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

The royal family

Andrew Mountbatten Windsor

165 replies

StrongandNorthern · 30/10/2025 20:42

Finally.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
BitOutOfPractice · 31/10/2025 19:47

Senso · 30/10/2025 22:12

I am assuming it’s a warning shot to Harry. Charles had to set a precedent that the monarch is willing and prepared to strip titles if necessary.

How utterly ridiculous. No matter what your opinion of harry is, comparing them is really crass.

Rhaidimiddim · 31/10/2025 19:56

waitamo · 31/10/2025 19:01

Regarding SF, I believe the palace said she would sort out her own living arrangements, or words to that effect.

Now to me that doesn't preclude her from moving in with Andy again. Unless there's something fundamental copperfastening the fact that she will never live with A again. Remember that yesterday she was co habiting, but today she's not.

The devil is in the detail, and how things are worded.

Earlier in the week (or was it last week?) it was being reported that A was negotiating for a separate house for her, as well as ond gor him.

nicepotoftea · 31/10/2025 20:06

Rhaidimiddim · 31/10/2025 18:14

I am just puzzled as to why, a week-or-so after A's statement about not using his titles, the RF go scorched earth on him.

It sounded then like they had negotiated a deal.whereby he would go quietly.

So what riled them up to the point that they went proper nuclear?

Was A's statement him going rogue, perhaps?

Or did he backtrack on an agreement (for example, by demanding two houses instead of one, as reported) and the RF decided to give up on a negotiated settlement?

Perhaps they've seen new evidence that he has yet another skeleton about to be discovered.

Or perhaps KC3 is clesaning house (including putting H&M on notice to behave or else) as a gift to W while he still has time.

But why the sudden escalation when the trash was already being deal with?

I look forward to the Sunday papers, once all the hacks have had time to sound out their sources.
Typo edits

Edited

Agree - presumably this wasn't always inevitable, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered with the statement about titles from Andrew - so what has changed?

QuenchedSquirrel · 31/10/2025 20:09

nicepotoftea · 31/10/2025 20:06

Agree - presumably this wasn't always inevitable, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered with the statement about titles from Andrew - so what has changed?

They underestimated the reaction from us commoners when Andrew announced he'd stop using titles, and continued to show no care for the young women who'd been trafficked.

That statement was supposed to knock the whole thing on the head.

Instead it acted as petrol on the fire.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 31/10/2025 20:20

I am just puzzled as to why, a week-or-so after A's statement about not using his titles, the RF go scorched earth on him.
It sounded then like they had negotiated a deal.whereby he would go quietly.
So what riled them up to the point that they went proper nuclear?

You're not alone in wondering, @Rhaidimiddim, but they're certainly not going to tell us so we can only wait for what else they fail to cover up comes out

Whatever it is there's a pretty high chance it'll be mishandled, and while I've no great faith in William it surely can't be any worse than this when his turn comes

QueenOfHertz · 31/10/2025 20:20

The Andrew formerly known as Prince singing Purple Reign.

QueenOfHertz · 31/10/2025 20:20

Spare

Andrew Mountbatten Windsor
bluegreygreen · 31/10/2025 20:29

nicepotoftea · 31/10/2025 20:06

Agree - presumably this wasn't always inevitable, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered with the statement about titles from Andrew - so what has changed?

I suspect they were working out with parliament & lawyers what needed to happen to remove the titles and sort out the lease, and KC3 wanted to give Andrew one last chance to make a decent statement which included some contrition.

He clearly failed to do that, which pulled the trigger on everything else. As someone said on another thread, KC3 has probably been taught a few things by Camilla and Sophie over the past few years.

Theunamedcat · 31/10/2025 21:26

I dont think he was contrite in the slightest so they went scorched earth

weegielass · 31/10/2025 21:34

Its only a matter of time before H&M lose their titles too. They are so desperate for fame, money, and attention. I have no doubt they will also associate with the wrong people, if they haven't already done so. Andrew's demise sets a precedent. I personallly don't think Andrew is a sex offender, just very stupid.

sosorryimnotsorry · 31/10/2025 21:47

weegielass · 31/10/2025 21:34

Its only a matter of time before H&M lose their titles too. They are so desperate for fame, money, and attention. I have no doubt they will also associate with the wrong people, if they haven't already done so. Andrew's demise sets a precedent. I personallly don't think Andrew is a sex offender, just very stupid.

