The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy (2010-2021)

[JessRulz]

The moderating team has made the decision to remove the link and responses to the article in The Spectator on this topic.

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla

Before Prince Andrew resigns from any patronages, could Queen Elizabeth II assign Princess Eugenie to take over some of the patronages' royal duties?

The patronages are not 'royal duties'. They aren't reserved for working royals. Both Beatrice and Eugenie are 'royal patrons' for a dozen or so patronages. Beatrice for example is already patron to English National ballet school, her father is patron of the ballet itself. It would make sense for her to take over as she is already connected. She is a trustee to outward bound which her father is patron of, again an easy transition.

I am not sure why only Eugenie would be given some.

[rob2008]

Originally Posted by Roderick

Prince Andrew, by way of being the Queen's son, has always had doors opened for him and by his nature, seems to have taken advantage of this perhaps more than his brothers and sister have. Even privately now, some of these doors may close in his face and friends and venues previously welcoming him may be afraid of the association. I don't think it's a matter for him to live the same life simply without royal engagements and patronages. I do think his life will be vastly different, at least for a considerable time. This is even without any further allegations or legal action against him.

Andrew will continue to be royal and have the word Prince in front of his name, so he will always be a desirable commodity even though the circumstances have changed slightly.

[Claire]

i know it was mentioned earlier- but how difficult is it comparatively to remove an HRH, Prince Title or a Royal dukedom, Privy councilor membership, garter knight honour and other subsidiary titles. Not that I am suggesting or thinking this will happen - just curious?

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Claire

i know it was mentioned earlier- but how difficult is it comparatively to remove an HRH, Prince Title or a Royal dukedom, Privy councilor membership, garter knight honour and other subsidiary titles. Not that I am suggesting or thinking this will happen - just curious?

The titles of HRH and Prince(ss) are determined by custom and by the expressed will of the sovereign, who is able to overrule custom.

https://www.heraldica.org/topics/bri...e_highness.htm

Originally Posted by tommy100

I'm shocked at the suggestion gets a cut from any success from pitch@palace personally. I would think, and like to hope, that any cut goes back to the organisation rather than Andrew personally.

The linked article quoted an unnamed source from Pitch@Palace who stated that the clause has never been invoked but, if it were, the cut would go to the organization to fund its operations.

[ACO]

So Andrew and HMQ were spotted going out horse riding today. I interesting timing of that photo op. So very fascinating how all of this is happening.

Anyways Virginia Robert’s interview airs Dec 2

[rmay286]

I wonder if Pitch@Palace can still be called Pitch@Palace now. And can it still be held at St. James' Palace? Would that be considered bad optics for someone who has 'withdrawn from public life'?

[Roderick]

Originally Posted by rob2008

Andrew will continue to be royal and have the word Prince in front of his name, so he will always be a desirable commodity even though the circumstances have changed slightly.

Of course he will continue to be royal, but I dispute both your assertions that he will always be a desirable commodity and that the circumstances have changed slightly - they've changed a great deal in fact.

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by ACO

So Andrew and HMQ were spotted going out horse riding today. I interesting timing of that photo op. So very fascinating how all of this is happening.

Anyways Virginia Robert’s interview airs Dec 2

I think the message is pretty clear. The Duke of York is in public disgrace, and his mother was forced to act.

But privately she is in his corner as always.

HMQ is very skilled at this type of messaging. Always has been.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Roderick

Of course he will continue to be royal, but I dispute both your assertions that he will always be a desirable commodity and that the circumstances have changed slightly - they've changed a great deal in fact.

He certainly is not a desirable commodity.. and I hope he will not manage to get back to "royal duties". and indeed charities and so on simply do not want to be seen with him..

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

I think the message is pretty clear. The Duke of York is in public disgrace, and his mother was forced to act.

But privately she is in his corner as always.

HMQ is very skilled at this type of messaging. Always has been.

Not sure how skilled this display is but she definitely sent a message.

