It comes after Thames Valley Police said they were assessing a complaint over the alleged sharing of confidential material by the former prince with Jeffrey Epstein.
Maybe, I’m not so sure. I had thought they knew it was very likely the accusations were true, but they spent a lot of time sidestepping action. If public criticism hadn’t been so relentless, they might have been content to sweep it under the rug, as is tradition.
But I have never kept close track of the royal family, largely because I always assumed they were untouchable.
That’s sort of my point though, they spent years protecting him and then suddenly a few months ago something made them turn on a dime and strip him of his titles very rapidly. I suspect that “something” was being told the police had enough evidence to arrest him.
Someone asked Ernest Hemingway how he lost all his money.
“Gradually, then all at once.”
Same situation. One person says something and it’s dismissed. Ten people say it and it becomes gossip fodder. A hundred people say it and it becomes an open secret. A million people say it and he gets arrested.
Charles has a complex that his parents never loved him, and merely bred him to be Sovereign. It’s why he still refuses to move in to Buckingham Palace. Andrew was unquestionably Elizabeth’s favourite child, with his frequent failures and bankruptcies excused and waved away.
You do not know these people. This is knitting circle talk. Charles removed Andrew because of Epstein and other local infractions, as well as knowledge of him sharing state secrets.
I’m not British but I’m also very surprised. I can’t help but wonder if they would have dared had he still had his title?
I would assume that the king and other interested parties will have known this was coming for a while and that is why he lost his title.
Maybe, I’m not so sure. I had thought they knew it was very likely the accusations were true, but they spent a lot of time sidestepping action. If public criticism hadn’t been so relentless, they might have been content to sweep it under the rug, as is tradition.
But I have never kept close track of the royal family, largely because I always assumed they were untouchable.
That’s sort of my point though, they spent years protecting him and then suddenly a few months ago something made them turn on a dime and strip him of his titles very rapidly. I suspect that “something” was being told the police had enough evidence to arrest him.
Someone asked Ernest Hemingway how he lost all his money.
“Gradually, then all at once.”
Same situation. One person says something and it’s dismissed. Ten people say it and it becomes gossip fodder. A hundred people say it and it becomes an open secret. A million people say it and he gets arrested.
I wonder if the one that defected with his wife to california had something to do with all of this too, and not just snobbery to his new wife.
Charles has always hated and envied Andrew. He removed him from Royal duties as soon as he had the power to do so.
What did he envy him for?
Charles has a complex that his parents never loved him, and merely bred him to be Sovereign. It’s why he still refuses to move in to Buckingham Palace. Andrew was unquestionably Elizabeth’s favourite child, with his frequent failures and bankruptcies excused and waved away.
You do not know these people. This is knitting circle talk. Charles removed Andrew because of Epstein and other local infractions, as well as knowledge of him sharing state secrets.
This is detailed in Tom Bower’s thoroughly researched book.
Again, hearsay and a book designed to sell books.
The law wanted to send a clear message, just 25 years too late.