Rubbish! If the king decided that selling stories about the family was worthy of punishment in the form of removing titles then he would have to abdicate. Harry isn’t the first and probably won’t be the last royal to sell stories about the family!

Lesina · 31/10/2025 21:50

Senso · 30/10/2025 22:12

I am assuming it’s a warning shot to Harry. Charles had to set a precedent that the monarch is willing and prepared to strip titles if necessary.

How on earth do you equate the paedophile Andrew Mountbatten Windsor with the Duke of Sussex? I

Lesina · 31/10/2025 21:52

weegielass · 31/10/2025 21:34

Its only a matter of time before H&M lose their titles too. They are so desperate for fame, money, and attention. I have no doubt they will also associate with the wrong people, if they haven't already done so. Andrew's demise sets a precedent. I personallly don't think Andrew is a sex offender, just very stupid.

He had sex with a coercived child. What is your definition of a sex offender if not that?

Letthemeatgateau · 31/10/2025 21:55

Senso · 30/10/2025 22:12

I am assuming it’s a warning shot to Harry. Charles had to set a precedent that the monarch is willing and prepared to strip titles if necessary.

You think that stripping the titles of a man who sexually assaulted/raped a young woman is a 'warning shot' to Harry?

What is wrong with you?

LamourdesTrois · 31/10/2025 21:58

Lesina · 31/10/2025 21:50

How on earth do you equate the paedophile Andrew Mountbatten Windsor with the Duke of Sussex? I

He’s an immoral sleazebag but he’s not a paedophile.

LamourdesTrois · 31/10/2025 22:00

Lesina · 31/10/2025 21:50

How on earth do you equate the paedophile Andrew Mountbatten Windsor with the Duke of Sussex? I

His behaviour was disgusting, but Virginia Giuffre was not a pre pubescent child so he’s not a paedophile.

User5306921 · 31/10/2025 22:01

QueenClinomania · 30/10/2025 20:56

I think its only happening now because Andrew was the Queens favourite and she wasnt having any of it.
I expect Charles always planned to do it as soon as he could.

Don't be silly.
Its damage limitation. Charles's hand was forced.

User5306921 · 31/10/2025 22:03

Senso · 30/10/2025 22:12

I am assuming it’s a warning shot to Harry. Charles had to set a precedent that the monarch is willing and prepared to strip titles if necessary.

Will you ever grow up.

You're embarrassing yourself.

ThisIsMyBurnerPhone · 31/10/2025 22:03

LamourdesTrois · 31/10/2025 22:00

His behaviour was disgusting, but Virginia Giuffre was not a pre pubescent child so he’s not a paedophile.

  • "Paedophile" is the general term for individuals like Jeffrey Epstein who are convicted of or accused of sexual offenses against children.
  • "Minor" (under 18 years old in the US) is the legal classification for the victim at the time of the alleged abuse, as specified in court documents.
  • The lawsuits focused on specific allegations of sexual assault and sex trafficking.
  • The term "paedophile" itself is a descriptive term for an individual's sexual interest, not the specific legal charge of the civil suit brought by Giuffre against Prince Andrew.
ShenandoahRiver · 31/10/2025 22:05

@Senso
So are you saying that KC stripped A of his titles etc just so that he can line up Harry for the same treatment? Really ?

Yoyo5 · 31/10/2025 22:11

LamourdesTrois · 31/10/2025 22:00

His behaviour was disgusting, but Virginia Giuffre was not a pre pubescent child so he’s not a paedophile.

He was 41, she was 17. Please stop apologising for abusive men.

sosorryimnotsorry · 31/10/2025 22:18

Lesina · 31/10/2025 21:50

How on earth do you equate the paedophile Andrew Mountbatten Windsor with the Duke of Sussex? I

There is no doubt that Andrew is a sleazy horrible man but he hasn’t been accused of being a paedophile. A Paedophile is attracted to prepubescent children.

sosorryimnotsorry · 31/10/2025 22:21

Yoyo5 · 31/10/2025 22:11

He was 41, she was 17. Please stop apologising for abusive men.

It’s not apologising for him at all. It’s correcting and using the appropriate language which is important.

Yoyo5 · 31/10/2025 22:22

This reply has been withdrawn

Withdrawn at authors request

Bedheadbeachbum · 31/10/2025 22:26

Will he be known as the 'Andrew formerly known as Prince'?