Times: King Charles hopes to contain ‘unstable’ Prince Andrew in Norfolk

One of the funniest things about King Charles is that he’s never been a good “manager.” He dithers, he’s indecisive, he has terrible instincts when it comes to PR, messaging, and staffing. He’s been closely associated with child-predators too, he just hasn’t gotten blasted for it because Prince Andrew was literally part of Jeffrey Epstein’s human trafficker crew. Well, watching Charles deal with Andrew over the past three years (in particular) has been fascinating from a bad-managerial standpoint. Charles has shown little foresight into how Andrew’s relationships with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell would come back to haunt the monarchy. Charles has shown consistently that he does not care for any of the victims. And even in the past week, Charles’s damage control efforts have been absolutely pitiful. It’s painful to watch an unwieldy institution strike the wrong note, day after day. Speaking of, Charles and his courtiers gave a big exclusive to Roya Nikkhah at the Times this weekend, and wouldn’t you know, it’s all about how Charles feels he *must* go gently on Andrew because Andrew is “unstable.”

The King is allowing Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor to live on his Norfolk estate because he wants to “contain” him, and believes he has no option other than to provide for his “unstable” brother. The revelations detailing Andrew’s relationship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein prompted the King to immediately “remove him from the public gaze” by “accelerating” his eviction from Windsor to Norfolk.

A palace source said: “The King feels he has no other option than to provide for his brother, who will be privately funded on a private estate. Every time he’s tried to support himself by independent means, it has led to greater trouble. Containing him is the hope.”

Sources close to Charles said the revelations, which have emerged over the past week detailing Andrew’s relationship with Epstein, were “shocking and distressing”. Royal sources described the late Queen’s second son as “unstable”.

After stripping Andrew of his royal titles in October and forcing him to move to a smaller property, the King has pledged to fund Andrew indefinitely, using private funds. Andrew’s security is also paid for by Charles. The King provides his brother with a “modest stipend” from which Andrew covers his staff and living costs. Sources said speculation that Andrew was “sitting on a large source of funds from his late mother or the sale of former homes is wide of the mark”.

In February 2022 Andrew reached a multimillion-pound out-of-court settlement with Virginia Giuffre, who claimed she had been trafficked to Andrew by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell three times when she was 17, which he denies. It is understood he did not have adequate means to pay the settlement, which is thought to have been privately funded by Charles and the late Queen.

A friend of the King, 77, who was heckled about Andrew during a public engagement in Essex on Thursday, said he had expedited the move to Norfolk after being appalled by his brother’s continued daily rides around Windsor Great Park past waiting photographers and camera crews. The friend said: “The King is acutely aware of the public feeling. He doesn’t need to be heckled to understand the mood of the nation. Accelerating him [Andrew] out of Royal Lodge last was another nod to show he gets it. A plan made is not the same as a plan enacted, and the King wanted that plan enacted asap.”

“The King feels that keeping his brother out of the public gaze and away from any kind of public expense, is the right thing to do. Andrew is no longer a burden on the public purse and the King has done all he can to remove him from the public gaze, but the reality is he can’t remove him from the public consciousness.”

Andrew, who has made no comment since the latest release of Epstein files, is under mounting pressure to testify to the US Congress about his friendships with Epstein and Maxwell. It is believed the King feels it would be the right thing to do and royal sources have said it is “a matter for his conscience”. But most in royal circles concede that Andrew is unlikely to speak to the authorities, and is likely to be legally advised against it, given how badly he fared under questioning for Newsnight. Several of his statements in that interview regarding his closeness to Epstein, which he downplayed, and the length of their friendship, appear to have been contradicted by the newly released correspondence between the pair.

One tranche of documents suggest Andrew invited Epstein to dinner at Buckingham Palace in September 2010, promising “lots of privacy”, a month after Epstein emerged from a year of house arrest and probation after his jail sentence for procuring a girl under 18 for prostitution. Another set of files included photographs of Andrew kneeling on all fours over a woman lying on the floor, in what appears to be Epstein’s New York house. Andrew remains eighth in the line of succession and is still a counsellor of state – a member of the royal family who can carry out state duties on behalf of the monarch, if the sovereign is not available. Palace sources say there are no plans to remove him as a counsellor of state as he is unlikely to be called upon and it requires legislation.

[From The Times]

  A ‘source’ in Prince Harry’s camp insinuates that Tom Bower was Variety’s source

I’m intensely irritated by the palace labeling Andrew as “unstable.” This comes after weeks/months during which the palace centered Andrew’s mental health in their briefings too, saying that both King Charles and Prince William are super-worried about Andrew’s poor state of mind. All of it runs contrary to what we can see with our own eyes – that Andrew was out in Windsor, smiling and waving to people without a care in the world. And all of these “concerns” were never expressed about Virginia Giuffre, even when she died by suicide last year. The darkest part of me believes that the palace is actually trying to set something up to dispose of Andrew. But the cynical side of me believes that they’re fine with letting Andrew fester on the monarchy and this is all just Charles’s bad management and his refusal to simply step back and force Andrew to face some accountability.


Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.











(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *