The Grand Old Duke of York

Introduction

"Current affairs" can mean something else other than today's attention-grabbing and often calamitous world events.  

When placing slight emphasis on the noun, this alternative sense can stir images of exploitation and abuse.  In that eventuality, it also replaces politics and wars as the current news headlines - at least across the U.K.  

Reputation

There is substantial debate currently about the impact of Prince Andrew's behaviour on the reputation of the Royal Family.  The Prince is, not least, the brother of the King himself. 

Whatever is happening on the global stage, from climate change to wars and famine, both the place and reputation of the British Monarchy do matter.  In September 2022 King Charles III became not only the Head of State in the UK, but he is also Head of the Commonwealth comprising 56 countries, and he is Head of State in 14 of its independent nations (1).  His responsililities go further to include an important religious role, he being the Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

Constitutional experts play down the current exposure of the Monarchy to the adverse headlines by emphasising that Monarchial power as Head of State is "symbolic" rather than practical.  

Taking that interpretation as gospel, the symbolism of actions of members of the House of Windsor is the subject of increased public scrutiny.  One perhaps underappreciated aspect of this is that there is a "protocol" which prevents Parliament debating the affairs of the Royal Family, including its financial arrangements.  This, to outsiders, may help to explain the strongly deferential attitude of British politicians, press and general citizenry to its Royal Family.  They are the face of the U.K., symbolising its traditions, incorporating British values.

Six Years Ago

Prince Andrew's relationship with the American financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein (2) grabbed public headlines roughly six years ago.  Queen Elizabeth II was the Monarch then.  The story hit the fan in a spell-binding television interview which took place in Buckingham Palace in November 2019 conducted by Emily Maitlis.  The Prince denied any accusation of guilt or knowledge of meeting a young lady called Virginia Roberts Giuffré.  

In a subsequent civil lawsuit in a United States federal court, she had accused him of sexually assaulting her in the early 2000s when a 17 year old teenager.  Guiffre and Prince Andrew reached an out-of-court settlement in Feb 2022 with the case dismissed without going to trial.  The Prince paid an undisclosed sum to Giuffre without any admission of liability.

Reports of her death by suicide aged 41 in April this year thrust the matter back into the spotlight. 

As has the very recent publication of her memoir (3).  Among other things her book says that she had sex with Prince Andrew on three separate occasions; and that the third was on Epstein's island as part of what she called "an orgy" with Epstein and eight other young women (4). 

The deceased's co-author Amy Wallace told BBC Newsnight on 20 October, the date of its publication, that Prince Andrew should act on his undelivered willingness to assist investigators in the USA but was "never available, for some reason."  She also said that "Virginia wanted all the men who she had been trafficked to against her will to be held to account, and this is just one of the men...."

Wallace added that Epstein's jets "had been remodelled in order to afford many bedrooms - they were designed as flying trafficking agents, they were there to use girls in."

The broadcaster has recently re-broadcast the 2019 Maitlis interview with the Prince. They have also re-posted it on the BBC iPlayer (5).

As the public debate intensifies with new details being reported, ordinary people wonder if the Monarch disbelieves his brother's story and if he may have determined Prince Andrew's guilt in his relationship with Mr Epstein.  Or if the King's motivation is primarily driven by his compulsion to protect the Royal Family.  Or possibly motivated by both.

Either one or other could explain his rationale for punishing Prince Andrew by removal of some titles.  At the same time, judging by some of the public commentary, it appears that some citizens consider that the symbolic retirement of titles such as the Duke of York are insufficient to stem the public criticism; others argue that his allegedly free board and lodgings of a spacious (and familiarly named) Royal Lodge (6) mansion should be replaced with the fair payment of rental dues. 

Others, even allowing for the general deferential attitude to the Royal Household, might argue for sterner action.  

What does the alleged behaviour of Prince Andrew, if proven, symbolise about the Monarchy, what does it symbolise about the state of the U.K?

Unscientific survey - old pals act

Following the numerous news reports and criticisms of Prince Andrew, and considering the adequacy of these recent punishments, I bounced a couple of questions off two trusted friends, different people.

  1. Should Prince Andrew not be prosecuted in a Court of Justice for charges including rape?
  2. Is there one law in the UK for “commoners” (so-called) and another for the Royal Family?

One (a resident of England) replied saying that - 

Traitors gate would be the right place for him; £12m taxpayers money in the pay-off; How many women are dead because of this.

