoners have against this institution?

  12. Tarte Au Citron says:

    I thought the deal was that Philip was head of the family, while Liz was off Queening. What did HE do with Andrew? I would imagine Andrew was more or less left to fend for himself?

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      Philip was “a man’s man”. He, no doubt, thought Randy Andy was one too and, if some of his flings were not age appropriate, it was no big deal. Those girls don’t matter. After all, Philip was close enough to Louis Mountbatten that he had to know about his sexual proclivities. Absolutely none of these things register as a problem to the Windsors. And, yes, if Andrew being spoiled was such a mistake, his father must bear some of the blame.

      • mightymolly says:

        Philip is partly to blame for Andrew. BUT this is not a case of we’re blaming the mother for the sins of the father. Grown ass adult Andrew was coddled by his mother while being a menace to society. We could certainly speculate on why she favored Andrew over the others, but as I already said above, I think she lived vicariously through him. He had freedom she never knew.

  13. Brassy Rebel says:

    A dead woman can’t “answer” for anything. That’s ridiculous. But this whole family is so f**ked up it would take a team of psychiatrists working full time to even begin to straighten them out. And the institution itself must take a large share of the blame. Elizabeth didn’t punish Andrew more meaningfully for the same reasons Charles hasn’t. They are not familiar with the concept of accountability because none of them have ever been held accountable for anything. They just do as they please and expect others to deal with the mess they make. All of Andrew’s messes are not a distraction from the so-called public work of the monarchy. They are the result of trying to preserve a medieval institution in the modern world and failing spectacularly. Dysfunction is the natural outcome of letting people think they can do whatever they want with no consequences.

  14. Libra says:

    The Queen with her head in the sand, Charles off dithering and William incandescent with rage, these are the Royal Family. Appointed by God, I hear.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      With magic blood.

      • Kirk says:

        Conscripted by the British public to forever provide service as a symbolic head of state — to provide “continuity” between elected governments, function as non-political diplomats of the UK, act as a focus for national identity, and be a beacon for economic tourism. 🙄

  15. aquarius64 says:

    Throw your mom QE2 inder the bus huh Chuck? The Andrew/Epstein mess continues on YOUR WATCH you fix it. William doesn’t want to deal with Andrew when it’s his turn on the throne so he puts out these preemptive talking points to try to clean up the start of his reign.

    • jais says:

      Yeah, a source saying the queen has a lot to answer for is cracking me up. She definitely does but no one made Charles invite Andrew on the Christmas walk. That’s on him. This will be William’s future too. Any bad press he gets as king will somehow get blamed on Charles. Wait for it.

      • SURE says:

        Wasn’t the Christmas walk with Fergie the year she announced she’d been diagnosed with cancer for a second time? It seemed a charitable gesture to invite her given KFC & K’s own diagnoses. It would have remained a magnanimous decision had not the Epstein emails emerged this month.

  16. Water Lilly says:

    Sweet Carolean Era
    Good times never seemed so good…

  17. Amy Bee says:

    There is absolutely no reflection on the institution of monarchy in this piece. All members of this family have been warped and damaged by this institution and has lead to the situation that exists today. The Queen and Charles have equal blame because they were raised to believe that they were special and above it all. It’s interesting that the press and Palace have now realised that Camilla and Sophie condoning Andrew’s behaviour is not a good look for them and their supposed work in sexual violence against women.

    • maja says:

      If the house, which apparently belongs to the Crown Estate, no longer seems suitable for Andrew due to the benefits he receives, the Crown Estate Commissioners should take care of it. They have been managing the properties since 1715? These are not privately owned; the King only receives a portion of the income.

      This is where it is managed.
      The Windsor Estate | The Crown Estate https://share.google/ixY8z82tWZ8CRUjti

      Turning the whole affair into a story of “the misguided mother and her favourite son” takes away from the seriousness of the situation and protects the flawed system.

      How stupid do they think we all are? This is not a family matter.

    • BeanieBean says:

      They conveniently left out Eugenie & her anti-trafficking ‘work’. All three of these women need to stay far, far away from these issues as they have ZERO credibility.

      • Nic919 says:

        I believe Eugenie dropped her public association with the anti trafficking work a few months ago.

        She should never have gotten near that topic. Even if she did feel bad for the victims, you can’t be the face of anything when your dad literally gets away with victimizing trafficked victims.

  18. Jay says:

    First of all, shame on The Times for trying to minimize Andrew’s ties to Epstein. It’s not a “tawdry” revelation, it’s CRIMINAL.

