And we don't have to pay any tax... dad.

[Ray B]

Now that Andy has been stripped of everything including the Winsor park house, I just hope this can now be put to bed.
It's getting a bit tiresome reading in the papers or on Radio/TV Andy, Andy ,Andy.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I'm pretty fed up with Andy but don't agree with some of the comments earlier.

First off while I generally go along with innocent until proven guilty I think the balance of probabilities is leaning heavily to guilty. He's a proven liar where Epstein is concerned. Claimed to have broken contact and then whoops a later email, we'll play again soon, emerges, for example. Says he's never even met Virginia, yet has his detectives investigating her, and then there's that photo. Ai didn't exist then and if it's faked there are clever forensic techniques that could prove it. So why haven't they been used? And who pays £12m, whoever sourced the cash, to someone they've never met? If it was me and I was innocent I'd have said bring it on, prove it, I'll show I'm innocent.

I think they have done the right thing, eventually, because I don't believe his behaviour is typical of the Royal family and they don't need the damage he brings. One bad apple etc. His mother and siblings put public duty before entitlement and I think were taken in by his protestations of innocence. I'm pleased they've seen the light and got rid.

Harry and Meghan might be advised to lie low now the cull has started.

[Ray B]

Merv, I have been playing the devil's advocate to provoke a certain person's response.

[oldbluefox]

He doesn't need any encouragement. Makes it up for himself

[david63]

There is perhaps another side to the Mr Andrew saga that has not had much publicity.

At the time of Andrew first encountering Epstein he was a highly successful trade envoy for the UK bringing millions of pounds worth of trade/investment into the country and Epstein was a significant influence in the American financial world.

It is without doubt that Andrew and/or his advisors (some of whom would have been senior members of the government of the time) made what appear in hindsight to be some bad decisions for reasons that we do not, and may never, know. Because of those decisions Andrew was drawn into a world that he could not extricate himself from without some potentially serious consequences for the UK economy.

I fully agree that there has been a considerable degree of naivety, possibly through arrogance, on Andrew's part in the handling of this situation possibly compounded by him being "thrown under the bus" by the authorities.

[towny44]

Does our resident republican not know that these sort of TV programmes are deliberately skewed so that they raise the hackles of the unwashed anti royalists, and their blood pressure.
Anyway despite Rachel from accounts failings, I am sure the civil servants running the treasury ensure that any tax concessions granted to the Monarchy are more than fully offset by the benefits the nation derives from the Crown Estate.

[Ray B]

On Laura Kuenssbergs show this morning one person made the point that there are a number of high profile people in the States connected with Epstein who have not been pursued and certainly not the way the media have hounded Andy.
Another suggested that in a few years time Andy could be in prison after losing the protection of Royal status after the FBI start to pursue Andy .
Now, not forgetting Andy has not cleared himself, could we as a country allow Andy, he is still technically a royal , to be banged up in an American jail. They are already glorifying bringing down a prince, to have a Royal banged up, would we allow this to happen?

[david63]

On Laura Kuenssbergs show this morning one person made the point that there are a number of high profile people in the States connected with Epstein who have not been pursued and certainly not the way the media have hounded Andy.

One of which is currently residing in the White House

Another suggested that in a few years time Andy could be in prison after losing the protection of Royal status after the FBI start to pursue Andy .
Now, not forgetting Andy has not cleared himself, could we as a country allow Andy, he is still technically a royal , to be banged up in an American jail. They are already glorifying bringing down a prince, to have a Royal banged up, would we allow this to happen?

I doubt that it will happen as first of all there would have to an extradition and then the speed at which the legal system operates, especially in the USA, followed by appeal after appeal it will take years.

[Onelife]

Does our resident republican not know that these sort of TV programmes are deliberately skewed so that they raise the hackles of the unwashed anti royalists, and their blood pressure.
Anyway despite Rachel from accounts failings, I am sure the civil servants running the treasury ensure that any tax concessions granted to the Monarchy are more than fully offset by the benefits the nation derives from the Crown Estate.

Hi John, with my blood pressure in the region of 135 - 75 and a heart rate generally below 60bpm (after doing 10 miles on the yellow peril) I can assure you that I’m not overly influenced by what I read through the media, which unlike you Royalists who keep believing everything the firm puts out about this archaic institution, then I would suggest you shouldn’t be worrying about my blood pressure but spend the time getting your heads examined.

Oh’ and while we are talking about what influence the media has on our health…we will now be subjected to an unprecedented Royal PR exercise meaning wall to wall coverage of how hard the Royals are working for the country

[Onelife]

There is perhaps another side to the Mr Andrew saga that has not had much publicity.

At the time of Andrew first encountering Epstein he was a highly successful trade envoy for the UK bringing millions of pounds worth of trade/investment into the country and Epstein was a significant influence in the American financial world.

It is without doubt that Andrew and/or his advisors (some of whom would have been senior members of the government of the time) made what appear in hindsight to be some bad decisions for reasons that we do not, and may never, know. Because of those decisions Andrew was drawn into a world that he could not extricate himself from without some potentially serious consequences for the UK economy.

I fully agree that there has been a considerable degree of naivety, possibly through arrogance, on Andrew's part in the handling of this situation possibly compounded by him being "thrown under the bus" by the authorities.

Are you sure about that David? It’s a long way back, but from what I can remember of his overseas trade activities, much of it was spent on the ski slops and basking in the sun on some Caribbean island’, hence the name Airmiles Andy.

[david63]

Are you sure about that David?

Yes - remember the aircraft deal between the Saudis and BAE?

but from what I can remember of his overseas trade activities, much of it was spent on the ski slops and basking in the sun on some Caribbean island’, hence the name Airmiles Andy.

