Prince Andrew, Duke of York Current Events 6: July 2011-February 2015

[muriel]

Prince Andrew steps down as trade envoy - FT.com

Prince Andrew steps down as trade envoy

 

[Diarist]

I am not surprised by this news - the timing and manner seems to reflect current Royal practice [and contemporary political and business practice come to that, and even romances!]. The procedure seems to be something like this:

Stage 1. Scandal breaks

Stage 2. Royal family / Company CEO/ Political Party leader / Celebrity Spouse of the 'supposed love cheat' / all affirm their support for the scandal-hit person. There are sometimes even declarations of support for the scandal-hit person: 'He has our full confidence' / 'He will still continue in his role as Special Representative / We are very much in love and there is no truth in the allegation that my spouse was seen out in the company of a new lover etc etc [delete which is not applicable.]

Stage 3: a 'decent' interval elapses.

Stage 4. Formal Annoucnement of 'stepping down' / political resignation / Celebrity divorce etc.

It seems to happen this way every single time.

As soon as BP announced support for the Duke of York [i.e stage 2!!] you could just tell it was only a matter of weeks before he fell on his sword.

The problem with Andrew is that he appeared to reach his peak in his very early twenties: Regarded as serving in the Navy with distinction during the Falklands War, and at his most handsome [he now looks both overweight and gray - neither of which are crimes, I might point out] he now seems to be in decline.

Only my thoughts, which as I always say, are not meant to offend.

Alex

 

[Meadow]

Does this happen as of now or does he have more engagements to fulfill in this role? I thought they usually got booked months in advance? Or if it happened like you say they may off stopped booking him for engagements in that role awhile ago do you think? Sorry for the questions? I hope he does better in his new role he will need to be careful because he will be watched very carefully after all this. You are right his early twenties were his time he seems older then he is. But if he lost weight and did something with his hair it would take years off. He may lose weight now not so many big dinners!

 

[fascinator]

The problem with Andrew is that he appeared to reach his peak in his very early twenties: Regarded as serving in the Navy with distinction during the Falklands War, and at his most handsome [he now looks both overweight and gray - neither of which are crimes, I might point out] he now seems to be in decline.

Only my thoughts, which as I always say, are not meant to offend.

Poor guy.

Well, outside of his appearance, he and Fergie share a marked tendency towards poor judgement. I hope this development isn't too hard on his girls.

 

[Diarist]

Not sure at this stage Meadow: we'll have to wait for the formal annoucement.

You are certainly right that enagements are arranged some time in advance; arrangements that involve travel abroad are always a bit more flexible in case of natural disaster / political upheaval etc, otherwise cancellation of ANY royal enagement is very rare. [most usual reason over the years for cancellation has been illness of the particular 'performing royal' [dear Princess Margaret seemed to have a lot of 'off-days' particularly if the Engagement looked 'boring'] or bereavement.

If you want me to take a guess - and it is a guess, then I reckon that when the scandal first broke [about 3 months ago] I expect that at that time nothing new was pencilled into the Duke's diary. [Normally they would be 'booking things' up to 12 - 18 months in advance.] I would imagine that Andrew will fulfil his existing committments and then it depends what happens to the role - I can't think a 'new' royal will be found to replace him i.e. someone who will take over the job, which first began with the Duke of Kent. Andrew's role will probably therefore be downgraded and will be renamed and Royal Aides and the Government will presumably take care to make sure that any new duties he carries out for the UK are kept separate from Andrew's own 'private' interests.

Just my thoughts - and we will have to wait and see.

Alex

 

[Meadow]

Thanks for that! It will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[Diarist]

I would also add that I am quite sure that Royal Aides will be busily beavering away with a view to making sure that NOTHING scandalous is allowed to intrude on the Queen's Diamond Jubilee. For this reason, I expect that anything with a potential for scandal [involving all members of the Royal Family] is being identified, with appropriate steps to either 'neutralise' or 'eliminate' it: [Imagine if the sucessor to the Epstein scandal were to break on the day that (say) the Queen was attending a Diamond Jubilee Thanksgiving event ''here is our Monarch who has never [or hardly ever] put a foot wrong and has been diligent in serving her country, and here is the Duke of York who..............[fill in the rest].

It's hard for Andrew. I do NOT think that he is instrinsically bad or evil; I have met him quite a few times and I think that he is just not....very bright. I think that he's basically well-meaning and affable, but does not seem to be intellectually over-burdened and not does he seem to have the power to think things through....