    Charles can try to pretend all he wants that his brother’s scandal is news to him and his aides, but it just won’t wash: the photo of Andrew walking with his convicted sex offender pal Epstein in New York was taken in 2010. The stories about his predatory behaviour and corruption have been around for decades, they are not new.

    Charles has been preparing for the throne his whole life, including sharing extensive plans for what would happen when he assumed the throne and who would be considered a “working royal”. If he didn’t have a plan for Andrew beyond “hoping he would just go away” then that’s on him. Remember, he’s been king for three years now. If he wanted Andrew out, he could have done that on day one of his reign if he wanted.

    Also, as the rota helpfully reminded us last week, Charles was basically the acting monarch for the last few years of QEII’s reign. He could have “dealt with” this then. He certainly exerted his influence when it came to making sure Camilla was going to be called “Queen” and kicking the Sussexes out of Frogmore.

    Finally, I think it’s pretty risky to openly question the Queen and her poor parenting skills considering what we know about Charles and how unpopular he is compared to his mum. Let’s see how this plays out…🍿

    • Tessa says:

      Charles treatment of the sussexes makes the late queen look like parent of the year.

    • Blujfly says:

      The mail on Sunday printed the photo of Andrew with Virginia and Maxwell in 2011, right on the front page, under legal threat from Andrew and the Palace and other threats from the Palace. It’s a former Mail on Sunday and photographer that met with Virginia and saw the original. For whatever reason and their many other sins the news side of Mail has kept its foot on Andrew’s neck on this one.

  19. maja says:

    Punishing Andrew is not a family matter. Andrew should face up to his responsibilities and, if he considers himself innocent, prove it in court. The government should face up to its responsibilities and ensure that members of the royal family are treated no differently from other citizens and are subject to the law and state control. Only the king himself is above the law, not the others. The police should take responsibility and prevent any interference in the investigation. And the family should also advocate for Andrew to prove his innocence in court. And citizens should demand this as well. Since when are families the arm of the law and impose penalties? If they want to take something away from him, they should do so, but that is a private matter.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Tiny nitpicky point: in the UK & the US, and other but not all countries, you don’t have to prove your innocence in court. The prosecutors have to prove your guilt.

      • maja says:

        You are right, of course. One is innocent until proven guilty. But from the defendant’s point of view, it is a matter of maintaining his innocence, is it not? And he should face up to that, because he denies any guilt and is obviously not prepared to accept that this is not just about the age of consent.

  20. Over it says:

    So now we know that both of them paid 12 million pounds to someone their son/brother never met for something he never did. I thought before it was only Betty who coughed up the money . Funny how these little tidbits keep dropping By the end of the year we might get the full truth of everything that they did and were denying doing before

  21. Over it says:

    Today it’s chuck helped his mother with the payments, last week it was chuck knew about his brother business arrangements that were providing the money to pay the upkeep of his property. It’s interesting how every week we get a little bit more information about all the things they knew and were doing that not so long ago they were denying that they knew anything about. By the end of the year we might know everything.

  22. Lady Digby says:

    Well at least they can’t blame Meghan for this complete and utter disaster. Andrew is the author of his own downfall but his enablers who are alive also need to take responsibility!

    • sunnyside up says:

      Just waiting for someone to find a way to blame Meghan.

    • Chrissy says:

      I hope that this happens but currently the dead but indulgent Queen Elizabeth seems to be the one who’s being blamed the most. It’s almost like he didn’t also have a father, older brother and numerous politicians who knew exactly what he was doing and put it all down to being an unfortunate “family matter” and “boys being boys”! RIP Virginia and heaven knows how many other young women he raped and abused.

  23. Rachel says:

    Amazing that because Will and Charles are so dysfunctional trying to claim sole credit for kicking Andrew out that now everyone knows they can’t stand each other.

    So to distract from that they’re blaming their dead beloved mother and grandmother.

    THIS IS WHY HARRY WANTED OUT

  24. QuiteContrary says:

    Charles, Camilla’s tampon, has the best antenna for public opinion?

    Camilla is a champion of abused women?

    Who says fairy tales don’t exist in real life?

    The rota continue to suck up to the king.

  25. Nic919 says:

    Andrew needs to face the police. Unless Charles or William permit this, they are cowards.

    That’s the only decision to be made. Andrew is not above the law but right now he has avoided the consequences of his criminal actions.

  26. sunnyside up says:

    Wouldn’t surprise me if Prince Phillip supported his son’s behaviour, As far as he would be concerned the only sin would be getting caught.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment