King Charles heckled over Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein

[SerendipityJane]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8empv38vgo

He shouldn’t be on walkabouts and heading up the monarchy then. You can’t have it both ways.

Yes he’s elderly and has cancer but he also holds the power to make decisions about Andrew and it’s good for him to know the strength of feeling from the public rather than cooing advisers.

Saying things like he's a poor old man with cancer who just deserves sympathy is utterly ridiculous.

He is the monarch and the buck stops with him. Unlike other families he does have responsibility for how his family behaves because he bankrolls and protects them. He gives them properties to live in and allows them to live a lifestyle that no other citizen of the UK would be allowed to.

So he absolutely has a responsibility here and his personal circumstances have no bearing on that.

If he is unable to do the job then it needs to be passed to William.

He has absolutely contributed to the current situation with woeful inaction. He needs to stop protecting Andrew but he won't because he doesn't want questions to be asked in Parliament and be answerable to the UK tax payer.

People should be more angry and more people should be asking questions. The people who told him to shut up are just being complicit in the cover up.

That woman who told the heckler to shut up looked a bit unhinged, whereas the guy who was asking the questions seemed much more rational. Common sense is starting to prevail.

More of this please. He should be put on the spot every single time until he answers truthfully.

I am not the Monarch of Great Britain with a family who is funded by the taxpayer
Of course he is responsible for what goes on within his CLOSE family

The woman who shouted at the man asking the question looks the sort to go to Sandringham church at 5am on Christmas morning with a plastic union jack hat and a flag to wave 😅

When was he convicted? when was the criminal trial? You cannot just go around calling people paedophiles especially when its not even what he allegedly did she was trafficked she wasn't underage if your going to be self appointed judge and jury get the charges right

I agree, Tiredofbullshit, and it's not my idea of how to handle this, but with parliament completely supine and the RF concerned mainly with their own preservation I can just about sdee why someone felt moved to do this

As for a PPs comment that he deserves kindness and compassion - what, like his attitude towards Peter Ball's victim who later killed himself, but was described by Charles as this "ghastly man up to his dastardly tricks again" who he'd "see off"?

The Queen enabled him, Charles has to pick up the pieces. He should be moved into a modest home out of the public eye to see out his days, unless there’s anything criminal that comes out, in which case he can do the appropriate punishment. I think Charles is dealing with it as well as he can, probably aided by public opinion, Andrew is shameless and needs to see the writing on the wall.

she wasn't underage

How many times does it have to be said? Age is IRRELEVANT if you have been trafficked

I agree he should not be labelled as a paedophile

It depends on how much and when the Royal Family and Palace knew about Andrew's close friendship with a paedophile, and his usage of sex trafficking victims.

Andrew has only just been asked to rescind his titles. It's been 14 years since he was seen socialising with Epstein post-paedophilia conviction - that cost him his Trade Envoy post at the time, but seemingly no action or investigation was taken by the Royal Family.

It's been 10 years since he was first named in court documents as a sexual abuser of young trafficking victims.

It's been 6 years since his 'car crash' interview with Maitlis.

It's been 3 years since he paid a settlement to his known victim - £12 million, including payment to charities supporting sexual abuse victims, despite him claiming that he's completely innocent and had never met her. Notably the settlement didn't have any conditions preventing his victim from speaking out further in the long term, only a temporary one to protect the Queen's Jubilee.

The Royal Family have plenty of time to get this sorted, and to cut off the sleazy pervert. I'm not responsible for my brother, but I'd be denouncing the fuck out of him if he'd abused women and girls, and happily continued associating with a convicted paedophile.

Andrew was sidelined by the monarchy years ago. The only occasions he has attended were family ones. There are many sleezebags who still attend family gatherings. He had is military attachments cut, he lost his trade job. He recently renounced his royal titles, I think he jumped before he was pushed.

Exactly. Right on both points.

You beat me to it jumpingthehighjump

Of course everyone's entitled to their view, but there's no rationalalising with these people and I guess she'd be another who'd insist they "didn't understand" the references to paedophile enablement - probably because they simply don't want to know?

There is a kind of strange cognitive dissonance around the Royal Family supporters. The insistence that an organisation that is one of the richest in the world, with direct access to government and security services, wouldn't have any clue what is going on in close proximity to them, whilst the rest of the great unwashed public does know! it's crazy when you really start to pull that kind of thinking apart.

On the one hand they're held up on a pedestal and on the other they are infantised. It's a strange line of thinking.

Rude? Hardly rude. People are frustrated. Surprised it doesn't happen more often. People have no recourse, no opportunity to make themselves heard directly. He should hear what people think. His security people got immediately agitated and whisked him over to the other side of the crowd, just incase charlies delicate ears were damaged by being asked a question.

I hate the “how is he responsible for his brother?” line

the whole royal family thing is we are the chosen ones, pay for us, wave at us, we are important because of our family line, but when shit hits the fan, they’re just individuals, just ordinary family members trying to get by. No Charles is the head of and prior to that second in command of a business essentially that revolves around family, he’s responsible.

the man shouted valid questions.

You think asking someone we bankroll, for £132million, how long they were aware of their brother's reprehensible behaviour is cunty? There should be more heckling, not less.

Like the compassion and kindness he showed towards Neil Todd RIP?
He, along with the rest of them need to be made to feel very uncomfortable. 😡

@Tiredofbullsit

I'm shameful?!?!?!?😂

Charles accepted the job of King

Just out of curiosity, who were the other candidates ?

https://www.threads.com/@zandisussex/post/DQWE5XAkvRI?xmt=AQF0KozPXQVctbsXVpOJGiVBDhZmyNnsS9JuLdJTpnP90w&slof=1

Cant get over the royal apologists on here.

Precisely, MyDownstairsLooisHaunted

The one that stays with me is No.10's recent comment that "legislation (around removing titles) is a matter for the palace in the first instance" - as if that's the way things are supposed to work

And still some will insist that these people have no power, and probably claim that they "don't understand" why anyonee would object

Typo

There's this thing called the line of succession....

Charles could have said no.

I find it hilarious how many people feel the need to jump to the defence of an incredibly powerful billionaire, as if he couldn’t possibly withstand a tiny bit of criticism. He’s in a position of responsibility and the public are allowed to openly criticise him. He couldn’t care less about any of us, frankly, so he’s hardly going to care if he gets called out on the historic protections given to his pdf brother.

Then call your elected representatives out on it!