The sheer weight of allegations against Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor – all tawdry, all sordid – runs the risk of creating not so much outrage as weariness. It was clear months ago that the former Duke of York appeared to have been behaving in a way that brought shame not just on his family but on his country. Yet as the stories from the Epstein files continue to weave their insidious way into the public consciousness, the effrontery with which Andrew behaved seems quite unparalleled in any kind of recent history. Well, perhaps if we exclude the antics of Lord Mandelson, that is.
What is of most interest, at this demeaning point, is to examine the complex psychological relationship that appears to have existed between Epstein and Andrew. The former duke seems to have wanted to impress the paedophile financier, and it has now come to light that, when Andrew was visiting China on a taxpayer-funded trip, ostensibly as a trade envoy, he was arranging meetings with young women. One of the former duke’s aides sent details and photographs over to Epstein.
Despite everything, Andrew is still eighth in line to the throne
It is increasingly clear to me that any value that was obtained from Mountbatten-Windsor’s ‘Air Miles Andy’ days was negligible. Instead, he seems to have spent most of his time either forwarding accounts of his antics over to Epstein or arranging assignations with actresses and models. A probe has now begun into details of whether Andrew passed over confidential details to the financier, which would presumably result in his being interviewed under caution by the police if it looks as if wrongdoing has occurred
Cavorting with actresses and models is, of course, in itself not illegal. Nevertheless, there is something profoundly distasteful about the way in which Andrew’s aide David Stern, for example, sent emails to Epstein enclosing a picture of one of these young women and saying ‘we have dinner on Sunday in Beijing with this p’. For the uninitiated, ‘p’ is urban slang for ‘pussy’: a grim example of the way that Epstein’s misogyny corrupted everyone around him, not least his royal acolyte.
The question now is what, if anything, the King can do about his brother. Even those who have been sceptical about whether Charles has been robust enough up until now acknowledge that his willingness to take action over the past few weeks has been impressive. Whether it’s throwing Andrew out of Royal Lodge in the middle of the night or releasing statements from Buckingham Palace testifying to his willingness to let the police into his home to cooperate with their inevitable investigation into his brother’s misdeeds in any way that he can, Charles has shown himself to be on the side of righteousness. Ironically, as his late mother’s reputation sinks – the £12 million payoff to Virginia Giuffre that Queen Elizabeth partially funded should never have taken place – so Charles’s is enhanced by his actions.
There remains one further step the King can take, and that is to remove Andrew from the line of succession altogether. He has already been stripped of his titles, his royal residence and any right that he has to associate with his family, so this seems an inevitable step. Despite everything, Andrew is still eighth in line to the throne, and anyone who has even the most cursory understanding of the situation would find it extraordinary that such action has not yet been taken.
Granted, it is exceptionally unlikely that Andrew would ever be called upon to take over the throne – if he did, we’d be in unimaginable trouble as a nation. But even the principle of keeping the former duke in the line of succession means that these latest, decidedly unpleasant revelations should embolden the King to scrub his brother’s name from the list. Posterity, and his country, will thank him for such a bold and decisive move.
Comments