Prince Andrew stripped...

[Sarahlou63]

Of all royal patronages and military titles.

Guess mummy has finally had enough.

@Happylittlethoughts

I just watched an American video where the presenter said the reason she has stripped him of his titles and assets is because- 1. If he defaults on the case then his assets can be seized - and that's not a huge amount

1. They would then go after the assets of the the Royal Family to complete the debt

So the Queen has cut ties to stop her assets being seized in compensation
Can anyone clarify American Law ?

I'm not sure if they could pursue RF assets but when it comes to the final showdown the firm always closes ranks to protect the entitlements and status of line of succession and the continuity of the throne. It may be Diana or Harry or even the old Duke of Windsor but palace machine will attack their own to protect the centre.

I can feel sympathy for the Queen as an old women trying to deny the behaviour of a massively entitled and shitty son, but then as the matriarch of the family she has also been the head of the structures which raise children with that sense of entitlement. Anyone thinking Charles, William or any of the others have less sense of entitlement is deluding themselves. She then used her position to create positive photo ops for him every time the heat was on and certainly has never stopped her DC or their DC and other relatives using their position to make money.

Andrew isn't too much older than me. It was a common tale when he was younger, before SM, that his security staff never worried about drink and drugs with him but his drive to shag anything that moved (perhaps he is part labrador).

Andrew may be HM's overindulged favourite but that sense of entitlement is no less strong in the rest of the family.

Wrong on both counts - as he's not been stripped of assets either

Exactly, he’s not been stripped of any assets and he’s still part of the royal family, the queen is still his mother. Surprised anyone was touting such nonsense.

@Aroundtheworldin80moves

And I presume he will stay in the line of succession too.

He's so far down it that it isn't really a problem

He'll be in the succession unless he does the decent thing and quits it.

Bill Clinton went to the island too plus he used the personal plane he is just as guilty and has had allegations made against him is he going to be sued also? Or are they waiting on this outcome to see if its worth trying?

@blueberryporridge

Why should he go abroad? As someone from ‘abroad’ I can categorically say we don’t want him, you can keep him. Like it or not, the British people played a part in creating the creature as he is today. The flag-waving adulation, the bowing and scraping, the deference to the monarchy, the ongoing acceptance of the monarchy, the queueing up for weddings and other events etc all contributed to the continuation of the monarchy and the utter sense of entitlement and superiority they all have. You guys created a monster, you deal with it. Why should any other country have to deal with Britain’s scum?

Well to be fair, we don't all bow and scrape but enough of us do to allow this ridiculous and frankly disgusting institution to continue.

He's a pig...but male entitlement and sexual abuse isn't exactly limited to the Royal Family is it? It's about super rich men...Epstein for instance.

Looks like the 8 John Doe's will be made public. Maxwell has stopped objecting to the unsealing of papers.

It's pretty outrageous that he's ahead of Anne in the succession anyway. I'm surprised that they didn't change this when they changed the succession rules for future monarchs.

@BashStreetKid

It's pretty outrageous that he's ahead of Anne in the succession anyway. I'm surprised that they didn't change this when they changed the succession rules for future monarchs.

The were both born before (well before) the Sex Discrimination Act of 1975 came into being and the order of succession was established already. Probably nobody thought it was worth any effort when the succession rules were changed because it was unlikely Andrew would ascend to the throne as Charles had children.

I agree it's wrong, but I imagine that was the reasoning.

@Wheresthebeach

Looks like the 8 John Doe's will be made public. Maxwell has stopped objecting to the unsealing of papers.

Yes - that will make very interesting reading. It's basically now down to the John Doe's to make a case via their lawyers as to why their names should remain secret. I was amused to see that at least one of them thinks that "I don't want to be publicly associated with Maxwell and Epstein" is a good reason...

@Theunamedcat

Bill Clinton went to the island too plus he used the personal plane he is just as guilty and has had allegations made against him is he going to be sued also? Or are they waiting on this outcome to see if its worth trying?

Going to the island on the plane would scarcely constitute a good case, even in civil litigation where the bar is lower (on the balance of probabilities vs beyond all reasonable doubt).

Ms Giuffre is doubtless pursuing a case that she - and her lawyers - think is winnable. I don't doubt for one moment that Bill Clinton was involved in all of this, but that's not proof, and she may not have any.

There was also a veritable harem of young, trafficked girls involved. She may not have been given to him, he may not have wanted her. There are a myriad of reasons as to why he is not being pursued - it's not necessarily a conspiracy, although I accept that's possible.

