To think Queen Elizabeth's legacy is going to be seriously harmed by this?

Many mothers will go the whole way to protect their children and can't see a thing wrong with their adult child's behaviour.
I don't feel it counts as being a paedophile - the females were over the age of consent in this country. Agree it is unpleasant and exploitative and very sad for the young people involved.

Firstly, people need to stop throwing around the word paedophile so casually.

Man has sex with younger woman, “paedophile.” The definition is very clear a paedophile is someone who has an attraction to prepubescent children, and absolutely nowhere is there any evidence that Andrew is a paedophile, and to suggest this fact is in fact not only defamation but is an insult to the victims of actual paedophiles.

Secondly. We all assume that the queen must have known what Andrew was doing by virtue of the fact she was the queen. But how many parents actually do know what their kids are up to? Genuinely?

People are quick to blame the queen, but that is a slippery slope to go down. By that definition if a person commits a crime their whole family must be considered complicit and held accountable accordingly? Except nobody would argue that would they?

The ones we’ve heard about so far were over UK age of consent. However, the latest files describe covert flights through UK airports of girls on Epsteins plane, girls as young as 9 are mentioned, torture videos featuring Middle Eastern royalty. Virginia was the tip of the iceberg so it seems.

She was trying to keep up the illusion of propriety to keep their position and money safe. She was not that interested in her children

Yes since when? I doubt their education was about anything of the sort! I think the only one who can even fake empathy is Charles. Anne is a pretty brusque woman and Edward couldn't even answer a simple question off the cuff without making a hash of it.

This was due to a combination of factors. She was quite marketable as a queen in the mid 20th century and became essentially a global brand, a living relict from the old world, where Britain was a powerful empire but also modern as she was a female monarch. The fact that she wasn't actually born into her role but ascended to the throne due to her uncle's scandals and her father's early death helped frame her as a dutiful, calm and mild mannered monarch. Being nice to look at didn't hurt either. Her coronation was one of the first major global televised events, turning her into a household presence and strengthening the monarchy’s accessibility. My grandparents lived in another country and bought their first ever TV to watch the coronation.

She certainly is an important figure in history but was fallible like all people.

I think she was largely indifferent towards her children. Had them as a duty. She kept him close because she thought that would make people look the other way when he started going 'to parties'.

The first inklings of the Epstein crimes started to leak out in 2008 when the Queen was 82yrs old and already in cognitive decline.

I don’t think she ever got a whiff of the truth. I am sure Charles and Anne decided not to tell her so she wouldn’t die on the spot from the shock.

In all honesty, I caught myself playing a bit of a devil's advocate over my lunch break. If you step away from queen as a queen, and think of her as a mother, is there anything you wouldn't do for your child, were it in your power. Then I realised rape is my line in the sand. I'd probably do the patio-and-alibi for my child in case of murder, but this is where I draw my line. But would that have been her line? I don't know. I'm not defending what she did/didn't do, that's another kettle of fish, and I'd happily watch HIM thrown in the cell with the key tossed away. Playing the devil's advocate, where would you stop for your child?

Why do you believe their education was planned with morals and empathy in mind?

I dont think she is to blame. I think its potentially another an interesting picture into the nature vs nurture aspect of a psychopath though.
In an upbringing intended and rigidly planned to teach morals and empathy, out of the 4 children it was the one most doted on who developed those traits.

Let's also remember that Philip's mother spent quite a lot of WW2 saving the lives of Jews, and was declared Righteous Among the Nations for it.

Her persona was one of a wise stateswoman who could be relied on to behave with dignity and never put a foot wrong whichever head of state she was with. To give wise counsel to all the Prime Ministers who consulted her. That she represented the best of British. The longer she reigned the stronger that persona became and things like Charles marrying Diana were glossed over, and often reasons found for why she wasn't as wrong as she seemed. The world's media stopped when she died, not just the British press.

I've thought about the point made by @ChangePrivacyQuestion before I started the thread. How far will a mother go to protect her adult children? There have been posts on here where the adult child has been in serious trouble and the OP has asked whether she should cut him (it's usually a him) off. Lots of replies saying that they would only cut their child off for child abuse. Anything else and although they wouldn't like what they'd done that person would still be their son and they would still love them.

They are all like that. The ultimate nepo babies with no redeeming qualities. Andrew is the patsy because he got caught. It’s no coincidence that Charles was best friends with Jimmy Saville and his favourite uncle was also a horrific satanic child abuser. I just don’t get the pearl clutching for this horrible, evil family. What more do they have to do? Diana tried in fairness. The only decent one of the entire, rotten lot.

well clearly Philip wasn't his sisters was he? and he served in the British navy during the war so clearly he wasn't a huge fan of the Nazis.

I hope some of you don’t have kids who turn out to be wrong uns.

In terms of damaging the RF reputation, yes Harry is little better.

Harry and Andrew have both bitten the hand that feeds them.

Yes, actually, it is. I don't know how much more needs to be said. Here is an adult male (allegedly) committing a crime and instead of focusing on that, the poster choses to blame his mother.
It's absurd that we are even doing that. I don't know what else is to be said on the subject...