Who advised the Queen to walk into the Abbey escorted by Andrew??

[TinyTortoise]

This seems to be the most tone deaf and damaging decision. It's a public facing event with international leaders and royals. If it was a closed family gathering I could understand it - he is her son still- but why on earth would they allow him to escort her to her seat?! He should be invisible from now on and never represent the RF again. He could have attended and stood somewhere out of the way. She could have chosen anyone to escort her. It's staggeringly awful!

@Canigooutyet well if the conviction was a guarantee then why was money taken
It was never a criminal charge though
I think its wrong money can be exchanged without an investigation

@notanotheroneagain

That grieving family decided to give the finger to the country and to trafficked women everywhere.

Don't act like this was not pre-planned.

Do you mean Zara Tindall? Camilla? Lady Helen Taylor? Prince Edward? Every single one of them?

"He will be at the Queen’s funeral, just to warn everyone outraged by a man (convicted of no crime at all) attending his father’s memorial and assisting his nonagenarian mother."

^^this. At 95 I probably wouldn't give two fucks what people thought

I do wonder if she has an illness which is being kept quiet

So do i, and I have a pet theory about what it is.

Her hospital stay last autumn was never fully explained I think it may be a chronic condition, which can be well managed (no need for further announcements on her health) but which takes its toll, and which could accelerate if treatment doesn't keep it in check.

@EdithWeston

I do wonder if she has an illness which is being kept quiet

So do i, and I have a pet theory about what it is.

Her hospital stay last autumn was never fully explained I think it may be a chronic condition, which can be well managed (no need for further announcements on her health) but which takes its toll, and which could accelerate if treatment doesn't keep it in check.

An you say what it is?

Lets face it he was more or less blackmailed into handing over £12 million. IMHO. I think it was the wrong outcome.

What illness do you think she has @EdithWeston ?

@Vapeyvapevape

What illness do you think she has *@EdithWeston* ?

It's called old age

@Blossomtoes

I think the family recognise how much she’s aged since she was widowed *@AnastasiaRomanov*. I noticed that Princess Eugenie barely took her eyes off her and she looked very concerned. There’s no doubt that yesterday must have really taken its toll on her.

Being widowed after a long and close marriage can certainly cause major health deterioration. My mother had a stroke within 6 weeks of my father dying, and there is no doubt that in turn precipitated her decline into dementia. I would hope that nothing like that has happened to the Queen, but the shock and stress are unlikely not to have taken their toll.

@Viviennemary

Lets face it he was more or less blackmailed into handing over £12 million. IMHO. I think it was the wrong outcome.

I wouldn't have thought blackmailed exactly but definitely pressurised. I too think it was the wrong thing to do, had hoped he would challenge which is what he initially intended but he was 'advised' (pressurised) into settling. I don't know about the £12m though, that figure seems to have come out of nowhere.

@Viviennemary

Lets face it he was more or less blackmailed into handing over £12 million. IMHO. I think it was the wrong outcome.

There is no way his lawyers would let it go to court.

VG's lawyers asked for a medical report / diagnosis of the 'no sweating' medical condition. It was not supplied, I think his side argued it was personal information and not relevant but, as it was already in the public domain that would not wash.

Ghislaine Maxwell was found guilty not long before, that probably gave his lawyers something else to think about. The possibility of her giving evidence would be a huge risk.

He wasn't blackmailed. He has paid off a victim.

Andrew has no self awareness.

That interview he did for the BBC? He thought it had gone well, why wouldn’t it, he was Prince Andrew. No one has ever come forward to say they seen him at pizza express.

He wanted to turn up in military uniform for his father’s funeral last year. So as not to show him up as different, all male members of the royal family wore suits.
I’m sure it was Andrew who suggested to his mother that he would escort her. Most people would be ashamed of what he was accused of and of the fact he had to pay them off. Not Andrew.

I think it will be a different matter when Prince Charles takes over, Andrew will be excluded from centre stage.

I don't think a lot of people on this thread entirely understand what having a monarchy means.

It doesn't matter what they do, who they hurt, who they rip off etc. By allowing a hereditary monarchy we acknowledge that we think they are better than us.

