Prince Andrew gives up royal titles

This is 100 percent the right call. This was certainly going to happen when William became king, so he probably decided to get it over with now.

So is he just Prince Andrew now? Or Andrew Windsor? Windsor-Mountbatten? Andy from the block?

These things are so confusing,

He must have received a nice settlement and promised to cease whatever business activities he's engaged in.

Has he given up the titles or just agreed not to use them?

Poor Fergie.

does he get to keep all the 🧸 teddy bears?

[QUOTE]He will remain a prince - but will cease to be the Duke of York, a title received from his mother, the late Queen Elizabeth

I guess this means he's still an HRH.

[quote]Poor Fergie.

I never got over the way she sang the national anthem at this NBA game.

Ah yes, a nation in which sex offenders are hounded out of public life, as opposed to another in which they are elected President.

R6 He lost the HRH in 2019.

How long until Fergie starts eating her feelings?

He’s a potentially dangerous asset, given that he could write a scathing tell-all about the royal family.

I would imagine he was given more than enough money to live comfortably somewhere far, far away from the palace.

he brought it all upon himself.

Only an act of Parliament can strip Prince Andrew of his HRH. He was born with it& he will die an HRH. He's not going to use it, just like Prince Harry (born an HRH).

I'm sad for Sarah. I have always liked her.

She will always be Duchess of York.

I wondered what happened behind the scenes. Andrew's notoriously arrogant; he won't have agreed to this without a fight. Charles doesn't seem like someone who'd want to rock the boat, although he and Andrew have reportedly never been close. Maybe William was the driving force. He seems more PR-savvy than Charles.

[quote] She will always be Duchess of York.

She is the people’s porkus.

[quote]She will always be Duchess of York.

In her mind, maybe. To the rest of us she's now plain Sarah Ferguson.

I bet that William had a big say in this.

Harry and Meghan must be quaking in their boots, they are next on his list.

I'm betting a big payout from Charles prompted this decision on Andrew's part.

Is there a new Duke of YorK?

[quote]To the rest of us she's now plain Sarah Ferguson.

Sarah, Plain and Tall.

Does that mean fergie can no longer go by the Duchess of York?

Sarah's days may be numbered, wasn't she diagnosed with melanoma a year or so ago?

[quote]Only an act of Parliament can strip Prince Andrew of his HRH. He was born with it& he will die an HRH. He's not going to use it, just like Prince Harry (born an HRH).

No, no, no. The monarch has FULL power over the use of the HRH honorific. Parliament has no say - it lies solely with the sitting monarch. They can give it, or take it away at will. It's called being the Fount of all Honour - look it up.

This day was a long time coming and frankly, necessary. Andrew can still remain as Royal Lodge, as long as he can continue to afford it. He can live out his life as a privileged private royal family member, as can Sarah. Just without titles, or public appearances.

He will still be present at family events, such as funerals and weddings, and at Christmas at Sandringham.

Fuck Fergie and her egg-cocked supreme friend Jeffrey.

She will now be known as...Her Grace, Sarah

[quote]Maybe William was the driving force.

He had to have a major say after: Andrew Lownie's biography, Andrew and Sarah openly revealed as lying about their last contacts with Epstein, and Andrew's pseudo-matey conduct with William at the recent Royal funeral. Plus strong hints about more to come about Epstein. Well might William have said to Charles, how much more of this can be tolerated?

To add to my post at r26, I wonder if part of the trade off here was to allow Beatrice and Eugenie to keep their HRHs, and continue their own semi-public roles as they have the past few years. Both princesses have made appearances at Royal Ascot, for example, and worked at the Buck Palace tea parties to meet/greet the public.

BBC is reporting that the York dukedom is not being stripped away from him, but is voluntarily being put "in abeyance" so won't be used again by him.

The upcoming book by the late Virginia Giuffre also allegedly played into this decision. It's being published next week - the pile-on of bad press was just too much. The damage would have extended to the King and broader Royal Family.

[quote]He will still be present at family events, such as...Christmas at Sandringham.

Not this year, when a precedence is likely to be set.

William might have played a role in getting Charles to agree to this as Charles is weak and ineffectual.

I think Harry will face some humiliation/deprivation as well after Charles kicks the bucket.

Sarah was kissing Epstein’s ass hard (figuratively) in the email in case she needed more money or favors in the future.

I'll wager you r32 that even if he and Sarah aren't present this year, they will be in future years. He's still a member of the Family and Christmas is a private family holiday, not an official event.

Agreed r33.

And yes, HRH Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie should rightfully retain their titles.

They are the daughters of a prince and they were grandchildren of the sovereign at the time of their birth and as a birthright, they are entitled to HRH princesses.

Lady Sarah Ferguson.

She will never be plain ol' Sarah

It is now time to remove Harry and Markle's titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

He should be know only as Prince Harry, and she can be plain, mundane Meghan Markle.

