A Very Royal Scandal (Amazon Prime)

[MrsLeonFarrell]

Apologies if there is a thread about this.

I haven't watched Scoop, because Netflix won't work on my old TV box so I have no idea how this compares. I watched all 3 episodes and found it bizarre. I did like that it didn't include any royals outside the York family.

What struck me the most was how sheltered Andrew's team must have been to think him doing an interview was a good idea. I'm just a member of the public and I wouldn't have advised him to speak for himself going only by what I read about him before Epstein was even heard of. Why on earth would anyone advise him to do this? Why did they think it had gone well? And why has he not just retired out of the public view and accepted there is no way back.

The arrogance of some people is astounding. I don't even think it's a royal thing but more a monied sense of entitlement, although ironically he didn't seem to have much money.

Anyone else seen it?

I wonder if Prince Philip knew what his second bloody son was up to? And whether he was in the slightest bit bothered, or also had the special monkey blinkers on?

And Harvey Weinstein ...this photo never gets old. In the grounds of Windsor Castle. Beatrice's 18th. Epstein probably waltzed the Queen round the room! (Just hearsay I know but he was in the bosom of the RF along with Maxwell)

How can three such (allegedly) wealthy people look so cheap? Badly-fitting white tie, joke shop medals, and an outfit yer mum would wear to the PTA's Christmas drinks.

Why would you invite these people to your daughters 18th birthday party? She should surely have her own friends there not her dad's! Wtf is Weinstein doing there?

I'm pretty sure the girls were wards of the crown at that point so they may have been referring to that.

She doesn't seem to have had any more sense that Andrew where finance is concerned and seems to be happy to take money from anyone. I used to like Fergie but I can't understand why she is sticking by Andrew.

Major Ferguson was pretty blunt about what was happening - that it was an outright threat for her to lose status as the resident parent, rather than some royal-status technicality due to the line of succession.

I suspect that might have influenced why Meghan and Harry (friends with Eugenie) have always been so reluctant to bring Archie and Lilibet back to the UK.

I have endless respect for the late Queen, and thought she was wonderful.

The nation and its interests came very much second to the monarchy in her book.

She deprived the nation of valuable assets, dodged tax until she was forced by public opinion to cough rather weakly while still being exempted from the burdens her 'subjects' were forced to bear and turned a blind eye to her family's shady capers and connections for years.

Not wonderful.

i was just rewatching the video that was taken of Andrew standing just inside the front door of Epstein’s house in NYC waving goodbye to a young woman.

There's a shot of Andrew peering from some royal doorway in AVRS which really seems to echo the way he was skulking at the door in that video.

I wondered if it was a subtle refernce to that sequence.

Iirc, I think I remember reading, years ago, that the young woman leaving, mentioned above and who looks very young indeed, is in her twenties and is the daughter of a friend of Epstein. Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

I would love to have a source for that?

Looks like ‘The Firm’ were also warned about al Fayed and his revolting criminal behaviours by Dai Davies:

https://news.sky.com/story/mohamed-al-fayed-former-royal-security-head-says-he-warned-royal-family-before-diana-went-on-holiday-with-businessman-13219217

The Firm’s reply? ‘Her Majesty is aware’. Of what, exactly??

I said exactly this to my OH after we watched all 3 episodes.

Good post @PeggyMitchellsCameo

I remember reading about the very young Mandy Smith and much older Bill Wyman when I was young. It was classified as ‘gossip’ in daily newspapers and magazines. And I was not aware of anyone talking critically about it.

It was this sort of response to something that was unconscionably wrong that served to encourage the worst in many men - young and old - to behave disgracefully (and often criminally) and it also served to gaslight their victims into thinking they were at fault and it was their own doing, that they had brought it on themselves. It was the victims who were labelled ‘sluts’ or ‘on the make’. The men walked away untarnished with unspoken permission to do it again because they can, and did, get away with it. They still get away with it. And as we see with Maxwell, sometimes the predators are women but this is not as common.

Most victims don’t ever speak out and I don’t blame them. Not only are they going up against often powerful individuals and institutions who will fight to survive, they will be picked apart in court cases, in the media and on social media nowadays.

I’m not sure that things have improved all that much. At least the blinders are off. The world is full of predators. We esteem and sometimes idealise the wrong people.

I used to think of the Queen as a hard worker and an excellent diplomat - and a sort of benevolent character. Mainly because that’s what I read about her. I never liked the deference paid to her, or any of that family, because they aren’t there through merit.