Only my thoughts

Alex

 

[Mirabel]

It's hard for Andrew. I do NOT think that he is instrinsically bad or evil; I have met him quite a few times and I think that he is just not....very bright. I think that he's basically well-meaning and affable, but does not seem to be intellectually over-burdened and not does he seem to have the power to think things through....

Only my thoughts

Alex

I know this sounds like I'm Fergie-bashing, but I do believe that his life would have turned out differently if he'd married a different sort of woman.
Someone discreet, intelligent, well-mannered.

As for William and Kate replacing him in the role, I have no doubt that is what many would like, but I don't think it's feasible.
William is the heir, and his duties are bound to increase in the (very) near future.

I suppose the best Andrew can do now is imitate Edward, and carry out whatever duties he's assigned without making too much of a fuss. At least until things calm down.

 

[muriel]

I suppose the best Andrew can do now is imitate Edward, and carry out whatever duties he's assigned without making too much of a fuss. At least until things calm down.

That will certainly be the preferred option, IMO.

 

[Kataryn]

Seems like Andrew and the girls made their choice: pro Sarah and are now frozen out. It's sad but with someone like Sarah in tow (and I'm sure we haven't heard all about the background of the "Cash for Access"-scandal yet) and with both their needs for fresh money it is definately not good to be too closely connected to them for the BRF. And when it comes to serious decision, even HM always put her duty before her family ties.
As Diarist once mentioned: it's not only Sarah who always tried to profit from her Royal connections but from the beginning Andrew was in in it (in a harmless form back then, like selling pics to the media) and today, after the job as a trade envoy anything is possible.

 

[Osipi]

I am not surprised one bit that Andrew has stepped down from his position as Trade Envoy for the UK. Although, it may in a small way have a bit to do with Sarah, there was just too many other things that happened to lay it all on Andrew being pro-Sarah. I'm thinking that possibly there were too many "iffy" questions that arose from his work that pointed to "mixing business with pleasure and personal gains" and expenses that were over the top. His relationship with Epstein didn't do him any favors either.

It seems like this is geared towards keeping Andrew in the UK and that kind of makes it easier to keep an eye on him as least as far as his travels and what is paid for out of the public purse.

Its not a good time for the Yorks at all. Sarah with her financial and emotional baggage, Andrew being "grounded" and the girls being told to seek employment in the private sector. I think this will be an interesting time for them and I do see them pulling together as a family even more so now. We'll see.

 

[sliver_bic]

My question is will Andrew's new position carry diplomatic immunity? That Epstein ordeal might not be over, they might wanna question Andrew about certain things.

 

[NotAPretender]

Seems like Andrew and the girls made their choice: pro Sarah and are now frozen out. It's sad but with someone like Sarah in tow (and I'm sure we haven't heard all about the background of the "Cash for Access"-scandal yet) and with both their needs for fresh money it is definately not good to be too closely connected to them for the BRF.

Kataryn, I don't necessarily agree that Andrew, Beatrice & Eugenie's alliance with Sarah has directly resulted in their being "frozen out." Andrew's long been criticized for being free and easy with travel costs and friendships with unsavory fellows in return for what can certainly be seen as financial gain. While "greed" is the common denominator of the two (S&A,) I don't see that Andrew's loss of position is directly the result of having Sarah as his perpetual millstone. I think he "earned" this demotion all on his own demerits.

 

[dbarn67]

ITA NotAPretender.

I think it's too easy to blame Sarah for everything. Andrew is grown man who made his choices. IMO Andrew is more like Sarah than he's given credit for being. He's Her Majesty's son so his bad deeds are excused or put on Sarah because we can't be too critical because he's royal born and a man. Expecting special treatment because of his position as Trade Ambassador has nothing to do with Sarah. It has everything to do with him and him alone. I'm no fan of Sarah but neither am I willing to heep all blame and responsiblity for bad behavior on Sarah alone. Andrew alone is responsible for his choices. Also, has anyone ever thought that he fell in love with and married Sarah because they're kindred spirits? All their negative and postive traits match. They probably should never have divorced but that's another discussion. But IMO Andrew's just as bad or good as Sarah.

 

[rmay286]

If you want me to take a guess - and it is a guess, then I reckon that when the scandal first broke [about 3 months ago] I expect that at that time nothing new was pencilled into the Duke's diary. [Normally they would be 'booking things' up to 12 - 18 months in advance.]