Andrew/The Queen can do whatever they like, they are quite literally entitled.

And for all the frothing, nobody is going to do anything about it? Are they?

Viviennemary although I agree that being wealthy and a public figure does obviously make you susceptible to blackmail, it also means in PA's case that he has a shed load of money to retain some of the best legal minds in the world to work on his behalf, and that he has influence and power with which to fight his case, which is very different to the position from which VG had to fight her corner.

Of course you are innocent until proven guilty but the fact that VG managed to persist and get her case so far, through lots of testing rounds of legal obstacles, from a not very prepossessing start, and having signed a non disclosure agreement with EP, does suggest to me that she had a valid case.

Remember it was the Manhattan federal judge, Lewis Kaplan, who dismissed a motion by Prince Andrew’s lawyers to have the civil case thrown , who has seen all the evidence, who decided that the the case could go before a jury, unless it was settled beforehand. This was not decided on a whim! Virtual blackmail does not come in to it; VG's case underwent vigorous legal scrutiny.

thrown out.

It really is extraordinary the number of people defending him on here. Why? Because he has an elevated position in society and therefore should be given the benefit of the doubt? It's so naieve!

Anyone who is interested should look at his Wikipedia page , all of the information about the VG case is there and it's also , incidentally, ^very^ interesting to look at the the part titled "controversies and other incidents". Paragraphs titled "Alleged comments on corruption and Kazakhstan" and "Arms sales". It really speaks to the character of the man!

I think it will be a different matter when Prince Charles takes over, Andrew will be excluded from centre stage.

^^ I agree with this!

And it will be interesting to see whether he gets to stay at Royal Lodge in Windsor or not.

I'm ill and bored ATM and have gone down a real rabbit hole this morning and discovered this very interesting Wiki page about the property:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Lodge

Have a look at the hit about "Lease to Prince Andrew Duke of York" fascinating stuff!

For most of us the word "lodge" sums up a small house situated at the bottom of the drive leading to a stately home. Or a log cabin at Centerparcs

In this instance "lodge" apparently means a £30 million, 30 room, grade II listed property in Windsor Great Park belonging to the Crown Estates. However, Prince Andrew was granted a lease agreement back in 2003 for 75 years, which meant that after the Duke paid £7.5 million for refurbishments, a £1 million payment to the Crown Estate was made by him to secure the home. The property leased included the Royal Lodge, a Gardener's Cottage, the Chapel Lodge, six Lodge Cottages, and police security accommodation.

From the Express: "Before Prince Andrew first moved in, he is said to have spent £7.5m renovating the 30-room Georgian house in Windsor, with new additions including an indoor swimming pool. The property also has a private chapel, and eight separate additional properties for staff."

How the other half live eh?

And this is just one of twenty-three royal residences :

Buckingham Palace, London
Windsor Castle, Windsor
Palace of Holyroodhouse, Edinburgh
Hillsborough Castle, County Down NI
Sandringham Hose, Norfolk
Balmoral Castle, Aberdeenshire
Craigowan Lodge, Balmoral
Clarence House. London
Highgrove House, Gloucestershire
Llwynywermod, Carmarthenshire
Tamarisk House, Isles of Scilly
Birkhall, Balmoral
Kensington Palace London
Amber Hall, Norfolk
Frogmore Cottage, Windsor
St James's Palace London
Gatcimbe Park. Gloucestershire
Ivy Cottage, Kensington Palace
Batshit Park, Surrey
Bar well Manor, Northamptonshire
Wren House, Kensington Palace
Thatched House Lodge Richmond

I don't know how up to date the list is, as they don't mention Nottingham Cottage, but you can see on the Wiki link that seven of these are privately owned, three are owned by the Duchy of Cornwall, and 13 are owned by the Crown Estates.

I never knew it was so many! I know I have wandered massively off the point of the thread and many of these buildings are "held in perpetuity for the nation" but not all of them are open to the public by any means. It seems extraordinary to me, and slightly morally dubious in these straightened times, that one family requires all of these assets.