The other (a Northern Ireland resident) replied with - 

Hard to prove in court.  Anyway he is not too bright and maybe has been taken advantage of. 

My leg-pulling response to the latter was that his first sentence could have adopted a classic double entendre - it wouldn’t stand up in court.  More seriously, it was revealing that one reaction was to exact proper punishment, while the other offered sympathy to the alleged perpetrator.

The wider family - Duke of Sussex

At a time when the Royal Family is dealing with what sounds like an emerging crisis, some will ask what lessons, if any, have been learned from its contrasting approach in the earlier case of Prince Harry.  Is he regarded as an enfant terrible on some other basis?

No sleezy allegations have been made about him, he continues to operate as a Royal outside the House of Windsor's confines.  And this despite his recent diplomatic overtures for "reconciliation" to end the isolation.  He continues working for a range of charitable organisations.  It was only last month that, for example, Prince Harry as the Duke of Sussex donated £1.1m "from his own money" to the BBC Children in Need and a Nottingham project (7).

Matters arising

Questions arise apart from those raised about the adequacy or otherwise of current plans.  For example, 

  • on what basis is Andrew being punished, especially if his declaration of himself as not guilty of any offence is borne out?; 
  • why has it taken time for the Monarch to chide the allegedly recalcitrant Andrew?; 
  • were they hoping that there would be little or no public fuss or interest and that it would not become a national issue?  
  • since when was it acceptable for any UK resident to engage in activities - such as alleged sex abuse, trafficking, potential obstruction of justice, grooming etc - that are criminal acts when proven in a Court of Law?  
  • apart from these events being a bad look for the Monarchy, could the U.K be facing a constitutional crisis, given the King's position both the symbolically political and the religious, at the pinnacle of U.K. governance? and
  • in addition to the reputation of the Royal Family, should the legal system not be concerned about protecting the wider public interest?


© Michael McSorley 2025  

References

1. BBC News 22 Oct 2025 What does King Charles do and who else is in the Royal Family? https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy7e4q779wo

2. BBCNews 3 Jan2024 Who was Jeffrey Epstein? The disgraced financier with powerful associates  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48913377

3. Virginia Roberts Guiffré The Extraordinary Memoir co-author Amy Wallace 20 Oct 2025 https://amzn.eu/d/ai4ha23

4. BBC News 20 Oct 2025 Prince Andrew should share what he saw of Epstein abuse, co-author tells BBC  https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c201k3wd65yo

5. BBC BBC2 Newsnight Nov 2019 Prince Andrew and the Epstein Scandal 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000c1j4/newsnight-prince-andrew-the-epstein-scandal-the-newsnight-interview

6. Lóiste ríoga (as Gaeilge) - should the Belfast development receive a bilingual sign

7.BBC News 9 Sept 2025 Prince Harry donates £1.1m to Children in Need https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg2xknwyp7o

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gaza - be human

Image
U.K. criticises Israel The Government at Westminster has at long last condemned the war in Gaza as "intolerable."   More particularly, the U.K. Prime Minister declares that he is "horrified" by Israel's decision to escalate its military campaign, that Israel's decision to allow some aid in was "utterly inadequate;" with the Foreign Secretary adding that the situation in Gaza is "abominable."  The conflict in Gaza started after Hamas militants crossed into Israel on 7 Oct 2023 and killed 1200 people and taking another 251 people as hostages.  It has been described as "the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust (1)".  Israel's response has led to an estimated  53,000  or more Palestinians being killed in  consequent  attacks in Gaza, nearly a third of them children according to Gaza's health authorities.   In the aftermath of the U.K's widely heralded ceremonies to mark the 80th anniversary of VE Day, one wonder...
Read more

Warfare v Welfare

Image
Defence spending How can the U.K. afford to double its spending on "defence (1)" - fighter jets, military, and nuclear weapons - as America retreats from its role in world affairs (2)? And who could have forseen a Labour Government facing policy-driven opposition  from its own MPs  over plans to cut the "balooning" welfare spending bill (3)? In signing the Hague Declaration earlier in the same week, the Prime Minister said that the UK would buy American-made fighter jets.  This announcement signals the RAF's return to nuclear deterrence for the first time this century.  In so doing, it also raises pressing questions for Government at a time of further pressures on the public purse. Was any such committment about the projected degree of upscaling armaments articulated by the landslide-winning Labour Party in July 2024's General Election to the Westminster Parliament ?  Ambiguous references to Government's first committment of any Party being the security ...
Read more