Does Prince Andrew have to become plain Andrew Windsor?

[Noras]

I am a Royalist and firmly believe in a constitutional monarchy. I think that a CM creates stability and is better than a President etc

It seems to me that Andrew ( guilty or not) has done huge amounts of damage to the brand and I think that he needs to become plain Andrew Windsor.

I can’t see any other option if they want to get ahead of the curve.

This thing is growing legs and the ripples could implicate the entire family. It seems to me that even the late Queen’s involvement is being looked at eg Andrew Lownie
discussions on security logs on the relevant night ( non sweat dance / Pizza Hut!) and how they ( PA and SF ) remained at Windsor to avoid being served papers.

Andrew needs to walk the streets as a plain mister or get out there demand a trial and clear his name.

He is destroying the Royal Family brick by brick.

Am I wrong?

Why would ABC listen to the Palace? I could understand if it was the BBC, but why would ABC care? If their journalist had the story.

I don't think Omid Scobie is a credible source!

There is footage out there with the reporter herself actually saying this so it's not anything to do with scobie.

have used the power of the monarchy against the best interests of the British people and in the service of classism and misogyny

That's not news though.

The poster also said Scobie claimed the Palace disincentivised journalists from covering stories they didn't like.

The journalist may well have said it, but my question is why didn't ABC run the story? Why would they care about what the Palace said?

Because they wanted to run stories on the royals unconnected and would be cut off from that

It is indeed a problem that Andrew hasn’t been tried or found guilty. Any consequences he may feel now and in the future he would, theoretically, be justified in claiming are unfair because he hasn’t been convicted of anything.

The bigger and, in fact, real problem is that Andrew will never be tried, can never be tried. He’s in a privileged position, protected by law and convention. Normal rules don’t apply to him. As we’re seeing, he’s above the law. So, people will do what they can to deal with people who are above the law.

Trial by media and social media, that is to say by the public - every element of it that makes itself heard - is the only trial he can be put to. It’s always been this way for royalty. They’re not there by the grace of god in the 21st century, they’re there by the grace of the public. Laws give them rights; laws are determined by parliament - the people - and in the modern world royal assent is a formality (mostly, that’s another question).

Seems unlikely. Once a royal story is out there anyone who wants to can pick it up and report on it. ABC was hardly likely to have been treated to any exclusives that they would otherwise be denied. I call BS.

Probably Mountbatten Windsor.

So the journalist who gave an interview about this is a liar
Ok 🥱

I'm a Republican not a Royalist but surely if you think we should have a monarchy you have to accept that those in the line of succession can't be removed from that unless there's a criminal conviction?

I think he is damaging to the RF, and should be dealt with accordingly.

Well, i don't automatically think every journalist tells the truth - I don't think every journalist lies. There are thousands of journalists in the world, and I assume there is a mix of people like any other walk of life.

It seems odd that the story had cast iron proof and ABC wouldn't run it.

As I said, I could see why British media might be wary, but not foreign media.

It happened all the time in the good old days 😂and in more recent times we had Edward VIII

Absolutely. Its all very well saying ' oh he hadnt been convicted of anything ' but his privileged position has meant that he has been able to avoid questioning by the FBI, even as a witness, which he undoubtedly was. The chances of him having his day in court are zero. As for all the other accusations against him, his time as a trade envoy are sealed for 100 years. Parliament has decided that they are not allowed to discuss the RF. The entire British establishment has colluded to keep him out of a court of law but hes ' innocent until proven guilty'- even though the mechanisms for him to be proven guilty or innocent are impossible to access.

Other members of the RF have taken others to court. If you can use the courts for your legal convenience, you should also be subject to it.

But every time the Monarchy is show to be subservient to parliament, the question about it's constitutional position gets advanced that tiny bit more.

The hereditary part of British monarchy is being shown to be increasingly at odds with it's constitutional (i.e. how we are all governed) role.

Not necessarily. Mistaken perhaps.

I would never have bowed anyway! Is that not just the Ling/queen?

I would like to see a proper Met police investigation because if allegations about PA are true they need to come out. And if he has done something illegal he should face that. Given his payoff to VG I am not hopeful of him or indeed others facing their day in court But the Met police could do a thorough investigation ( though what records are left - who knows) and that would be something.

I do think the RF think they have reached a pragmatic solution with PA giving up all his titles and fancy purple garter ships etc , and I can see why. Also given he only has daughters , B&E can't pass down princing and pricessing down the line , so it stops with them. & I do understand they wouldn't want to clog up govt time. But actually I do think they should set a bill in motion to remove titles from those who won't willingly give them up - doesn't need to be urgent but start the process I would say, in case you need it again.

BTW I received my degree from Princes Anne a fair few decades ago & we were told a nod in respect to the Chancellor of the university is all that is required - no curtseying necessary. She seemed fine with that 😊

Amy Robach has said that the ABC did not want to lose access to a Kate and William interview.

Amy Robach Virginia Guiffre re interview

It must have been so disappointing for Virginia that the interview was not aired. Sex abuse survivors often speak to how they are re-traumatized every time they have to tell and retell what was done to them.

This ^. You either believe it’s God given or you don’t.

Sidenote - when they were briefed before meeting KC, my relative was told bowing was a choice not a requirement.

That’s ridiculous though. So worried they wouldn’t be able to interview “Kate and Will”? When was this interview scheduled to take place? Oh wait…

Also given he only has daughters , B&E can't pass down princing and pricessing down the line , so it stops with them.

It does anyway, the titles of Prince and Princess only continue down the direct male line. Harry’s children are also the last in his line to have that title, and I wouldn’t bet on those staying long.

There is no such thing as a ‘teenage prostitute’ the same as there is no such thing as ‘child pornography’ - what is happening in each situation is rape, sexual assault, sexual abuse, grooming, coercion, threats, trafficking.

VG was a vulnerable trafficked teenager - having sex with any trafficked person is declared legally as rape as there is no ability to consent given the treatment listed above. Her age is irrelevant to this crime - if someone is 17 or 77 it’s the criminal charge of rape.

PA ‘had sex with’ Virgina an American teenager in London - it was crystal clear then that she was trafficked and this legally was rape whether PA believes it was consensual or not.

So PA is a rapist - multiple times of a teenager.

It was Pizza Express not Pizza Hut. It's by dint not by dent.
I'm female so I would (or would not) curtsy not bow.

Are we all (probably quite fairly) assuming that if he had sex with one teenage prostitute and attended one orgy at Little St James' Island then he'd probably done it more?

Teenage prostitute? I thought these types of descriptions had been consigned to the bin years ago.

He had sex with a victim of sex trafficking.