Andrew's future outside of the working BRF

[Denville]

Nothing has changed. Its simply that the pandemic and the natural inclination of the RF to sit and wait have meant that for a time there was no need to make a decision.. Now with a trial possibly looming, the RF have to indicate a clear distance between the senior working royals, and Andrew who is in a mess

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Denville

Nothing has changed. Its simply that the pandemic and the natural inclination of the RF to sit and wait have meant that for a time there was no need to make a decision.. Now with a trial possibly looming, the RF have to indicate a clear distance between the senior working royals, and Andrew who is in a mess

My impression is that the emphasis on saying that Andrew would argue his case in New York as a "private citizen" was to underscore that the Royal Family or the monarchy were not institutionally on trial. And that the Royal Household or the Queen would not be part of or underwrite any settlement that might arise from those proceedings, nor pay any related legal fees. A different matter is whether the Queen will privately bail out her favorite son eventually, which some British tabloids seem to be suggesting today, but I think even that possibility is doubtful at this point.

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

My impression is that the emphasis on saying that Andrew would argue his case in New York as a "private citizen" was to underscore that the Royal Family or the monarchy were not institutionally on trial. And that the Royal Household or the Queen would not be part of or underwrite any settlement that might arise from those proceedings, nor pay any related legal fees. A different matter is whether the Queen will privately bail out her favorite son eventually, which some British tabloids seem to be suggesting today, but I think even that possibility is doubtful at this point.

That is a great point regarding the finances. I hadn't really thought about it that way.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by Denville

Im not sure what your point is? Yes, Andrew's working liffe is over. We know that. Andrew knows that. I doubt if the RF would WANT Andrew turning up in court in the USA, and will try to make sure it does not happen.. But I dont know of any evidence that Andrew is phoning up Charles or his mother all the time to complain about his lot. He isn't bright and he's arrogant but I would imagine that he realises he is stuck with a comfortable but very limited life from now on.

Yes, his working life is over and I think Andrew can live with that. But his public and not least royal/celeb life with the privileges that entails is over as well. And that may not be something Andrew is delighted about.
He's lost all his perks and all the people who would like to mingle and offer him favors (in all sorts of forms...) because he's a royal, that's gone as well.
While many royals would be quite happy living an ordinary life, that may not apply to Andrew if the descriptions of him being an arrogant dot, are true.
And if he is indeed arrogant, selfish and spoiled he may very well think that is very unfair and complain.

[Alison H]

I think that the Queen might have been quite happy living a quiet country life, riding her horses, walking her dogs, going to local WI meetings, popping into local shops and cafes, doing the garden and so on. Ditto Princess Anne. But not Andrew.

[Denville]

Yes he is, indeed an arrogant selfish fool.. but over the past 2 years it must have been borne in on him that the glamourous life is over, that he is stuck in Royal lodge with perhaps a few visits to friends.. I'm sure he will still have people who suck up to him in private life because of who he is.. and he wont totally lack for company. He has hardly been anywhere over the past 2 years, not just because of Covid. Hes had his attempts with Sarah to do a litlte volunteer work slapped down, so I htink he can see that life is going to be limited from now on. He may moan to the queen but I think by now he will surely have to come accept that however unfair it may seem to him, this is what has happened and things are not that likely to change for a long time, if ever.

[Alison H]

Originally Posted by victor1319

And if one thinks this to the end, then it is somewhat clear, that a lot of folks are now sympathetic towards the York Princesses... - but in the very moment some things happen, they make mistakes and so on, the same folks will say: The apples don't fall far from the tree! And everything will be stirred up again.

So, the York Princesses are a potential risk, a liability.

But to strip them of their titles right now would look cruel and heartless and like an "overkill" and is neither an option.

A difficult matter!

How are Beatrice and Eugenie liabilities?

What are they likely to do to make people compare them to their father? The worst they've ever been accused of is taking too many holidays and having poor taste in hats, neither of which are exactly criminal offences.

[Denville]

They aren't. I think they have had bad luck with boht of them getting married when Andrews issues are all over the news. Noone sensible is going to blame them or see them as liabilities

[Somebody]

It seems the main reason to take action now is to ensure that Andrew is not arguing his legal case as 'His Royal Highness'. That's the only thing that changed this week: the case wasn't thrown out so will move ahead and the BRF wants to distance themselves from that legal battle as much as possible.

[valeas]

I asked a question some posts ago,
maybe some us american can answer, txs.
if beatrice was asked to witness the pizza express story, could they get hold of her in the us
and would it mean she cannot go there (if she does not want to be a witness in her fathers trial).
this would mean consequences for her though she did no wrong.

and I wonder if Andrew is such a taboo now in the US, even H&M will keep quiet on this matter?

(as before I like many others got the feeling that they take every wrong step one could hit.
but this is a little off-topic, sorry.)

[BriarRose]

I'm not sure I understand the question, but here's what I think is being asked:

As Beatrice is not a U.S. Citizen or national, they can't compel her to fly to America for deposition or court testimony. As to whether she can be deposed in the U.K.- if she voluntarily agrees to be, then absolutely yes. Happens all the time. And her deposition can be used at trial in lieu of her appearance, as she would be considered "unavailable". It's possible that her father will want her deposed to back up his arguments in court.

