Andrew Lownie just said "We have to remember the royal family fought for a long time to protect Andrew and in fact tried to prevent investigations into him" on BBC news

@MrsLeonFarrell

Perhaps you could read up on how Andrew dodged the police and FBI ?
He hid on royal estates .
Buckingham palace issued a statement stating - based on no evidence whatsoever - that Virginia Guiffre’s claim was false and without foundation . How dare they ? They smeared her because it suited them . That was 2019 I think .

Never mind the repeated rehabilitation attempts - you know - let the photographers take a snap of William driving Andrew with Kate grinning away in the back .
At the height of the Harry hate campaign W and K let it be known that they’d rather have Andrew as a neighbour than Harry .
There are multiple examples of how Andre was protected .

They then enabled Andrew with a multi million pay off to this accuser who they’d previously tried to smear

They are still protecting him now . Kicked off to Sandringham is a nonsense

When he’s being questioned by the police I’ll maybe believe Andrew is not protected

I don’t think this is fair. This was the Queens own SON after all. He’s not just a RF member. Now she’s gone and obviously Charles and William don’t have the same unconditional love towards him they’re able to boot him out.

I don’t agree with this. Andrew was requested to appear in the USA but didn’t, and hasn’t been on trial, he swerved that ! However, Virgina was not only a child, she was also trafficked, this is illegal, essentially a slave. Imagine if she had said she didn’t want to go/do anything … she’d likely have met with violence or worse. Effectively he raped her.
also, would you say the likes of Fred West, who has never been on trial, would be innocent? Or Jimmy Saville? Again died before he was caught/arrested - is he innocent?
andrew has been too slippery to be brought to account, so the country has taken that into their hands.

The journalist was Chris Moore

And @MrsLeonFarrell are you seriously trying to suggest that Andrew wasn’t protected by the Windsors ?

They protected him until the balance tipped and then they do their usual smoke and mirrors . No one is a prince . They’ve taken nothing.
If they had let Andrew be interviewed by the police ( as he swore he would do) they
wouldn’t be facing this mess

But of course that would never happen .

I'm unsure as to what practical protection Andrew has received. He was allowed at family events, not saying I agree with that but i don't think walking to church with the Queen protected him. I'm trying to understand what posters mean by protection and how they think that worked.

He's a member of the RF, with that massive amount of privilege comes the responsibility to others.

He knowingly associated with a convicted sex offender, and lied about it many times.

He's worthy of no respect, no titles and no support.

@MrsLeonFarrell

What exactly is it that you do not understand ?

Charles and Camilla mentioned victims in their statement - who is more vulnerable than a child in a care home ?

Will the Windsors now condemn Mountbatten?
Andrew Lownie had been researching a book about Mountbatten and had every obstacle put in his way . Another journalist had a similar story .

Yes, it's clearly just a matter of long-delayed damage control, given that the scandal broke years ago.

Andrew is doubtless aware that his brother is just cynically re-arranging the showroom windows.

"Don't worry old chap, we'll still look after you, but they're baying for some sort of "action" so it can't really be helped. I'm sure you understand..."

How did that protect Andrew?

On the one hand she was a racist paedophile protector but on the other hand after she died people have decided she could possibly have liked paddington... So lots of light and shade there

I wouldn't engage @Tutorpuzzle however tempting it is.

I absolutely agree with you and hope more people see victim blaming for what it is. Trying to frame it as critical thinking is disingenuous to say the least.

Thankfully it looks like Virginia will have her day in court soon, just so tragic she won't get to see it but hopefully it brings comfort to the other victims.

What a superficial response

Andrew has been protected by the Windsors for a decade at least ( he was emailing Elizabeth’s admin team telling them he’d instructed his protection team to dig up dirt on his accuser a decade ago)

They all knew and after his BBC interview the queen was careful to be photographed several times with Andrew , William too, and Charles had him at the Christmas pap walk and allowed Andrew to prance around in his curtains as a knight of the garter .
Andrew was protected . Why now are the Windsors actually doing something ?

As for the other men involved - I’m sure we all fervently hope that they are revealed and prosecuted . That they haven’t been does nothing to absolve Andrew Windsor

Will they now denounce Mountbatten I wonder ?