I agree...I've noticed for a little while that Prince Andrew hasn't been doing any foreign trips. It seemed that he was keeping a low profile.

It will be interesting to see what he ends up doing after this. He will be spending more time in Great Britain, I guess. It must be a sad time for Andrew, because he seemed to really believe in his work. Maybe this is why he is supposed to be in Yellowknife with Beatrice and Eugenie (he is supposed to be there later this month, if he isn't there already)...he can avoid any media storm in Britain.

This Saturday would have been Andrew's 25th anniversary, too. He must have a lot of regrets right now.

 

[rmay286]

Kataryn, I don't necessarily agree that Andrew, Beatrice & Eugenie's alliance with Sarah has directly resulted in their being "frozen out." Andrew's long been criticized for being free and easy with travel costs and friendships with unsavory fellows in return for what can certainly be seen as financial gain. While "greed" is the common denominator of the two (S&A,) I don't see that Andrew's loss of position is directly the result of having Sarah as his perpetual millstone. I think he "earned" this demotion all on his own demerits.

I agree - Sarah can't be blamed for all of Andrew's misfortunes. For one thing, he chose to marry her and then to stand by her through thick and thin (some might argue that was a bad decision, but it was Andrew's choice). Andrew has chosen to consort with certain people and take certain expensive trips. Also, while it might have been heroic for Andrew to try to bail Sarah out of debt, turning to a convicted sex offender for help was very unwise. And it was Andrew, not Sarah, who was photographed with Epstein.

 

[Zonk]

There is enough to talk about in regards to Andrew's Current Events before we start throwing in Sarah. This is Andrew's Current Events thread.

 

[StoneCold]

Prince Andrew to quit as UKTI ambassador | Royal Insight

Its a sad day for Britain

 

[rmay286]

This article has some details about what Prince Andrew may be doing in the future:

Revealed: Duke May Sever UKTI Link | duke_of_york | uk_trade_and_investment | olympics | Kleinman | Sky News Blogs

 

[sliver_bic]

My question is will Andrew's new position carry diplomatic immunity? That Epstein ordeal might not be over, they might wanna question Andrew about certain things.

Sorry to quote myself but wondering if anyone had a thought on this.

 

[fascinator]

Sorry to quote myself but wondering if anyone had a thought on this.

Sorry- I'm an attorney and unless I misunderstood your question, it does not make any sense. I started to list all of the reasons why it doesn't make sense, but it was taking too much time.

The "they" who "might wanna" question Andrew about "certain things" would necessarily be US authorities, since domestic immunity can't be claimed in a diplomat's home country. Howeber, he is not in the US or in custody here. Also, I am unaware of Andrew being suspected of any criminal acts in the United States.

His only crime, as far as I am aware, is keeping bad company. He "might wanna" question himself about that, since a moment of introspection and reflection about the company he keeps is long overdue.

 

[fascinator]

Seems like Andrew and the girls made their choice: pro Sarah and are now frozen out.

Do you think the girls have also been frozen out? I have heard that Andrew always was and continues to be his mother's favorite. With such a high profile job and higher profile bad choices, he had to lose his post, but do you think he has been frozen out of the family as well? Public and private life are quite different.

I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Fascinator, I tend not to speculate, as it generally is of no use. Where's you get your J.D.?

 

[Mermaid1962]

I'm predicting that we'll see Andrew's engagements on any particular day scheduled so close to each other distance-wise that we won't be seeing much use of helicopters between appointments.

 

[Diarist]

Sorry to quote myself but wondering if anyone had a thought on this.

So far as the UK is concerned, Andrew even in his role as the UK Special Representative for trade has NEVER been able to claim diplomatic immunity, for the simple reason that he is NOT an accredited UK Diplomat. Andrew would therefore be regarded and treated in exactly the same way as a non-royal UK Citizen: only the Queen [Sovereign] is exempt from prosecution here in the UK

It therefore follows that if it was felt that Andrew has committed an offence under British [English] law, he could be charged with an offence. This happened here in the UK with the Princess Royal, who has a couple of minor criminal convictions in relation to speeding [a traffic offence] and IIRC, the keeping of a dangerous dog.

If it was felt that he had committed an offence abroad, Andrew could EITHER be arrested and charged with the offence if he was abroad at the time of his arrest, or, if he remained in the UK and a foreign power wished him to stand trial, he would theoretically have to stand trial, he could theoretically be extradited to the foreign power concerned to face the charges.