I read the Lownie book on the Yorks. I was, at first, sympathetic to Sarah but as the book goes on, you realize she is really quite a monster: a behind-the scenes, full-of-herself diva, and a shameless, repeat-offender griftress. She stiffed many charitable organizations and kept donations for herself, including those intended to help the sick, orphaned children, whom she pretended to champion. Just despicable. Andrew, too, is utterly awful: stupid, arrogant, pervy, and 100% shady.

Will people still buy her books without the Duchess Of York on the cover? Does this mean that nobody has to curtsy to her anymore?

So many questions?

[quote]It is now time to remove Harry and Markle's titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Agreed, but I'd wager it will be William who will do that, and not Charles. The latter won't stomach doing that to his son, who he seems keen to forgive for nearly anything.

No and no, r40. No one has curtsied to her since her divorce anyway.

Fergie is a common grifter who lied when she said she cut ties with Epstein, she emailed him soon after begging to be lept in his good graces. She's a vile enabler of her ex-husband, always on the prowl for a payout.

I swear some of you would swoon like idiots over Adolf Hitler if he had a royal title.

No one has "had" to curtsy to Sarah Ferguson since she lost her HRH with the divorce almost 30 years ago.

[quote]Agreed, but I'd wager it will be William who will do that, and not Charles. The latter won't stomach doing that to his son, who he seems keen to forgive for nearly anything.

R41. Agree, but it would be perfect if Charles would do it now in one feel swoop. End these titles for Harry and Markle--and those of the invisible children. Rip off the band aid now.

R42 we all know what Fergie is like, we are taking the piss. Try getting a sense of humour.

Sarah, Duchess of York will remain in my heart and head.

I like her, always have.

[quote] Does that mean Fergie can no longer go by the Duchess of York?

You didn't even bother to read the original post, which wasn't even long.

Fasten your seatbelts Harry and Meghan, changes are coming!

Just heard Lownie interviewed on the BBC: he said he himself knows more about Andrew than he's yet to reveal, which might go into the paperback of his biography; and that it's very likely others know plenty more which is likely to emerge. This at the moment could just be pariah-lite for Andrew.

Prince Andrew STRIPPED

[quote]He’s a potentially dangerous asset, given that he could write a scathing tell-all about the royal family.

I assume he wants to lie low, r11.

They had to strip Andrew's titles first to prevent Harry and Meghan shrieking any 'whataboutism' when their titles are sent to the guillotine as well. Stay tuned!

Royal Family drama is the best!

They are also doing this in advance of the (eventually) to be released Epstein files. Congressman Thomas Massey read out loud the names and er titles of several me of the clients identities that had been disclosed closed to members of congress (though greatly redacted) Among the identities listed were a couple of billionaires (named), a particular individual of highest U.S. political office, and one “Royal”. As soon as that New Democrat representative is sworn in they will move to get the complete unredacted Epstein client list.

I don't think so, R23.

This has nothing to do with Harry and Meghan. It has to do with Prince Andrew's ties to Jeffeey Epstein and the very credible evidence that he raped a minor employed by Epstein. Andrew has done more damage to the modern monarchy than the two of them, Diana, Charles, Camilla, Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson combined. NONE of those people were ever accused of any crime at all, let alone one so vile, deviant and disgusting.

He'll always be Randy Andy to me!

That was my thought, too, r54.

Charles is trying to get out front of the Epstein drop

Fergie and Meghan Markle strike me the same way — as opportunists with a nose for money. Fergie with Epstein and Meghan with the sexual molester Tyler Perry. Money wins every time.

[QUOTE]even if he and Sarah aren't present this year, they will be in future years. He's still a member of the Family and Christmas is a private family holiday, not an official event.

Christmas at Sandringham involves the family walk to church, so it's semi-official. Given how he and Sarah behaved for the cameras at the Duchess of Kent's funeral, chatting up other members of the family who clearly looked uncomfortable, and then cheerfully laughing and smiling? They are not up to the task, not this year or any future year. They lack the self awareness or humility.

And, honestly, who in the family now would be comfortable having Andrew around at Christmas lunch for a few hours? If I were him or Fergie, I'd expect polite ostracism and decline. Would YOU want Andrew at your Christmas festivities?

Sarah has had.more challenges in her life than a person should ever have to bear. She’s the victim in this story.

I bet William and Kate don’t want him anywhere near their children.

As the well-born say, and as the well-born inevitably consider themselves when they fuck ip royally, right r61?

I hear Andy is now selling cars at Carmax of the Jersey Turnpike. Go see him

That was how I felt about her, too, R61. However, Lownie's book documents scam after scam committed by Sarah for her own benefit. Her childhood sounded pretty terrible but that just doesn't excuse SO MUCH selfish and unethical behavior.