Well said and my thoughts exactly. Some of the accusations slung at him have been not only baseless but slanderous and by people who just want their pound of flesh. I'm no fan of Andrew, he's a spoiled and entitled fool but why are we not seeing the big names in US politics and business under investigation?

Exactly that.

Andrew Lownie is not some benevolent altruistic figure desperate to get justice for a possible abuse victim who is no longer here to do so herself.

He’s a writer doing the press junket rounds trying to flog a book to make money, and his interview style, rather than the content, is more than a little disturbing.

It’s also more than a little disturbing that people, especially other women given the context, don’t realise that.

Please, feel free to withdraw. I don’t particularly enjoy engaging in conversation with people who are incapable of assessing the possibilities of a situation from any angle other than the one that fits their own agenda.

And no, I am not wrong, thank you. Since the accuser can not give evidence in a court of law, nobody will ever know the truth from a legal standpoint.

Who is Andrew Lownie? Never heard of him.

Just googled. An historical writer/agent with books to sell.

QED.

If they tried to cover it up they weren't very good at it. So far the only men to have any consequences at all from associating with Epstein are Andrew and Peter Mandelson. So either the English are terrible at cover ups or, and i think this is more likely, other powerful people are hiding behind Andrew's massive shadow.

The problem is @attichoarder , discontent with the royals has been building for so long and Andrew, because he is so objectively tawdry, is, I believe, being thrown under the bus by them, encouraging a possible mob mentality. (Not for a second saying he shouldn’t be properly investigated.) The dodgy charity donations to Charles’ charities, the lack of tax paying transparency, the unknowable cost of security (there are so bloody many of them), the treatment of tenants on duchy estates…it just goes on and on. And this takes the heat off the rest of them somewhat. The edifice does seem to be crumbling a bit, though.

I feel that the frenzy is encouraging a baying mob, which I feel very uneasy about. Whilst there are unanswered questions, and clearly very poor judgment the fact remains that as far as the legal side is concerned no prosecution has occurred. Of course poor judgment itself can be morally wrong but not necessarily illegal. I don’t agree with the baying mob approach which is pursuing him as he remains innocent as far as the law is concerned. I find it abhorrent how there have been incidents concerning the public where some people have graffitied people’s housing accusing them of crimes, ostracised people and their because they believe them guilty and carried out hate campaigns locally etc I have seen that and feel that this is similar.

He’s privileged, sure, but it’s not as easy as ‘stripping him of his titles’ - the King cannot just remove them, and Andrew himself cannot give them up - there’s no legal mechanism for him to do so even if he wanted to. The house at Windsor is large, but he signed a lease for it, and paid millions of pounds towards necessary repairs, a new roof, etc - again, it shouldn’t be easy to turf someone out of their home when they’ve signed a legal contract just because they’re in bad odour. This isn’t a route we should want to go down. We can’t have legal processes for some ‘deserving’ people and no process for the supposedly ‘undeserving’. Thats not how we do these things in the UK.

Just to address the point of victim blaming, which has occurred on this thread, it's important to remember the following if you see it:

• Challenge the behavior:
• Directly but constructively challenge harmful stereotypes, assumptions, or jokes that place blame on the victim.

• Reframe the narrative:
• Ask questions that focus on the perpetrator's choices and behavior instead of the victim's. For example, instead of "What did they do to make it happen?" ask, "What tactics did the perpetrator use?".

• Explain the impact:
• Explain that victim blaming is harmful and can make the victim feel more guilt or self-blame, potentially worsening their experience and recovery.

• Hold the perpetrator accountable:
• Reinforce that the perpetrator is the one responsible for their actions.

Sending out support to all victims of abuse who made read this thread. People do believe you and stand with you.

Because the book is out and because you can control a few newspapers but it’s impossible to control all newspapers over the world, social media and the whole Internet.

You are wrong in everything you say @TwinklyStork , not least of which the non criminal status of Andrew cannot be changed. It most certainly can. However, like a pp said it is difficult to discuss an issue like this with victim blamers so I, too, will withdraw from conversation with you.

Agreed ,but they do i honestly have no idea why 🤷‍♀️