[Ista]

According to The Telegraph, Prince Andrew has now stepped down from any direct involvement with Pitch@Palace, now to be known simply as Pitch, and the 2% clause has been removed:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...chpalace-role/

Has anyone seen any other confirmation of this? I'm wondering how reliable this report is.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by ACO

Not sure how skilled this display is but she definitely sent a message.

Not a good one. She sould have known ages ago that Andrew could not continue in his royal role.. and certainly not after his disastrous interview. If she wants to see him in private that's one thing but he has had to be back benched.. and IMO she should not be "sending out signals" that he's still got her backing...

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by Denville

Not a good one. She sould have known ages ago that Andrew could not continue in his royal role.. and certainly not after his disastrous interview. If she wants to see him in private that's one thing but he has had to be back benched.. and IMO she should not be "sending out signals" that he's still got her backing...

I have to disagree. As ugly and gross as Andrew's actions and words have been, the Queen is still his mum and she loves him. They're out riding together and mother and son, not as Queen and disgraced Prince, and she shouldn't have to jump through hoops to find private moments where she can express her love and support when he needs it most.

I am surprised that the Queen approved his interview; she's so sharp and tuned in to everything, so how did she not see that this could only be a disaster for Andrew and the BRF?

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

I have to disagree. As ugly and gross as Andrew's actions and words have been, the Queen is still his mum and she loves him. They're out riding together and mother and son, not as Queen and disgraced Prince, and she shouldn't have to jump through hoops to find private moments where she can express her love and support when he needs it most.

I am surprised that the Queen approved his interview; she's so sharp and tuned in to everything, so how did she not see that this could only be a disaster for Andrew and the BRF?

He doesn't need "love and support". He clearly only gave up on the royal duties after stern representation from the queen and probably Charles.. and he clearly is very slow to realise when he has doen wrong...

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by Denville

He doesn't need "love and support". He clearly only gave up on the royal duties after stern representation from the queen and probably Charles.. and he clearly is very slow to realise when he has doen wrong...

I don't see what the bolded parts have to do with anything. Andrew brought this all on himself - and sadly the BRF - by his willfulness, his sense of entitlement, and probably his notion that he was "teflon", that nothing could touch him. That's not in question. I just can't go as far as saying he doesn't need love - he's a human being, of course he needs love. I just can not support the idea of Andrew's family shunning him. They can be angry with him - furious, actually - without abandoning him not as a Prince, but as a son, brother and father.

[Moonmaiden23]

Andrew will never face the full consequences of any errant behavior while HMQ is alive and on the throne.

As indignant as that makes some people, that is simply the way it is.

But after she is gone...to paraphrase Louis XIV...it's another matter.

Apres la reine, le deluge.

[rmay286]

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

I am surprised that the Queen approved his interview; she's so sharp and tuned in to everything, so how did she not see that this could only be a disaster for Andrew and the BRF?

She had no idea what he was going to say, and the Queen doesn't have superpowers (although some people almost treat her as though she does!) She is sharp, but she also tends to follow advice and she was probably advised that Andrew would just be clearing his name in a short interview.

It wasn't the interview that was the problem, it was how Andrew came across in the interview that made it a PR disaster.

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by rmay286

She had no idea what he was going to say, and the Queen doesn't have superpowers (although some people almost treat her as though she does!) She is sharp, but she also tends to follow advice and she was probably advised that Andrew would just be clearing his name in a short interview.

It wasn't the interview that was the problem, it was how Andrew came across in the interview that made it a PR disaster.

No, of course she didn't......good points, and that's true about the interview.

I feel sorry for the Queen that she's got to deal with this at her age, and that she can't even be with her husband on their anniversary (though I guess she wouldn't have been anyway as she was working). I can imagine Charles is a big help to her...even from thousands of miles away.

[Pranter]

Barclay's has pulled support for Pitch program....Also Andrew has resigned from the Royal Ballet (patron).

The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra is one of the latest to announce it is parting company with him.

LaRae