Andrew - continuing his effort to end the Monarchy

[TheHaplessWit]

Another new story on Andrew today. Photo's have emerged showing that on Epstein's desk, there were emails regarding Epstein paying debts owed by Andrew/Sarah to staff:

https://people.com/epstein-had-emails-staff-ex-prince-andrew-sarah-ferguson-new-photos-show-11880419

Why on Earth was a Prince of England having his staff paid by a sex trafficker?
Doesn't seem "too honourable" to me.

I realise that these types of events are common in the charity sector but I always find them dubious.

I'm absolutely sure someone as venal as Andrew would have hidden millions in tax havens.

Is it? The story says she did not spend Christmas with him. I would have no idea what Eugenie or Beatrice have done over this period - do you? I think there's a bit in the story about this has been since the further revelations in the emails so not about from the beginning. 🤷‍♀️

I'm start by saying that I have seen how hard it is for families to believe this sort of accusation when it is about a family member. I can understand the girls finding it hard to believe at the beginning when we were talking about a photograph. But since the Matlis interview is been obvious that Andrew had done what he was accused of and failed to see anything wrong in it, plus he has never apologised or expressed any concern for any of the women involved.

We have seen how both Beatrice and Eugenie have supported Sarah and Andrew since that interview and even now they aren't cutting off their mother who called Epstein a "supreme friend". Subsequent evidence hasn't made what was alleged any worse, how could it, it's just more information.

I can understand someone who chooses to love their parent despite what they have done. I don't understand someone who waits and only cuts off that parent when they feel they are personally threatened. The mismatch between running an anti slavery charity and supporting parents who were friendly with a trafficker isn't new so why now?

I have posted these comments before and am quoting myself but they're well worth repeating if anyone's prepared to buy the utter drivel that Euge is acting in respect of her anti slavery initiative:
Interestingly enough the 2023 accounts for the charity were 98 days late in filing and the 2024 accounts show the bulk of the expenditure going on some knees up gala night with the rest of the income/expenditure carried over to the next set of accounts

I obviously missed that last time, @CathyorClaire, so am grateful to you for repeating it

They really do never change

I'm no fan of Eugenie or Andrew but I guess all the emails were something that cannot be explained away.

I just find it really self serving to cut him off now. I don't think it will achieve what she wants it to.

I'm absolutely sure someone as venal as Andrew would have hidden millions in tax havens.

I agree.

He's been shown in the past to have offshore accounts and dubious financial links including links with a private bank set up by his mates the Rowlands ('private' visits on the Trade Envoy ticket) which was fined for breaches of money laundering regulations, lost its licence and ended up in administration and was among several royals who were allowed to use the Bank of England Nominee scheme set up with the deliberate intention of hiding their shareholdings from the public.

Well someone has ' run to the press' now, in order to desperately tell people that Eugenie, after many years working with an anti slavery charity has cut her ðad off. They didnt spend last Christmas with them either and they hadnt cut them off. The know what side their bread is buttered. They need the closeness to the RF and to be seen with them so they can carry on their dosgy business in the ME. I doubt Eug is being paid for her massive experience in tech.

No sympathy for Andrew, but I don't think the future of the Monarchy will in any way be influenced by his behaviour.

Hope the girls don’t read Nobody’s child by Virginia Guiffre then!

I hope it leads to a tightening up of rules around royals on duty. He should never have been allowed to be a trade envoy for so long.

On the contrary, I hope they do!

I agree that is how her thoughts will be running.

I think Eugenie has tried to sit on the fence in too many situations.

i find it odd that 2 women in their late 30’s are called girls.

He should never ever have been allowed to be one at all.

With hindsight I agree but I can't remember when he actually started the role and what was known about him beyond serving in the Falklands. If being an arrogant rich boy disqualified him then half those in power would need to resign after all.

So many gobsmacking examples of grifting and sponging weren’t there @AnnunciataM? The other thing that got to me in the book was the examples of waste. Fergie telling her servants to cook every type of roast and have it ready, they’d slog away producing it then she’d just go out and the food would be binned. I know it’s not their biggest crime but it’s the arrogance to staff and the sheer waste. Presumably it wasn’t a one off either.

Not much has changed since Downton Abbey. Clothes commissioned & never worn, etc, tip of iceberg.

Its a while since I listened to the Lownie book about the house of York, but didn't he get 'sacked' from his envoy job, but ignored that and carried on doing it anyway?

I don't think he could carry on representing the government officially. But it didn't do him grifting his way round the Middle East in particular.

He set up his own charity and linked that to a limited company in his name , and carried on as before I think. Then it was pitch at the palace, again a charity but with a sidearm that he siphoned off of I remember correctly

Mummy was desperate to find him something to do after his naval career ended.

Even C in a rare moment of judgement advised against it on the grounds he'd use it as a cover for playing golf and chasing women (which does in hindsight beg the question of how much and for how long he knew of the unfolding scandal)

Then it was pitch at the palace, again a charity but with a sidearm that he siphoned off of I remember correctly

While what we do know of what went on at Pitch@Palace is jaw droppingly enraging, I doubt we've heard the half of it.

I've always thought Charles knew that Andrew was dodgy where money and women were concerned but didn't realise the extent re Epstein. Charles hasn't shown particularly good judgement when it comes to sex offenders (i realise this is a drastic understatement), but Charles is also not alone in this failure, judging by the frequent scandals in pretty much any institution we care to name.