But I’ve been reading more widely since her death, and lots of articles about her taking advantage of her position to enhance the monarchy’s wealth, and her documented interference in the government of a commonwealth country over which she was HoS (Charles too) has made me rethink my opinion about her.

And yes, she turned ‘a blind eye to her family’s shady capers.

I think they are all grifters to a greater or lesser degree. And I don’t think ‘doing charity’ cuts it.

Looking at Mandy Smith in those days was heartbreaking. She was obviously a child in great distress and nobody who was in a position to care for her appeared to show any concern for her welfare. Poor kid. I hope she's recovered and is as well as she can be.

@baobun, Katherine Keating, daughter of Paul Keating, Australia PM.

From what I could find she lives in Manchester now. She’s spoken out about raising the age of consent to 18. I read her autobiography years ago and it was heartbreaking.
Wyman said at 13 he was captivated by her and that she was already a woman. At 13.
I rewatched some news coverage of that first wedding yesterday and Charlie Watts says on camera that he doesn’t approve, it’s not a good match. Clearly not happy about it.
I think musicians of a certain ilk have always behaved this way. And then they mix with powerful figures who do the same.
The feeling I got from this portrayal of Andrew is that you have darling daughters, a wife who bows and scrapes, and a world open to you to take advantage of anything you fancy. It absolutely turns my stomach.

We are talking about two different people.
Katherine Keating was let out the NY mansion with Andrew in the doorway

I am talking about the very young petite girl running up the road after Epstein. This girl looked about 14 or 15. She had her hair tied back. She then runs back to the doorway rings the bell and goes in as Andrew sees out Katherine Keating.

Ah, corrected. Thank you.

"I have endless respect for the late Queen, and thought she was wonderful."

I genuinely don't understand why anybody would say this. Unless you were her child-and that's also pretty incomprehensible.

The feeling I got from this portrayal of Andrew is that you have darling daughters, a wife who bows and scrapes, and a world open to you to take advantage of anything you fancy. It absolutely turns my stomach.

Yes - it's a deadly combination of entitlement and stupidity, isn't it?

I believe from all I've read, heard and seen that Charles, Anne and Edward are all decent people - human, as opposed to perfect, OK. But Andrew, I think, has always been different. He was extremely unpopular when in the navy and those who accompanied him on his 'trade envoy' tours also reported extreme boorishness. It's a cliche, but he's the black sheep in that family, for sure.

I know it's said that he was the Queen's favourite child and there's no accounting for that kind of thing. I know myself of families where a parent favours the absolute worst of their offspring for reasons which baffle everyone else! I think it's fair to say (and it pains me to say it...) but, when young, he was the best looking of the royal children, so that might have been a factor. In those days he was a heart-throb, believe it or not, and must have got used to getting lucky with every woman he fancied. But those days are long gone.

Ooh - that's a complicated topic and would derail this thread!

I know what the pp means, but I also know what YOU mean.

If you are a monarchist then all kinds of almost mystical ideas about your country etc, its history, even religion sometimes - are invested in the monarch. It's not just about the monarch as in individual - it's about symbolism. And the late Queen - it can't be denied - took her role very seriously indeed.

But I genuinely think that's a different topic from the OP.

Derail away, it's an interesting topic!

I respect the Queen for making a promise to the country and sticking to it. Do I think that everything she did was right? Of course not. She seems to have been a useful sounding board for politicians, do I think she sometimes skewed the pitch in her favour, probably. She was human and she made mistakes.

She was a 1950s monarch in the 21st century and I don't think she necessarily adjusted her thinking. I was reading Courtiers recently and it struck me how vulnerable the Senior royals are to isolation in terms of ideas. They have to move with the times but not too quickly and that balance is hard and they don't always get it right (tax being an obvious example).

With respect to Andrew, I do think both the Queen and Prince Philip should have had a word far earlier in his career and they might have avoided the subsequent mess.

PPhilip was known for being somewhat brusque and outspoken and I am just surprised that he let Andrew get away with all that he did. He was almost like a passive parent

We talk a lot about the queen enabling him, but why wasn't Philip giving him what for?

Yes this is what I think. PrinceP was forthright.

Sarah was persona non grata because he disapproved of the beach papp pictures, the other royals including the Queen remained fond of her and took her calls. He wrote to Diana with his unsolicited opinions about the divorce, that’s on record. He told William to propose to C or to cut her loose because he felt that keeping her waiting whilst he looked around was unfair. He was opinionated and (arguably) overstepped.

So, either Andrew ignored him, or he said nothing. Or the Q vetoed his intervention. Who knows. Whatever happened, it is clear that Andrew got away with more than other relatives would have.