There are two weeks between Andrew's statement, and the Palace's. They must have thought the former would do enough - but subsequent public disquiet about Andrew's lies about the timeline, and (if my reaction is anything to go by) disgust at his sanctimonious claim to be acting as always in the interest of the country, in addition to the release of Giuffre's book, clearly made it necessary to cut him loose.
2025-10-30 23:54:53
You can't help wondering how some of the other people who "played" with Epstein are feeling about this. Interestingly, Giuffre's brother and SIL, and the other Epstein victim interviewed on Newsnight, were all very approving of and grateful for the King's behaviour in this. I wonder whether this will to a large extent lance the boil, at least over here and regarding the Royal Fam.
2025-10-30 23:42:09
The statement from Buckingham Palace in full: His Majesty has today initiated a formal process to remove the style, titles and honours of Prince Andrew.
Prince Andrew will now be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. His lease on Royal Lodge has, to date, provided him with legal protection to continue in residence.
Formal notice has now been served to surrender the lease and he will move to alternative private accommodation.
These censures are deemed necessary, notwithstanding the fact that he continues to deny the allegations against him . Their Majesties wish to make clear that their thoughts and utmost sympathies have been, and will remain with, the victims and survivors of any and all forms of abuse.
2025-10-30 23:38:48
lj: yes, but have you seen Buckingham Palace's statement today? A very different tone....
2025-10-30 22:50:13
FYI The last person to be de-princed was the Duke of Cumberland, who fought for the Kaiser in WW1, so treason, and the last person to have his KG removed (Knight of the Garter) was Emperor Hirohito in WW2.
2025-10-30 22:44:21
Well, Andrew is now Mr Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, and is being moved from his huge house on the Windsor estate to a (presumably) smaller house much further from London, on the Sandringham estate. There appears to be no precedent for this, and the interview with Virginia Giuffre's brother and sister-in-law (who are both in tears) is very moving. It's my impression that most people in the UK are perfectly satisfied with this.
2025-10-23 22:23:43
All of that said, from this side of the pond the UK royals seem to have this weird dichotomony between the ones who are actually king or queen (or in line to be), and who seem to take the responsibilities of their office seriously, and the rest of the family, who end up having too much money and privilege and not enough to do so they end up behaving badly.
Well, not always by a long shot. Princess Anne is an absolute workhorse, carries out more duties than any of the others and is much admired by the majority of the public. She also refused to let her two children be given titles. And Edward the VIII was the opposite in every way. In the current generation of the King's sibs, Prince Edward (now Duke of Edinburgh) and his wife appear to have come rather dutifully good. It's a weird old system, for sure. But even republicans of my acquaintance, looking at e.g. Trump, have started shuddering at the idea of an elected head of state.
2025-10-23 21:10:24
Also, I really miss the preview button too!
2025-10-23 21:09:26
wj, I seem to have mastered the italics and bold thing: you put your text in as normal, then highlight whichever text you want to alter, and then press the relevant button along the bottom. And then you exit the text and it lasts.
2025-10-23 16:00:27
Andrew is a very stupid, arrogant, entitled creep. It's perfectly possible he didn't know that Virginia Giuffre was trafficked, he would have assumed that a beautiful young girl wanted to sleep with a handsome prince (he was handsome, I regret to confirm), and if he even knew she was 17 that was above the age of consent here. But his general behaviour, in this issue as in everything else except his military service in the Falklands war, reveals his appalling character, and the most recent revelations that he lied in that BBC interview by claiming he had cut ties with Epstein in 2010, when an email from him to E in 2011 has since come out (dated after the famous photo became public) saying "“Don’t worry about me! It would seem we are in this together and will have to rise above it. Keep in close touch and we’ll play some more soon.”
You can imagine how the words I have bolded have landed here. As far as the royals in general are concerned, I think things are in flux. Feeling against Harry and Meghan is somewhat stronger here than in the US, but William and Catherine are regarded pretty favourably, and since William in particular has let it be known that he is implacably against Andrew, won't have him at his coronation, and intends to modernise the monarchy when he is King, I don't see any likelihood of any really significant change any time soon.
