Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

Andrew was on the church walkabout this morning

491 replies

meh2022 · 25/12/2022 17:50

I was surprised (and not in a good way) to see Andrew join the rest of the royal family at the Christmas service at Sandringham church this morning. He even shook hands with at least one member of the crowd. Surely he should be kept away from the public if the royal family have any desire whatsoever to keep the monarchy going? What is Charles thinking in allowing him to join them?!

OP posts:
feellikeanalien · 27/12/2022 16:30

Roussette · 26/12/2022 16:04

I don't think he's a safeguarding risk. I do however think he is tone deaf and if he actually did properly disappear for a few years, maybe some (not me!) would look more kindly upon him because of total absence.

But he can't resist can he? At every opportunity he shows up, the fact he had been to the early morning service anyway, and he had no need to go on the walkabout one, seems to escape him. He is desperate to get back in to how it was before, people bowing and scraping to him, treating people beneath him like shit, lots of shiny medals on dress up day on the balcony. The public won't stand for it, not in a million years and I have no sympathy whatsoever. He has abused his position for decades and the JE debacle was the final straw that broke the camels back

This sums up the situation perfectly.

LadyEloise1 · 27/12/2022 16:39

"Andrew was on the church walkabout this morning"

I really wish that he wasn't.

ZeViteVitchofCwismas · 27/12/2022 17:09

Well apparently he imparted some vital information to a well wisher,to stand on newspaper to insulate the feet

Rhondaa · 27/12/2022 17:32

'That sounds like you think these people are idiots'

Nope that was you when you called the disabled spectators and famliies 'sycophants'.

notanotheroneagain · 27/12/2022 18:26

Rhondaa · 27/12/2022 17:32

'That sounds like you think these people are idiots'

Nope that was you when you called the disabled spectators and famliies 'sycophants'.

What has those people's disability got to do with being sycophants ?

Anyone can be a sycophant. They could be any ability, colour, sexuality........wft?

notanotheroneagain · 27/12/2022 18:28

ZeViteVitchofCwismas · 27/12/2022 17:09

Well apparently he imparted some vital information to a well wisher,to stand on newspaper to insulate the feet

OMG 😂😂

Rhondaa · 27/12/2022 18:28

'What has those people's disability got to do with being sycophants ?'

You were mocking them, you know you were. Stop digging.

Walnutwhipsarenothesame · 27/12/2022 19:23

notanotheroneagain · 27/12/2022 18:28

OMG 😂😂

Show quote history

I do wonder when he has ever done that himself.
Locked out of BP in the snow? Ringing the bell and the butler didn’t appear quickly enough? The mind boggles.

Walnutwhipsarenothesame · 27/12/2022 19:25

knittingaddict · 27/12/2022 08:08

No that's not the point at all, if you read the entire thing.

The point is that PA is a public figure who many believe is guilty of having sex with a very young woman, who couldn't consent. This girl was being abused and trafficked due to the power embalance and one man's abuse of that power. PA became a part of that when he became a part of Epstein's world.

When Epstein was arrested the first time (think I've got the time line right) PA insisted on "breaking" his relationship with Epstein face to face instead of all the other ways he could have done it. He just couldn't keep away and didn't have a seconds care for the young girls and women who were victims.

One person on here said that the church should accept any old sinner who wanted to attend. Not really the point of the thread as that was more about PA showing his sweaty face in public at a Royal event. The Royal family going to church on Christmas day has always been a public event. I pointed out that actually the church aren't a soggy wet lot who must accept anyone to any event. That turned into safe guarding and we were off at a tangent.

I want to be clear that I don't think PA going to church is a safe guarding issue. I don't think he is going to rape any 17 year olds amongst the congregation. His crimes were more transactional if you like.

The point is that he has no shame, no remorse and no consequences and that interview was him treating the general public with contempt. Public figures lose their jobs all the time over stuff like this and so should he. People are looking out for any hint of him being inched back into public life and many won't accept that.

I think that sums it up.

Show quote history

She did consent though. She never implies she didn’t consent. She was being pimped out by Epstein but she still consented.

NanaBridie · 27/12/2022 19:39

As for the ex wives of various princes not being present...Well, I don't know of many women who would want to continue to spend Christmas with their ex inlaws!

My (ex) daughter in law still spends a lot of time with us. She was here with us on Sunday along with her visiting mum and our grandchildren. She’s part of my family and that will never change. My door and my heart will always be open to her, she’s a much loved sister in law as well as an aunty.