Possibly the same advisors who thought victim blaming would be the basis for Andrews defence. But what about him? Doesn't he have any shame? The arrogance of that man continues. Why didn't he decline such a prominent role?
Still doesn't get it does he.

@Eachdaygoesby

Yes I always knew about the 'Royal Residences' and the huge number of them. Imagine the upkeep because at any given moment a royal could decide to go to one of them, so they are permanently staffed.

Talking of the renovations by PA to Royal Lodge... also there was an cinema alongside the indoor swimming pool. Him and exwife have to be comfortable after all... God knows why we're paying for someone who divorced him twenty six years ago.

So agree on his Wiki page. It needs reading by those that defend him I've mentioned it on here countless times and before anyone says... ahhh it's Wiki, it's not verified... well... look at the sources at the bottom of the page. His behaviour has been absolutely disgusting for decades.

And here we are....
Personally I never want to see his smug face ever again.

@IGotAVaxAndILikedIt

I don't think a lot of people on this thread entirely understand what having a monarchy means.

It doesn't matter what they do, who they hurt, who they rip off etc. By allowing a hereditary monarchy we acknowledge that we think they are better than us.

Andrew/The Queen can do whatever they like, they are quite literally entitled.

And for all the frothing, nobody is going to do anything about it? Are they?

I agree with most of what you say, but take issue with a couple of points.

1. Do we acknowledge that they are "better" than us? I certainly don't. Richer & more privileged certainly, but "better"? Some may be, of course. There are people in all walks of life I acknowledge as better/more virtuous than I am.

2. Only the monarch is above the law and can do what she/he likes. In theory. If the theory was put into it would soon be removed.

Our real rulers are the ones we vote for, of course. Naturally, because we choose them, they are all virtuous, truthful, shining examples for us. If they weren't, we could soon vote them out and get another lot, who would be.........

Roussette I hadn't realised they were permanently staffed. Not all of them surely? I kind of imagined Prince Charles's residences in Wales and on the Scilly Islands draped in white sheets between visits, and a housekeeper and a valet or two sent over from Windsor or Sandringham to open up . I've clearly been watching too many episodes of Downton

It's no laughing matter though really. I"m not against people working hard, and enjoying things they have earned, but when it has all been gained through an accident of birth? Not so much! To me it seems excessive and incongruent when so many people are struggling today.

I might think differently if PA had put all of his privilege to good use. Think of the good he could have done for others with his advantages!

Well, you wouldn't usually itemise a number of those, like Nottingham Cottage, as their consitutent parts of larger properties.

So the Crown owns Buckingham Palace! Windsor Castle (inc estate properties inc Royal Lodge, and the Frogmore properties) Holyrood House, Clarence House, Kensington Palace (all properties within grounds) and St James Palace

Also Hillborough Castle (also in use as government building/residence)

The Monarch owns Sandringham and estate (inc Anmer Hall), Balmoral estate (inc Birkhall, Craigowan)

Other properties owned by senior Royal or held by HMQ for them: Highgrove House, Tamarisk House, Gatcombe Park, Bagshott House, Castle of Mey, Llwynywermod

Still owned

Osbourne Palace

Not sure

Kew Palace, Hampton Court Palace, Barwell Manor (Duke of Gloucester), Thatched House Lodge (Princess Alexandra - former grace and favour home, converted from keepers cottages probably same status as all buildings in Royal Parks?)

I have no idea, but I imagine so. Empty houses, estates, gardens need attention, they can't be left empty. The white drapes quite possibly, with a great fluff of dust when removed!

Yes, PA could've done so much good but his last venture was Pitch at the Palace which was just a means for him to trouser a lot of money. Unfortunately for the rest of the RF, Andrew typifies all that is bad about them.

Batshit Park, Surrey

I like it. But you probably meant Bagshot Park.

According to Twitter , HM overruled Charles and William to let Andrew walk in with her . It was ( apparently) the Dean who was supposed to walk in with her and A was supposed to slip in beside his daughters .
Things will definitely change for A when his big brother takes over ! And rightly so .

If it was on Twitter it must be right. 🙄