As to whether she can be compelled to sit for a deposition- I don't believe so, I think it can only be officially "requested", but I don't have extensive experience with the Hague Convention and private individuals, which I think applies.

And there was a question about Andrew's right to the 5th Amendment privilege:

Technically anyone can invoke the 5th Amendment, but if the other side challenges it, then the Judge decides if the person is justified in doing so. If all criminal statutes of limitations have completely run in the U.S., then it's possible the Court could rule that Andrew has no 5th Amendment privilege.

The 5th amendment is only for self-incrimination against criminal charges. If there is no way for Andrew to be charged criminally, then there is no 5th Amendment protection. I have no idea if this will occur, or if the criminal statutes of limitations have run, but I have seen this issue arise before.

[Alison H]

I really hope that Beatrice can be kept out of this very nasty affair.

[Denville]

I can't see any reason why she would be invovlved in it.

[tommy100]

I think alot depends on what happens with the case - there is still (even if it seems far fetched) the possibility he is fully exonerated by a court case. In that case I see no reason for him not to attend his mother's state funeral (just at Harry attended Philips) and even his brothers coronation.
IMO if he settles out of court - of is of course found guilty - then I doubt he will be at the coronation. For HM's funeral I would assume she will b buried in the vault in a similar manner to Philip, yet the state funeral service will be at Westminster Abbey but a more private internment at St George's - I could see Andrew attending the St George's element but not the Westminster Abbey service as a compromise.

As for money - I'm sure the Queen gives her children an allowance of some sort anyway from her private funds, they also probably have Trust Funds from relatives - the Queen Mother etc that give them a a decent income. Andrew may have to start living a life more like that of Anne and Edward but it hardly means he'll be queuing at the Job Centre anytime soon.

[royal-blue]

Taking into account the hugely negative attention that both Andrew and Harry have brought to the BRF, is it more likely that Louis and Charlotte will now be expected to live their adult lives outside of the working BRF too?

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by royal-blue

Taking into account the hugely negative attention that both Andrew and Harry have brought to the BRF, is it more likely that Louis and Charlotte will now be expected to live their adult lives outside of the working BRF too?

That is such a long ways down the line into the future that it's impossible to deem what the working royal family will be like when the time comes. It would be like comparing the working royal family of 1991 to today's working royal family.

Who knows what will happen in the years to come. My crystal ball is in the shop again so no clue there.

[yukari]

Originally Posted by royal-blue

Taking into account the hugely negative attention that both Andrew and Harry have brought to the BRF, is it more likely that Louis and Charlotte will now be expected to live their adult lives outside of the working BRF too?

Anne, the only daughter of the monarch, and Edward, the youngest son of the monarch -- position which Charlotte and Louis will be when William is king -- are both still active doing royal duty so why Charlotte and Louis can't follow their examples of being working royals?

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by yukari

Anne, the only daughter of the monarch, and Edward, the youngest son of the monarch -- position which Charlotte and Louis will be when William is king -- are both still active doing royal duty so why Charlotte and Louis can't follow their examples of being working royals?

It is 2022, not 1952. The idea that royals need dozens of honorary patronages, honorary positions, honorary military assignments has already been left in most other monarchies. It is an era with 24 on 24 hours visibility, with Twitter, Facebook, Instagram. I do not even need to go to the village next door to see a royal: social media bombs me with plenty of pictures, even if it is just an unglamorous royal "working visit" to an industrial site: it splashes on the screens.

And that a foundation proudly has a royal patron heading letters and cards: totally useless in 2022 as foundations go directly to the public via social media and start fundraising via TikTok, PayPal, whatever. (Who gets a letter by post these days, anyway?).

Morale of the story: when George is King, we are probably in 2072. That is 120 years since Elizabeth started her Reign. We can not expect that the royal family keeps working like they always did since 1952. We will see major changes and most likely the monarchy will focus on the present, the future and the former King (and spouse) like we see in practically all monarchies now.

[Alison H]

Originally Posted by royal-blue

Taking into account the hugely negative attention that both Andrew and Harry have brought to the BRF, is it more likely that Louis and Charlotte will now be expected to live their adult lives outside of the working BRF too?

I don't see why. The Kents and Gloucesters have never done anything wrong, and Princess Margaret never did anything that bad. Princess Anne is very widely-respected, and Edward and Sophie are popular now. Why should it be assumed that Charlotte and Louis will do anything wrong?

[Iluvbertie]

Margaret was a lose cannon from the mid-50s onwards. It is well-known that she was frequently rude to people and always expected to be treated as The Queen's sister and as a Princess. She was very much a 'don't you know who I am' person.

It is clearly a failing - even the late Duke of Gloucester and Kent were known to pull that 'don't you know who I am' idea and the Duke of Gloucester was far from respected as GG of Australia due to his attitude, which was not all that well received down here.

The BRF can't afford another generation with entitled spares so really needs to be clear with Charlotte and Louis that they have to make their own way in the world.

I am beginning to think that Charles needs to even separate the heir child in each generation from the rest so HRH for the heir apparent and HH for younger siblings (or even have younger siblings only as Lord/Lady)