There are two weeks between Andrew's statement, and the Palace's. They must have thought the former would do enough - but subsequent public disquiet about Andrew's lies about the timeline, and (if my reaction is anything to go by) disgust at his sanctimonious claim to be acting as always in the interest of the country, in addition to the release of Giuffre's book, clearly made it necessary to cut him loose.
You can't help wondering how some of the other people who "played" with Epstein are feeling about this. Interestingly, Giuffre's brother and SIL, and the other Epstein victim interviewed on Newsnight, were all very approving of and grateful for the King's behaviour in this. I wonder whether this will to a large extent lance the boil, at least over here and regarding the Royal Fam.
The statement from Buckingham Palace in full:
His Majesty has today initiated a formal process to remove the style, titles and honours of Prince Andrew.
Prince Andrew will now be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor.
His lease on Royal Lodge has, to date, provided him with legal protection to continue in residence.
Formal notice has now been served to surrender the lease and he will move to alternative private accommodation.
These censures are deemed necessary, notwithstanding the fact that he continues to deny the allegations against him
.
Their Majesties wish to make clear that their thoughts and utmost sympathies have been, and will remain with, the victims and survivors of any and all forms of abuse.
lj: yes, but have you seen Buckingham Palace's statement today? A very different tone....
FYI The last person to be de-princed was the Duke of Cumberland, who fought for the Kaiser in WW1, so treason, and the last person to have his KG removed (Knight of the Garter) was Emperor Hirohito in WW2.
Well, Andrew is now Mr Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, and is being moved from his huge house on the Windsor estate to a (presumably) smaller house much further from London, on the Sandringham estate. There appears to be no precedent for this, and the interview with Virginia Giuffre's brother and sister-in-law (who are both in tears) is very moving. It's my impression that most people in the UK are perfectly satisfied with this.
All of that said, from this side of the pond the UK royals seem to have this weird dichotomony between the ones who are actually king or queen (or in line to be), and who seem to take the responsibilities of their office seriously, and the rest of the family, who end up having too much money and privilege and not enough to do so they end up behaving badly.
Well, not always by a long shot. Princess Anne is an absolute workhorse, carries out more duties than any of the others and is much admired by the majority of the public. She also refused to let her two children be given titles. And Edward the VIII was the opposite in every way. In the current generation of the King's sibs, Prince Edward (now Duke of Edinburgh) and his wife appear to have come rather dutifully good. It's a weird old system, for sure. But even republicans of my acquaintance, looking at e.g. Trump, have started shuddering at the idea of an elected head of state.
Also, I really miss the preview button too!
wj, I seem to have mastered the italics and bold thing: you put your text in as normal, then highlight whichever text you want to alter, and then press the relevant button along the bottom. And then you exit the text and it lasts.
Andrew is a very stupid, arrogant, entitled creep. It's perfectly possible he didn't know that Virginia Giuffre was trafficked, he would have assumed that a beautiful young girl wanted to sleep with a handsome prince (he was handsome, I regret to confirm), and if he even knew she was 17 that was above the age of consent here. But his general behaviour, in this issue as in everything else except his military service in the Falklands war, reveals his appalling character, and the most recent revelations that he lied in that BBC interview by claiming he had cut ties with Epstein in 2010, when an email from him to E in 2011 has since come out (dated after the famous photo became public) saying "“Don’t worry about me! It would seem we are in this together and will have to rise above it. Keep in close touch and we’ll play some more soon.”
You can imagine how the words I have bolded have landed here. As far as the royals in general are concerned, I think things are in flux. Feeling against Harry and Meghan is somewhat stronger here than in the US, but William and Catherine are regarded pretty favourably, and since William in particular has let it be known that he is implacably against Andrew, won't have him at his coronation, and intends to modernise the monarchy when he is King, I don't see any likelihood of any really significant change any time soon.