UK - Prince Andrew accused of underage sexual relationship, 1999-2002 *settled* #2

  • #1,141
  • #1,142

'Andrew's move could be delayed until next yearpublished at 09:14
09:14'​


"It's not going to be an immediate move for Andrew Mountbatten Windsor from Royal Lodge to Sandringham, according to royal sources.

It will be "as soon as possible and practicable", but the process of giving notice, surrendering the lease and organising a move will take time, we're told.

There might also be thoughts that a delay stretching into the new year would avoid the embarrassment around Andrew being in Sandringham at Christmas.

It's been previously announced that he would be excluded from the traditional Royal Family gathering which takes place in Sandringham at Christmas, but that was when he was expected to be many miles away in Windsor.

It will be tricky if he's on the doorstep in Sandringham when the rest of his family are there too celebrating and walking to church together on Christmas morning, presumably without him.

It would look a little bleak against the Christmas spirit and sermons about no room at the inn.

Keeping him in Windsor until the new year might work both for him and the Palace.'

updates:
 
  • #1,143
  • #1,144
As the auditing continues, it seems likely that Prince Edward has been paying peppercorn rent (free loading) since 2007.

I bet Charles is having a fit over this ongoing auditing.

The cat is out of the bag now.

How can the Monarchy continue once the public knows the true cost of keeping these millionaires/billionaires in the lap of luxury?

 
  • #1,145
Andrew has not been charged with any crime.

If the King wants to keep him in a home on private property, that’s up to him & Andrew.

I do think that the other Royals are very aware that this anti Monarchist movement could affect them, so optics and getting off ‘public owned property’ is a must if they wish to keep the ball rolling.

My question is, once Charles dies, will William be willing to have his uncle stay onsite?
I agree the king can do what he likes in providing for his brother. It just seems to me that Charles is not doing enough because he is simply moving Andrew from one public home for the royal family to one private home also for the royal family. I don't see that as a negative consequence for Andrew. I get it that Andrew might have difficulty living away from Royal family properties due to security issues, but why doesn't Charles cut the strings entirely. That would be good optics IMO.
 
  • #1,146
As the auditing continues, it seems likely that Prince Edward has been paying peppercorn rent (free loading) since 2007.

I bet Charles is having a fit over this ongoing auditing.

The cat is out of the bag now.

How can the Monarchy continue once the public knows the true cost of keeping these millionaires/billionaires in the lap of luxury?

You mean Prince Andrew right?
ETA: Actually, just Andrew now :).
 
  • #1,147
  • #1,148
As the auditing continues, it seems likely that Prince Edward has been paying peppercorn rent (free loading) since 2007.

I bet Charles is having a fit over this ongoing auditing.

The cat is out of the bag now.

How can the Monarchy continue once the public knows the true cost of keeping these millionaires/billionaires in the lap of luxury?

The monarchy actually does not cost the taxpayer very much. They bring in a huge revenue which offsets many of the costs. The working royals do an enormous amount of work for charity and good causes . Other countries have Presidents who also have luxurious places to live and cost the country money.
 
  • #1,149
The monarchy actually does not cost the taxpayer very much. They bring in a huge revenue which offsets many of the costs. The working royals do an enormous amount of work for charity and good causes . Other countries have Presidents who also have luxurious places to live and cost the country money.

Sorry but I couldn’t disagree more.

They cost the taxpayers a ‘Kings ransom’.

That’s why Charles is running scared.

Tourists do not come to see the Royals.
 
Last edited:
  • #1,150
  • #1,151
  • #1,152
I have to leave this Thread. Now.

Some of my Best WS friends are here.
We may not agree on Royaltea. I am forbidden from Royal Threads.

But...

As The Four Tops soulfully sang:

I Can't Help Myself.


So, for Now. Ciao. And Keep the Red Flag Flying.


(All Just MOO) :)
 
  • #1,153
Tourists do not come to see the Royals, that’s a bunch of baloney.
Some do, e.g. to see Changing of the Guards, I mean from overseas.

Then there is tourism within the UK e.g. the loyal subjects heading to London for some event or other. Probably brings in a bit of money.

How many tourists come to see the Royals, I do not know, but definitely more than none.

JMO
 
  • #1,154
In the exchange, Epstein, who was released from prison in July 2009, suggests Andrew should meet former JP Morgan executive Staley in London in April 2010.

Andrew replied: "I would love to but sadly heading into the stans today and back via Kiev next Fri/Sat, so will miss him.

"But I will make sure I meet him soon on another trip.

"Also I have no immediate plans to drop by New York but I think I should at some stage soon.

"I'll look and see if I can make a couple of days before the summer. It would be good to catch up in person."



The lawsuit claims Staley had a close personal relationship with Epstein and that emails between the two "even suggest that Staley may have been involved in Epstein's sex-trafficking operation".

"That was fun. Say hi to Snow White," Staley emailed Epstein in July 2010, according to filings on Wednesday with the U.S. District Court in Manhattan.
"What character would you like next?" Epstein replied.
"Beauty and the Beast," Staley allegedly responded, to which Epstein replied: "Well one side is available," according to the filing.

 
  • #1,155
As the auditing continues, it seems likely that Prince Edward has been paying peppercorn rent (free loading) since 2007.

I bet Charles is having a fit over this ongoing auditing.

The cat is out of the bag now.

How can the Monarchy continue once the public knows the true cost of keeping these millionaires/billionaires in the lap of luxury?

That's if it is true tbh. I saw another article and that didn't suggest it was a peppercorn rate
 
  • #1,156
Sorry but I couldn’t disagree more.

They cost the taxpayers a ‘Kings ransom’.

That’s why Charles is running scared.

Tourists do not come to see the Royals.
Yes tourists do come to see the Royals
 
  • #1,157
The monarchy actually does not cost the taxpayer very much. They bring in a huge revenue which offsets many of the costs. The working royals do an enormous amount of work for charity and good causes . Other countries have Presidents who also have luxurious places to live and cost the country money.
Don't they cost each person like £1 a year ?
 
  • #1,158
Some do, e.g. to see Changing of the Guards, I mean from overseas.

Then there is tourism within the UK e.g. the loyal subjects heading to London for some event or other. Probably brings in a bit of money.

How many tourists come to see the Royals, I do not know, but definitely more than none.

JMO
Whenever there's a big event and the reporters go around the crowds it's full of tourists who have come for the occasion
 
  • #1,159

Gardens House​

Another option could be to rent Gardens House to the former prince. The building which once housed the estate’s head gardener was put on the market as a holiday let this summer. It has six bedrooms and already has one review which declares it to be “very well presented”.



Will he be paying rent though? I thought Charles was paying everything for him, as to not make locals pay for his living expenses.
 
  • #1,160
Was this the nail in the coffin, you'd imagine the legal eagles at the Mail saying were going to print this and the palace having a hissy.


 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
72
Guests online
1,699
Total visitors
1,771

Forum statistics

Threads
635,451
Messages
18,676,599
Members
243,239
Latest member
lisablairdo
Back
Top