[quote] I bet William and Kate don’t want him anywhere near their children.

In an excerpt from Giuffre's book she says Andrew and some other sleezebags were guessing how old she was. Andrew was the only one who got it right (17).

He said, "you're just a little older than my daughters." Then they had sex.

He's a spoiled, obnoxious and rotten cunt. He should be dragged by the balls before the courts.

[quote] How can you sex traffic someone who was already slinging pussy ?

Here we go again:

“Trafficking in persons” and “human trafficking” are umbrella terms—often used interchangeably—to refer to a crime whereby traffickers exploit and profit at the expense of adults or children by compelling them to perform labor or engage in commercial sex. When a person younger than 18 is used to perform a commercial sex act, it is a crime regardless of whether there is any force, fraud, or coercion involved.

Seems like a dumb overly explicit thing. They were better just letting him quietly disappear, officially whatever but in reality a disgraced prince playing no real role in public life, hopefully forgotten as much as possible.

But I guess people can't resist the big stupid gesture.

He raped a 17yo prostitute. Which means he had sex with her so it's rape because she was underage in USA. Thems the rules.

That said, statutory rape of a 17 yo prostitute is hardly an earth-changing event. Also I doubt Prince Andrew has any idea about the actions and people he is not entitled to abuse. That's not an apology for him.

R71, from what I understand, in all three of the jurisdictions which Virginia Giuffre alleged she had sex with Andrew, she was above the age of consent.

Actually, not everywhere in the U.S. r71. A lot of states have 16 and 17 age of consent. Which doesn't mean it's all fine, but it does indicate how arbitrary a lot of this is, and how there is no absolute OMG nobody must ever ... is largely a big, dumb, myth that most people don't really abide by or care about until it becomes an issue for other reasons. It's like the whole "transported across state lines" thing. Largely arbitrary and meaningless until somebody decides to give a fuck for whatever reason. It's mostly a legal game, until it isn't.

Which isn't to say that Prince Andrew is some great guy who didn't purposely do something wrong. It's just that being a "criminal" is a different standard and doesn't often make sense in some abstract sense.

Andrew hasn't given up any titles. He's still the Duke of York but he has agreed not to use the title.

A small part of me kind of feels sorry for Fergie. She’s a fucking grifter of the highest order, and losing the title “Duchess of York” makes her never ending pursuit of benefactors so much harder. Now she’s just another broke bitch reliant on her children for handouts.

York now joins Windsor as a damaged Royal Duchy.

I hope William holds it to bestow on CHARLOTTE, as a Duchess in her own right.

Make Louis Duke of Windsor, now. Both restore dignity. Charlotte needs to be elevated, before marriage, and before the current Princess royal dies.

This is the right step, and it had to happen since the revelations about Andrew and Fergie kept coming. Andrew up until now refused to live in a more modest style, and now he's got to do so. All these steps would never have happened under his mother's reign, though, but she wasn't going to live forever.

I agree that some sort of buyout was involved in all of this. Charles has tried to pressure Andrew to move out of Royal Lodge for a long time because the costs of keeping up Royal Lodge are insane, and since Andrew is no longer a working royal, they're not getting any bang for their buck whatsoever (believe it or not, the BRF probably IS getting their money's worth keeping Bagshot open for Edward and Sophie and Gatcombe for Anne, given how much work they do for the family). I assume Andrew will live in a much more modest house but will have enough money to be able to retain servants.

I feel little sympathy at this point for Fergie, since she's been consistently complicit in all this. She's lived her entire life off her failed marriage, and she still has diamonds a-plenty to sell from that if she hasn't sold them already (QE2 and Prince Philip gave her a diamond tiara for her wedding, and she got it in the dirvorce arrangement). Plus her daughters married rich men and they can help her.

As for Harry and Meghan: I agree that it is phenomenally unlikely Charles would ever ask them to relinquish their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex, but William likely will when he's the king if given half a reason to do so. The line will now be that if you want the titles and big houses, you've got play ball with the monarchy and not try to make money in other ways that take advantage of your title.

[quote]not try to make money in other ways that take advantage of your title.

Like the Prince of Wales fund?

And they thought WE were awful. I never in all my life...

Yes R74/ He has placed his titles in abeyance. Basically, he is still the legal holder of the titles of Prince and Duke of York but no longer has access to them.

It probably won't happen until William becomes King but the BRF should take this opportunity and follow Denmark and Sweden's example and strip all non-working royals of titles (this would include Beatrice and Eugenie) to minimize potential scandals.

Interestingly, when Harry and Meghan decided to leave, it's well documented that both Philip and William wanted Harry to be forced to put his titles into abeyance but the Queen and Charles didn't want to seem harsh. At the time they didn't believe Harry would stab them in the back. Honestly think it's one of the late Queen's few misjudgments.

[quote] in all three of the jurisdictions which Virginia Giuffre alleged she had sex with Andrew, she was above the age of consent.

