How come William chose to ignore the massive elephant in the room and no one challenged him on it?

[Roadtripwithpretzels]

Prince William spoke about the very important subject of mh yesterday on Radio One and while it’s a subject that should be highlighted, does no one else think that his credibility on this issue has now been damaged by the AMW case?

He may not have been personally responsible for the alleged cover up, and he may well loathe Uncle Andrew, but he is still a central player in the institution that helped to pay off and cover up the voices of AMW’s alleged victims? Virginia Giuffre took her own life fhs! He can’t just ignore it!

To me this interview came across as incredibly unintelligent and insensitive in current circumstances. And proof that William himself just doesn’t “get it”.

Why on earth did he not say that in the light of current circumstances and out of respect for victims; the interview couldn’t go ahead?

Or why did his new ex crisis manager PR person not advise this?

And why was he allowed to sit there by the BBC and not address this?

And what about the mh of the Palace staff who have suffered because of AMW’s boorish and inappropriate behaviour for years? The nanny who allegedly left because of AMW being inappropriate and the policeman whose arm was hurt by AMW’s speeding at Windsor? The maids who were screamed at? What about the mental health of the police protection offices who quite recently were, according to Lownie, reminded about their NDAs and the safety of their pensions if they spoke out?

I don’t think it’s good enough any longer for a senior member of the RF to sit there and say yet again in a rather generic way “we all need to talk about our mental health” while ignoring what their own institution has covered up for years and is still allegedly trying to suppress?

And the BBC should hold some accountability about this too!

The ‘royal’ pr machine never ever stops - I wonder how much money they throw at it? Certainly, it does seem like quite a few people lap up the narratives they are fed, either by official sources or the ones appearing in the media from ‘unnamed sources close to whichever royal person’. I’m thankful for Norman Baker and Andrew Lownie

Maybe W and C didn't want to make a scene at a funeral of a much loved relative and risk distressing the Duke of Kent who seems very frail.

Maybe AMW being attacked/murdered/kidnapped on the way to the funeral would have led to accusations of him hogging the limelight.

I really don't think using the funeral of a much admired woman to score points is appropriate, maybe better to move on to other matters as it isn't as if there aren't many to choose from.

If your partner assaulted that woman and YOU paid her in a court settlement, yes

I absolutely agree. I hate the “look at a candid snapshot of a person at an event and extrapolate an entire narrative” thing. It seems particularly prevalent in RF threads. And this thread alone has proved that one picture can tell many stories and none. For what it’s worth, I also apply that to the picture currently zooming round the world of Andrew being driven back from the police station. He looks terrible. Well, he IS terrible. But he was also in shock, hungry and exhausted. The picture shows nothing else.

Don't be so silly. If I was part of the family supposedly "ruling" us, I would make sure my behaviour and that of close family bore scrutiny.

I actually believe it is morally wrong to sleep with hundreds of people.

Yes! Agree!

It’s just an example of a provable, observable situation where they were protected by the Palace and he obviously still is being protected despite KC3’s latest statement, when it was reported that Charles had cut off AMW’s security payments in 2024?

As I recall Robert Hardman provided details of this in a book which was serialised in one of the tabloids; was it the DM? Lots of other reports in newspapers about Charles finally cutting off AMW including his security payments emerged around November 2024 I believe.

Incidentally, it’s utterly absurd to me that KC3 can put out a statement about the police investigation of AMW in which he says

“What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities. In this, as I have said before, they have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.”

Of course it’s great that AMW is finally being investigated but why didn’t the RF support and cooperate with an investigation years ago?

You can’t really be involved in a pay out to a victim to shut it all down on the one hand and say you welcome an investigation with the other?

Also, Lownie is saying that BP was reminding PP officers of their NDAs and the viability of their pensions while warning them not to speak out, only a couple of weeks ago!

Can we trust anything the Palace says at this point honestly? This is all boiling down to trust and Charles is so protected he doesn’t quite get it.

Did you read my post very cursorily or something TheignT?

Because I made a very similar point about W and C possibly not wanting to make a scene.

And us your last paragraph directed at me?

If so, I suggest you read the thread properly because I didn’t initiate the discussion about the Duchess of Kent’s funeral. As the op,
I was responding to many posters who did.

Also, I happen to be an admirer of the late Duchess of Kent and expressed my disgust at AMW and SF’s crass behaviour in my post and said how awful it must have been for her family. So you are directing your disapproval at the wrong person.

There is film of William and Andrew at the funeral from a different angle. Andrew is trying to engage with William, who looks decidedly uncomfortable!

Well we will see won’t we now that the Met Police have put out a call for all former PPOs of AMW to speak to them?

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c05v77mv69vo

While PPOs report directly to their superiors and not the RF, I know from listening to one of them on the radio recently that they work closely with the royal household on logistics, and scheduling - they receive a sheet of the day’s events and visitors from the royal household for example - as well as doing risk assessment for visits, and some of those activities indirectly intersect with the household's financial planning. So there should be plenty of records to investigate.

What I don’t understand is that if PPOs first loyalty is to their bosses and they are doing their jobs professionally and objectively, why was it ok for Ghislaine Maxwell to allegedly have virtually a free pass to wander around Buckingham Palace at one point?

Why was AMW allowed to allegedly invite a Libyan gun smuggler to lunch at St James Palace?

Didn’t AMW try and use his PPO to “dig the dirt” on VG according to an email from GM as revealed in the Epstein files?

Whose is the failure here?

Lownie states that the PPOs who did speak out got sent back to the beat in an insalubrious area of London. And that others were allegedly warned off from speaking out.

So you can have all the protocols in the world but they only work effectively when they can’t be over-ridden by power and influence.

It was to everyone bringing the Duchess of Kent's funeral into this. I think it's inappropriate and should be dropped. You obviously disagree as you are continuing to bring it up.

I'm sure there will be a stampede of officers coming forward to say they witnessed criminal activity and did nothing about it.

I wonder how much the people at the top of the MET know/ knew. For all we know they could be well aware and chose to shut down reports etc. I think this may well involve many institutions..The Met,MI5,Secret service,government,media. I think it stinks.

If MI5 and MI6 didn’t know what Andrew was up to at home and abroad then the country is in big trouble because he was doing all this in plain sight of palace staff, police officers and staff from the foreign office.

So I’ve got to assume that our security services aren’t completely incompetent and knew most of what was going on.

Was Andrew just a useful idiot that allowed them to keep an eye on various powerful influences and foreign spies etc?

His immoral behavior with trafficked young women was just collateral damage?

I agree Boudy and Wordler!

It stinks to high heaven!

And begs so many questions… .

As did you I’m afraid!

If we are talking about decorum at royal funerals, Sophie stayed away from Diana’s because of the similarities in how they look and how the press and public may respond to that. That is the decorous way to do things.

I didn't know that.

You asked me a question.

What a peculiar thing. Is this true?
A woman has fair hair like someone who has died so because of that doesn't go to their funeral, despite it being her ex SIL. How very odd

i read it a few years ago and it stuck with me - I think it was in something Lownie wrote or talked about. I am no RF fan but it’s clear that A&S were particularly vulgar in a way most are not.

given their position, I think W&K could have put out a statement.

Well if Lownie said it 🙄

In September 1997, Sophie was dating Prince Edward and was not yet officially part of the royal family.

Ahhh yes that makes sense

There are many things currently where the evidence is 'Lownie said'.

Yes I noticed 😉

Thank goodness he spent money and years of his life writing a book on the Yorks because we would not know half of it without him.

Ditto Norman Baker and finances of the Monarchy.