FurAndFeathers · 27/12/2022 20:06

Walnutwhipsarenothesame · 27/12/2022 19:25

She did consent though. She never implies she didn’t consent. She was being pimped out by Epstein but she still consented.

Show quote history

Educate yourself.
legally, sex trafficked women cannot consent.

the ‘consent’ of a coerced, abused and vulnerable teenager at the hands of some of the worlds wealthiest and most powerful men is meaningless

notanotheroneagain · 27/12/2022 20:25

Rhondaa · 27/12/2022 18:28

'What has those people's disability got to do with being sycophants ?'

You were mocking them, you know you were. Stop digging.

I wasn't having a dig at people for their disability and you know I wasn't. Stop reaching.

notanotheroneagain · 27/12/2022 20:26

Walnutwhipsarenothesame · 27/12/2022 19:23

I do wonder when he has ever done that himself.
Locked out of BP in the snow? Ringing the bell and the butler didn’t appear quickly enough? The mind boggles.

Show quote history

He would feel their ears with profanities.

notanotheroneagain · 27/12/2022 20:27

FurAndFeathers · 27/12/2022 20:06

Educate yourself.
legally, sex trafficked women cannot consent.

the ‘consent’ of a coerced, abused and vulnerable teenager at the hands of some of the worlds wealthiest and most powerful men is meaningless

Show quote history

Exactly !

purpledalmation · 27/12/2022 22:42

Trafficked women certainly can't consent, however if the man they are 'escorting' are not aware they have been trafficked, to all intents and purposes, he believes she had consented. PA clearly had an inflated sense of his attractiveness (hence Randy Andy) and had no difficulty getting girls. Epstein had paid her to sleep with him. Was PA aware of this? Maybe yes, maybe no. Either way his behaviour at the time was sleazy, entitled and arrogant. He only associated with Epstein for 4 years in the course of his job (which includes socialising) and it was over 20 years ago. He's paid a heavy price for his behaviour. I think the enjoyment people get from kicking him is as much to do with his position in the royal family as his alleged crime.

I think all the attention on one woman and one man and ignoring the many other women more damaged by Epstein and not financially compensated with millions, is doing them an injustice. As is focusing on one man and allowing hundreds of other wealthy and powerful men to walk free.

FurAndFeathers · 27/12/2022 22:59

purpledalmation · 27/12/2022 22:42

Trafficked women certainly can't consent, however if the man they are 'escorting' are not aware they have been trafficked, to all intents and purposes, he believes she had consented. PA clearly had an inflated sense of his attractiveness (hence Randy Andy) and had no difficulty getting girls. Epstein had paid her to sleep with him. Was PA aware of this? Maybe yes, maybe no. Either way his behaviour at the time was sleazy, entitled and arrogant. He only associated with Epstein for 4 years in the course of his job (which includes socialising) and it was over 20 years ago. He's paid a heavy price for his behaviour. I think the enjoyment people get from kicking him is as much to do with his position in the royal family as his alleged crime.

I think all the attention on one woman and one man and ignoring the many other women more damaged by Epstein and not financially compensated with millions, is doing them an injustice. As is focusing on one man and allowing hundreds of other wealthy and powerful men to walk free.

He only associated with Epstein for 4 years in the course of his job (which includes socialising) and it was over 20 years ago. He's paid a heavy price for his behaviour.

Nonsense.
Andrew invited Epstein and Maxwell to Balmoral in 1999 - so they were already friends at this point. In 1999-2000 Epstein visited several Royal residences with Andrew and Andrew flew to Epstein’s private islands. He attended Epstein’s ‘coming out of prison as a convicted child sex offender’ celebrations in 2010 and stayed at his house. It was only in 2011 that Andrew faced criticism and stood fine as a trade envoy.

that’s 11-12 years of sustained friendship and many of the engagements were nothing to do with his role as a Uk trade envoy - Andrew himself was clear in the Maitliss interview that Epstein was a good friend.

Sigma33 · 28/12/2022 01:00

purpledalmation · 27/12/2022 22:42

Trafficked women certainly can't consent, however if the man they are 'escorting' are not aware they have been trafficked, to all intents and purposes, he believes she had consented. PA clearly had an inflated sense of his attractiveness (hence Randy Andy) and had no difficulty getting girls. Epstein had paid her to sleep with him. Was PA aware of this? Maybe yes, maybe no. Either way his behaviour at the time was sleazy, entitled and arrogant. He only associated with Epstein for 4 years in the course of his job (which includes socialising) and it was over 20 years ago. He's paid a heavy price for his behaviour. I think the enjoyment people get from kicking him is as much to do with his position in the royal family as his alleged crime.

