Andrew - continuing his effort to end the Monarchy Part 3

[simpsonthecat]

Here we are

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/5487636-andrew-continuing-his-effort-to-end-the-monarchy-part-2?page=20&reply=150676336

Whether he deserves state-paid security or not, at this point in the Epstein narrative he is probably the member of the RF who is most at danger.

Probably mostly from his loose-lipped nephew who is angling for an invite to Sandringham likely trying to dig up some dirt to rinse out to the media and make some $$$$s.

Or more likely from any number of other powerful men who appear in the Epstein files and might be concerned that Andrew could sing like a canary if he wanted to.

But quite possibly has plenty of dubious billionaires in the address book?

Andrew hit a Vice Admiral employee of the royal family because he dared tell him a room he wanted for Pitch@Palace was already booked

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-15701359/andrew-mountbatten-windsor-hit-vice-admiral-buckingham-palace-robert-hardman-elizabeth-ii.html

Why was Daddy writing his apology for him?!

Because he'd probably have struggled to spell 'apology'.

Because his parents were pathetic enablers

Could be.

He certainly doesn't know how to say 'sorry' and never has done.

The way the article, or the author Robert Hardman portrays it, it's like the queen thinks Andrew is "troubled" in some way so keeps him closer than the other children of hers.

".. 'He was not as bright as the others, he could be boorish and everyone knew that,' Hardman said of Andrew.
'David Cameron said to me when I was writing the book, all the other members of the family knew the boundaries, they knew what they were supposed to do and what they shouldn't.

'I saw with my own eyes at places like the World Economic Forum in Davos how Andrew would come in and upset people, say the wrong thing, cross a line...."

They're not trying to lay the groundwork for some sort of spurious mental health / spectrum claim to explain away his behaviour are they?

Archive link https://archive.is/6Xon1

They're not trying to lay the groundwork for some sort of spurious mental health / spectrum claim to explain away his behaviour are they?

I believe that's very likely, @Lalgarh, but then I've said from the start that if any real chance of Andrew being prosecuted arose hey'd claim he was "unfit to stand trial"

You didn't really think they'd permit him being made accountable for anything did you?

Well quite. Daddy penning an apology for a man in his 50s, no less.

Why was his Mummy paying out £13million and publicly disparaging the reputation of his teenage trafficked rape victim.

It’s possible the ‘security’ is more along the lines of minders.

Because she and her utter cocks of advisors didn't want the tax-payer funded glory circus she turned out to be mostly too ill to attend overshadowed.

Apparently.

Apparently Sir Charles Johnstone-Burt is still serving as the Master of the Household, which I'd have expected to be rather uncomfortable had Andrew not already been sidelined for public consumption

If many are right about this all being cosmetic, I wonder what the family's attitude towards him will be now this has crawled into viiew

Murky. Why is AMW regarded as more vulnerable? I’ve heard it before. But no idea why.

Because he's the thickest of the very dim lot maybe? But I've worked with people of sub-normal intelligence and most of them were unfailingly polite having been brought up properly. One of the most pleasant working environments I've experienced, despite some obvious challenges. No one was going around thumping colleagues.

I know someone who has certifiable low IQ. He's nice, has a lovely wife, whatever caused the low IQ hasn't transferred to his children who are all very bright and they are also unfailingly polite.

I don't think Andrew has low IQ, he seems able to arrange deals and understand finance very well. Maybe he has an issue that causes emotional regulation difficulties of some sort, that would track.

Some stuff going on on X/Twitter this morning. I gather that Tom Sykes (and subsequently Andrew Lownie) is/are apparently saying that The Palace is on a mission to get the public to feel pity for Andrew.

However, TS and AL say that AMW feels no remorse, and both he and Sarah F consider themselves to be victims.

I expect they will be doing interviews today on the usual channels, and it’ll all pop up on YouTube shortly.

I’d like to see any actual evidence they’ve got that this is not mere speculation. It would be pretty damaging for the king’s credibility if true.

Yes, they've been suggesting that for a while (TS/AL) but now seem to be ramping up a level of outrage.

I wonder why now?

Surely all the Royals realise the great British public are heartily sick of A&S. Even before the pictures of him kneeling over a girl, a picture of him lying over six women in a Royal estate, him being arrested and an ongoing police investigation, her declaring the worst sex abuser ever as a supreme friend, . . We were all sick to death of the pair of them, there can be no doubt surely there is no rehabilitation of him. Or her.
If Charles and the rest of them think otherwise, they are even more stupid than I thought.
And don't their huge team of digital experts, private secretaries, advisers know what we the public feel?
If not, they should all be sacked and get a job in the real world, not the royal bubble

Maybe it's all speculation but nothing about the House of Windsor surprises me anymore

It will be a very poor decision if they try to rehabilitate A and worse S. The RF need to be very careful.

Gossip, rumour, tittle-tattle - where would the RF section be without it?