There is one caveat: even though we say in England that 'everyone is equal under the law, so far as the Epstein case is concerned, in practice the powers-that-be in either the UK and/or the US might decide to go after Epstein and not Andrew for what I will call quasi-politcial reasons.

Hope this helps

Alex

 

[fascinator]

So far as the UK is concerned, Andrew even in his role as the UK Special Representative for trade has NEVER been able to claim diplomatic immunity, for the simple reason that he is NOT an accredited UK Diplomat. Andrew would therefore be regarded and treated in exactly the same way as a non-royal UK Citizen: only the Queen [Sovereign] is exempt from prosecution here in the UK

So Andrew cannot claim diplomatic immunity in the UK because he is not an accredited UK diplomat? Interesting ...

Or could it be that diplomatic immunity is meaningless in one's home country?

 

[sliver_bic]

Sorry- I'm an attorney and unless I misunderstood your question, it does not make any sense. I started to list all of the reasons why it doesn't make sense, but it was taking too much time.

The "they" who "might wanna" question Andrew about "certain things" would necessarily be US authorities, since domestic immunity can't be claimed in a diplomat's home country. Howeber, he is not in the US or in custody here. Also, I am unaware of Andrew being suspected of any criminal acts in the United States.

His only crime, as far as I am aware, is keeping bad company. He "might wanna" question himself about that, since a moment of introspection and reflection about the company he keeps is long overdue.

Looking back at my comment I missed an "as" which makes it a little harder to decipher but not impossible. A simple, he didn't commit a crime would've sufficed despite the fact that I never claimed that he did. There were articles that claimed Andrew could claim Diplomatic Immunity, so I was going on those.

Prince Andrew may be quizzed as FBI reopen Jeffrey Epstein sex case | Mail Online

It is highly likely that detectives will also wish to question the Prince as part of their investigation. If subpoenaed he may be forced to plead diplomatic immunity based on his role as business envoy for UK Trade and Investment. Last week David Cameron faced calls from the floor of the Commons to remove the Prince from his post.

 

[fascinator]

So far as the UK is concerned, Andrew even in his role as the UK Special Representative for trade has NEVER been able to claim diplomatic immunity, for the simple reason that he is NOT an accredited UK Diplomat. Andrew would therefore be regarded and treated in exactly the same way as a non-royal UK Citizen: only the Queen [Sovereign] is exempt from prosecution here in the UK

It therefore follows that if it was felt that Andrew has committed an offence under British [English] law, he could be charged with an offence. This happened here in the UK with the Princess Royal, who has a couple of minor criminal convictions in relation to speeding [a traffic offence] and IIRC, the keeping of a dangerous dog.

If it was felt that he had committed an offence abroad, Andrew could EITHER be arrested and charged with the offence if he was abroad at the time of his arrest, or, if he remained in the UK and a foreign power wished him to stand trial, he would theoretically have to stand trial, he could theoretically be extradited to the foreign power concerned to face the charges.

There is one caveat: even though we say in England that 'everyone is equal under the law, so far as the Epstein case is concerned, in practice the powers-that-be in either the UK and/or the US might decide to go after Epstein and not Andrew for what I will call quasi-politcial reasons.

I thought I had an understanding of the charges against Epstein and the improprieties alleged with respect to Prince Andrew. Epstein paid underage (as young as 14) girls for sex. That is not disputed. Am I wrong in thinking that Andrew has never been accused of any such thing? An underage girl (US age of consent, not UK) was supposedly flown to England by Epstein to "entertain" Andrew, but they never had sex.

If Andrew is not even accused of committing a crime, then why would you dismiss the decision to not "go after" Andrew as "quasi-political", unless by "quasi-political" you mean rooted in facts, law and logic?

Please, help me with this, I might be missing a part of the story.

 

[Mermaid1962]

It seems to me that by Diarist's use of the term "if it was felt", she's speaking hypothetically. No, Andrew hasn't been charged with anything, but "if he was charged..."

 

[fascinator]

......

Prince Andrew may be quizzed as FBI reopen Jeffrey Epstein sex case | Mail Online

These articles jumble together a number of crucial distinctions regarding the concept of diplomatic immunity and its practical application in this context. For a number of reasons, I don't believe that Andrew could have effectively invoked diplomatic immunity prior to leaving his post and due to the implications of even attempting to, I don't think he would have tried. I am also finding it difficult to imagine a scenario where this would even come up.

Don't ask a question -twice- if you don't want an answer