God, the avenging Furies had nothing on the Jeffrey Epstein industry when it comes to the pursuit of its quarry. The latest installment in the ongoing excoriation of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is the revelation in the Mail on Sunday that the former Prince may, when he dies, receive a royal funeral. That is to say, it has learned that the King’s brother “remains on a secret government list of royals who will receive high-profile funerals, even though he became a private citizen following revelations of his friendship with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.” Alas, there are no further details. The paper however surmises that it may involve a funeral service at St George’s chapel, Windsor, and burial at Frogmore cemetery along with other members of his family.
What do we actually want? A shameful death for the King’s brother followed by an anonymous cremation?
This arrangement, if true, seems altogether uncontroversial. In death, even sinners are entitled to the dignity of a Christian funeral, and if the former Duke of York is given a funeral service at St George’s Chapel like his father, it seems pretty well what the place is for.
Yet inevitably, the lawyer for the Epstein victims, Gloria Allred, who has represented 27 of Epstein’s victims, pops up to say: “Andrew has brought disgrace upon the Royal Family and the UK as a result of his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein. Under these circumstances, the question arises as to why this man should be afforded the honor of a royal funeral. What kind of message would such a ceremony send to Epstein’s victims?”
Presumably the uncontroversial message that in death, any Christian has the right to a decent burial, something never intended merely for saints. This right to a proper burial includes even a man like Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.
To her discredit, Alicia Kearns, the Conservative shadow Home Office minister, told the paper: “There are no circumstances under which Andrew should be afforded a royal funeral…All such plans should be revoked immediately.”
There seems to be a misunderstanding here. If the Government does indeed have back-office plans for the conduct of the funerals of royals it seems like housekeeping…sorting out the practicalities in advance.
We’re not talking about the former Prince lying in state in Westminster Hall, like his mother. Nor a televised funeral service, like his father got. (Andrew went to that; are you not, in disgrace, entitled to go to your own father’s funeral?) It’s not envisaged that his coffin will process around the streets of Windsor.
All that may happen – and the paper simply doesn’t know the details – is that he may get a funeral in a royal chapel followed by interment in a royal graveyard. And given that he remains the King’s brother, the late Queen’s son, what exactly is wrong with that? Are you not allowed the minimum decencies, even in death, once you’re identified as a colluder with Epstein? – though in the time honored formula, I should say that A M-W has denied any wrongdoing. The cost may well fall on the royals, not the taxpayer.
Personally, I wouldn’t have had a problem with Ian Huntley, who killed two little girls, having a Christian burial either, though this prospect filled the national press with an ecstasy of disgust. It’s as though the only way to show your abhorrence of a ghastly offense, is to pile one humiliation after another on the perpetrator, even if he’s paying for his offenses, in Huntley’s case, by dying in prison. But can we not lay off in death? The less Christian our society becomes, the more pitiless it seems; formerly, even a sinner had dignity in death. Oscar Wilde’s Reading Gaol murderer had a chaplain in attendance at his hanging, who read the burial service.
As it happens, I believed Virginia Giuffre’s account of her encounters with Andrew, as she put them in her book, and these, if true, suggest at the very best, a repellent sense of entitlement on behalf of A M-W. I believe what Andrew Lownie says about him. But what do we actually want? A shameful death for the King’s brother followed by an anonymous cremation? I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, for, as I say, a funeral service acknowledges that we’re all flawed, all sinners.
Right now, it seems the wretched man is simply allowed to walk his dog early in the morning; he was reported to be barred from riding his horses in case anyone caught him looking cheerful. This is house arrest by any other name, with fewer freedoms than those given early release by the Government can expect. He’s been stripped of every dignity, every title and confined to a property privately owned by the King. Isn’t that enough for the Furies? No, it seems. They want him hounded to death and beyond it. Even given the terrible nature of what he’s accused of, it’s too much. Let’s hope he’s repentant when he dies; that should be enough for us.
Comments