That is what comes of believing what is printed in the press. I know for a fact that much, not necessarily all, of his flying was provided by owners of private aircraft so there was no cost to the taxpayer.

[Onelife]

No David, I didn’t remember it but having done a bit of research it would appear that he was part of the deal set up by the Thatcher government back in 1985. It would also appear that the brokering of the deal was steeped in controversy with bribes and corruption at every level of the deal…that being said I can’t imagine any Royal taking back handers, freebie holidays or using private jets to secure a deal can you?

[david63]

No David, I didn’t remember it but having done a bit of research it would appear that he was part of the deal set up by the Thatcher government back in 1985. It would also appear that the brokering of the deal was steeped in controversy with bribes and corruption at every level of the deal…that being said I can’t imagine any Royal taking back handers, freebie holidays or using private jets to secure a deal can you?

You have it wrong, the bribes were us bribing the Saudis.

The use of private jets by Mr Andrew is true (I know somebody that worked on the flights) as it is for other members of the Royal family

[Onelife]

No David, I didn’t remember it but having done a bit of research it would appear that he was part of the deal set up by the Thatcher government back in 1985. It would also appear that the brokering of the deal was steeped in controversy with bribes and corruption at every level of the deal…that being said I can’t imagine any Royal taking back handers, freebie holidays or using private jets to secure a deal can you?

You have it wrong, the bribes were us bribing the Saudis.

The use of private jets by Mr Andrew is true (I know somebody that worked on the flights) as it is for other members of the Royal family

Were there any knighthoods being dished out at around that time?

[oldbluefox]

Just for clarity the Monarch's power to decide disappeared in the 18th and 19th Century, as government by a cabinet of ministers headed by a prime minister developed.

[Onelife]

Just to let you know I’m thinking of cutting all ties with Harry and Meghan… rumour has it that the Royal pantomime is in such a state that they are begging Harry and Meghan to come back and make up the fab four again!

[oldbluefox]

Just to let you know I’m thinking of cutting all ties with Harry and Meghan… rumour has it that the Royal pantomime is in such a state that they are begging Harry and Meghan to come back and make up the fab four again!

Dreaming again. At your age late night Horlicks is not good for you

[david63]

Just to let you know I’m thinking of cutting all ties with Harry and Meghan… rumour has it that the Royal pantomime is in such a state that they are begging Harry and Meghan to come back and make up the fab four again!

I thought when I started reading this that OL was beginning to see sense but as I carried on reading I quickly realised that he was just hallucinating again!

[CaroleF]

I think Trump would be very hesitant about telling the King that Andrew should agree to travel to the States so he can be questioned by the FBI. I agree with what you're saying Foxy and David.

[Onelife]

WHATS THE MONARCHY FOR’

9pm tonight on BBC1

I do have a good idea about who it was (on this forum) who contradicted me stating the Monarchy have no political influence over Government decision making…listening to Daivd Dimbleby tonight… you were naïve.

[Mervyn and Trish]

After all you've said about the media lying suddenly......

[Onelife]

After all you've said about the media lying suddenly......

There are very few Media outlets that I would trust (Least of all the BBC over recent times) but I doubt many would disagree that David Dimbleby is one who commands much respect amongst his peers and wider public for impartial reporting.

If you think Tuesdays revelations were bad then next weeks program will have most Royalists squirming in their shoes.

[towny44]

You do realise that he is playing devil's advocate with his questioning. As regards the Prince of Wales, now King Charles letters to ministers, you obviously haven't picked up on their responses to his questions. They might all be sending polite responses to HM, but that is only to be expected, he is after all now King. But from all their comments they dont seem to treat his concerns with any more importance than those from the general public. Surely you have noticed that all the negative comments seem to be coming from varieties of personal secretaries. So far there is nothing to indicate that the Monarch has any more role in formulating govt. policy than any other lobbyist.

[Onelife]

You do realise that he is playing devil's advocate with his questioning. As regards the Prince of Wales, now King Charles letters to ministers, you obviously haven't picked up on their responses to his questions. They might all be sending polite responses to HM, but that is only to be expected, he is after all now King. But from all their comments they dont seem to treat his concerns with any more importance than those from the general public. Surely you have noticed that all the negative comments seem to be coming from varieties of personal secretaries. So far there is nothing to indicate that the Monarch has any more role in formulating govt. policy than any other lobbyist.

I do have a good idea about who it was (on this forum) who contradicted me stating the Monarchy have no political influence over Government decision making…listening to Daivd Dimbleby tonight… you were naïve.

[towny44]

You do realise that he is playing devil's advocate with his questioning. As regards the Prince of Wales, now King Charles letters to ministers, you obviously haven't picked up on their responses to his questions. They might all be sending polite responses to HM, but that is only to be expected, he is after all now King. But from all their comments they dont seem to treat his concerns with any more importance than those from the general public. Surely you have noticed that all the negative comments seem to be coming from varieties of personal secretaries. So far there is nothing to indicate that the Monarch has any more role in formulating govt. policy than any other lobbyist.

I do have a good idea about who it was (on this forum) who contradicted me stating the Monarchy have no political influence over Government decision making…listening to Daivd Dimbleby tonight… you were naïve.

Did you actually read my post, nowhere on that programme did any politician agree with your assumption that the Monarchy has any role in govt policy. In fact the Boris Johnson attempt to prologue parliament clearly illustrated that the Monarch has to do the bidding of parliament. I realise that republicans want the general public to believe that the Monarchy meddles in govt policy, because that suits their aims. Similarly they dislike the hereditary system and the wealth and privileges it brings, but most of the current working Royals work damned hard to promote the UK, and get involved in supporting countless charities. They certainly work a damned sight harder for their wealth and priviledges, than most offspring of self made millionnaires. Perhaps you republicans should switch your bickering to the likes of the Beckham brood, and their ilk.