@BashStreetKid

It's pretty outrageous that he's ahead of Anne in the succession anyway. I'm surprised that they didn't change this when they changed the succession rules for future monarchs.

It's probably because the line of succession is so long, and no one wanted to rework all of it! With an heir with two adult sons, there wouldn't have seemed much need either.

They were looking to those born in to the succession from that point onwards (all of them, not ust those in the first 20). Simpler, easier, not expected to make any difference.

Also - and I'm guessing here - I don't think the Princess Royal would have wanted her offspring getting further up the list. Because as Prince Harry is overseas and therefore not currently eligible to be Counsellor of State, it would mean that the four would be Charles, William, Anne, Peter and hevwasnt brought up anywhere near the expectation of a formal role.

@minou123

What is his surname? Is it Mountbatten?

They don’t have or need surnames.

I think if he was to use a surname (eg flight manifest, or whilst at school) he would use York.

As Kate/William/George use Cambridge

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

I think if he was to use a surname (eg flight manifest, or whilst at school) he would use York.

As Kate/William/George use Cambridge

Yes. About that:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10402205/York-council-member-wants-Prince-Andrew-lose-Duke-York-title.html

Perhaps he should have a new surname as private citizen, using the age of tradition of choosing something that matches his personal and mental qualities (or lack thereof).

Andrew Fuckwit perhaps?

Oh look Russell Kane has thought of this

m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=480492486776108&id=100044460818323&m_entstream_source=feed_mobile

I think Beatrice and Eugenie have used York when they've used a surname in the past.

I'm hiding this thread now because everytime I see the title in active convos it makes me a bit sick in my mouth.

@KloppsTeeth

Perhaps he should have a new surname as private citizen, using the age of tradition of choosing something that matches his personal and mental qualities (or lack thereof).

Andrew Fuckwit perhaps?

Surely one surname isn't enough ? In the great tradition of the upper classes:

Andrew Fuckwit-Entitled-Molester-von-Rape-Denier

How about that ?

I'm glad this has happened because I was getting sick of hearing the media bleat on about how this is affecting the Queen in her Platinum Jubilee year...

Yes, poor Queen, standing by her son who has been accused of sexually abusing a woman and hanging out with sex traffickers.

@Alekto

I think Beatrice and Eugenie have used York when they've used a surname in the past.

I'm hiding this thread now because everytime I see the title in active convos it makes me a bit sick in my mouth.

I think they can use york in the same way , apparently William and Harry used Wales at school ,and William and Kate,s children use Cambridge.

@caringcarer

He has lost HRH title and military titles and all patronages. He keeps Prince Andrew and Duke of York. He is a jerk but the girl was 17 so not underaged in UK and she looks happy enough to be stood next to him in that photo. I feel sorry for his 2 daughters, how embarrassing to have a Dad like Andrew. Sorry for the Queen who really does not deserve Andrew or Harry and their antics.

Sick and tired of reading this frivolous objection. The issue here is not age of consent. It's consent. If you didn't consent (ie were trafficked and 'ordered' to have sex with someone') then your age is irrelevant.

All this gushing, nauseating sympathy for his two daughters and their grandmother is also misplaced, showing how the revered privileged always illicit more sympathy than those who were children of deprived, abusive or dysfunctional backgrounds.

His mother rugswept this murky shitshow for years, in the hope that if the shit was left to dry for long enough, it wouldn't stink too much in the meantime and would eventually brush off. As for the daughters, if it's true one did help orchestrate that incriminating train crash of an interview, then she's either as arrogant or unintelligent as her father (or both). His daughters both stood up in support of their awful parent; let them take the heat for it.

My sympathy remains with the victim.

[quote ClaudiusTheGod]@minou123

What is his surname? Is it Mountbatten?

They don’t have or need surnames.[/quote]
Yes, they do. They are people just the same as anyone else.

Their family name is Mountbatten-Windsor.

The whole fucked up family should be abolished.
He will still have his staff running around after him and Fergie.

Andrew Fuckwit-Entitled-Molester von-Rape-Denier
Aye, this sounds about right @DeliriaSkibbly

[quote ClaudiusTheGod]@minou123

What is his surname? Is it Mountbatten?

They don’t have or need surnames.[/quote]
Of course they do. That’s why Prince Philip made an almighty fuss about his children having his name. He lost the argument which is why they’re all Windsor’s, not Mountbattens.