I think all the attention on one woman and one man and ignoring the many other women more damaged by Epstein and not financially compensated with millions, is doing them an injustice. As is focusing on one man and allowing hundreds of other wealthy and powerful men to walk free.

i think the focus one man as uniquely 'bad' is wonderful as a distraction against the brothers, uncles and friends who engage in dodgy behaviour that
is routinely and accepted by those who are outraged about PA.

Because his behaviour is no different to that of thousands of men every day. including the nearest and dearest of those who proclaim themselves as opponents of abuse and exploitation.

The reality is that the abusers exist in every day life. It is a comforting fiction that it is the rich and powerful that abuse

FurAndFeathers · 28/12/2022 08:27

Sigma33 · 28/12/2022 01:00

i think the focus one man as uniquely 'bad' is wonderful as a distraction against the brothers, uncles and friends who engage in dodgy behaviour that
is routinely and accepted by those who are outraged about PA.

Because his behaviour is no different to that of thousands of men every day. including the nearest and dearest of those who proclaim themselves as opponents of abuse and exploitation.

The reality is that the abusers exist in every day life. It is a comforting fiction that it is the rich and powerful that abuse

Show quote history

I think the focus on Andrew is because this is in the Royal family topic.

If you want to start a thread about abusers in everyday life then crack on.
But not in this topic

Alternatively visit the relationships board - lots of threads about abuse there. Literally no one has suggested that Andrew is ‘uniquely bad’ in fact if you read the thread, several other names are mentioned.

knittingaddict · 28/12/2022 08:44

Sigma33 · 28/12/2022 01:00

i think the focus one man as uniquely 'bad' is wonderful as a distraction against the brothers, uncles and friends who engage in dodgy behaviour that
is routinely and accepted by those who are outraged about PA.

Because his behaviour is no different to that of thousands of men every day. including the nearest and dearest of those who proclaim themselves as opponents of abuse and exploitation.

The reality is that the abusers exist in every day life. It is a comforting fiction that it is the rich and powerful that abuse

Show quote history

Don't be so daft and offensive.

We had an abuser in our family for over a decade. We still have to deal with him. I can care about celebrity abusers and common abusers all at the same time. On this thread we are talking about PA.

I know more than many that they are everywhere and that makes it even more important that they are challenged and punished whoever they are. PA has got off lightly, as did "our" abuser. It happens far, far too often because women are disposable. That needs to change.

CathyorClaire · 28/12/2022 10:50

He's paid a heavy price for his behaviour. I think the enjoyment people get from kicking him is as much to do with his position in the royal family as his alleged crime.

He's been a graceless entitled boor for decades and got away with it until now.

He's still rattling round Royal Lodge and has the run of palaces, gardens, horses and private leisure facilities while his ex seems to have found a magic money tree.

That's not too bad going.

Inkanta · 28/12/2022 11:10

Fergie was the scapegoat for decades and that never felt right to me. Never felt right that Andrew was the Mr Innocent blue eyed boy. Then he got found out and he deserved the kicking he got. Fergie was ostracised for years and that felt cruel to me - the mother of his children being treat that way.

Roussette · 28/12/2022 11:14

Yes, SF got a raw deal with the divorce and onwards. And I wonder if she is living in Royal Lodge, Windsor, the massive estate, being funded all the way because she has a lot on him. It's a way of keeping her quiet, whilst not careering towards bankruptcy yet again.
She is forever talking about how much they are best friends blah blah... methinks she protesteth too loud.
They are both reliant on each other

HymenOrNot · 28/12/2022 11:44

Usually when members of the RF visited NY they would stay at the Consulate there with the exception of Andrew who would stay at Epsteins home

Andrew apparently enjoyed being 'not under scrutiny' whilst staying there - presumably didn't take his personal security with him

So got to experience a different life thro' his friendship quite apart from indulging in any dodgy behaviour

This was from an interview with one of Epsteins butlers

Blossomtoes · 28/12/2022 12:01

Roussette · 28/12/2022 11:14

Yes, SF got a raw deal with the divorce and onwards. And I wonder if she is living in Royal Lodge, Windsor, the massive estate, being funded all the way because she has a lot on him. It's a way of keeping her quiet, whilst not careering towards bankruptcy yet again.
She is forever talking about how much they are best friends blah blah... methinks she protesteth too loud.
They are both reliant on each other

I think they’re pretty much still married in all but name. I got the impression that Phil drove that divorce and it’s telling that she’s been welcomed back to Sandringham this year. It would never surprise me if they remarried.