This is a FEDERAL statute, not the same thing as a state's age of consent.

*sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such an act has not attained 18 years of age;

[quote] That said, statutory rape of a 17 yo prostitute is hardly an earth-changing event. Also I doubt Prince Andrew has any idea about the actions and people he is not entitled to abuse. That's not an apology for him.

Sure sounds like it.

He is still officially the Prince Andrew. The Palace announced back in 2022 he agreed to give up public use of the HRH honorific, although he still retains it for private use--I doubt that will change.

What's he given up this time are the titles of Duke of York, Earl of Inverness (his Scottish title), and Baron Killyeagh (his Northern Irish title), plus his honors, including his knighthoods as a Royal Knight Companion of the Order of the Grater, and a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order.

There's more to life than a little underage island pussy, ya know. Don't cha know that? And here ya are. And it's a beautiful day.

Well. I just don't understand it.

R83, he hasn't given those titles up, he has simply stated that he will be longer use them. They are still his titles.

[quote] Plus her daughters married rich men

Beatrice’s Edo.

Charles has been stealing money and acting horribly for years but has been extremely protected by the palace for decades because he was the future king. This is not a nice person and I have no idea why people consider him so. (an environmentalist who is as concerned about the environment as when he is in his private planes. The DiCaprio sort) He can't be ruthless with Andrew and Harry though he has every right to be because he is in a very delicate situation. I'm sure Andrew and Harry have plenty to say about his foibles so he treats them with kid gloves while people claim the king is an old softie. Not true. Just scared.

[quote] Royal Knight Companion of the Order of the Grater

Well he is grating certainly.

[quote]That said, statutory rape of a 17 yo prostitute is hardly an earth-changing event. Also I doubt Prince Andrew has any idea about the actions and people he is not entitled to abuse. That's not an apology for him.

Then what is it, r71? At the very least you're giving him the benefit of the doubt.

When I scanned the subject title I thought it said he gave up “royal titties.” I guess it means the same thing.

So Virginia is given11 million pounds. What is that in dollars? Then writes an autobio then kills herself That makes as much sense as Epstein alone in a prison cell, the video cameras not working and the two guards happen to be taking 40 winks at the same time. Then the warden of the prison is given a promotion and is moved. The funniest things happen.

I'm sure Sarah has a home and a fortune for life.

It was a way to keep the York Princesses Yorkies, It would take an act of the king and parliament to remove a birthright prince.

Does he have to return the corgies?

I bet the deal is he agreed to this (and who knows what else) and in exchange he gets to keep the house he won't vacate. Royal Lodge?

I’ve long maintained Epstein is a (horrible) smokescreen but the real story is the millions he received from shady regimes as a roving trade ambassador.

Releasing news late on a Friday evening used to be an attempt to get ahead of a big story / scandal in one of the Sunday tabloids..

Fergie is the ultimate example of someone who got everything she ever wanted and proceeded to fuck it up. Growing up, she was fascinated with royalty, particularly Queen Victoria. She found her way into Diana's circle and managed to bag not just any member of the royal family, but the Queen's second son (who was, at the time, considered a real catch). She became a princess, was initially pretty popular with the public, grew pally with the Queen herself (who was reportedly very fond of her at first) and gave birth to the descendants of Victoria.

When it all went sour, she clung on for dear life. I honestly think the reason she and Andrew continued to live together for so long after their divorce is that she point-blank refused to move out, and he couldn't force her because she had a lot of dirt on him. The Queen became disillusioned with her (to say the least), yet she kept accompanying Beatrice and Eugenie when they visited their granny, even when they were grown women. The Queen was too polite to tell her to leave, but Philip would actively make himself scarce when he knew Fergie was coming round. She still talked to the press as though nothing had changed since the 80s, telling them Andrew was still "my handsome prince". She just carried on with the fantasy that she was still married to a prince, still a beloved daughter-in-law of the Queen, still popular with the public. She even kept acting as though she and Diana had remained BFFs until her death (in truth, they hadn't spoken for two years before Paris). She said it wasn't right that she wasn't invited to William's wedding because "Diana couldn't be there either".

She admitted she contacted the writers of The Crown to "advise" them on how to portray her. In the end, her character never even spoke onscreen. And now she's lost the title of duchess after nearly forty years.

[quote]Charles has been stealing money and acting horribly for years but has been extremely protected by the palace for decades because he was the future king.

None of those children with the possible exception of Anne are good human beings. But the Queen and Phillip never seemed like overly loving or caring parents to begin with. Liz makes Beth Jarrett seem like Marie Osmond.

William and Harry clearly take after Diana. She always presented herself with the utmost grace and dignity and was a shining example of how to conduct yourself in public with good morals.

Glad William if rectifying the mistakes of the past and putting good morals ahead of tired traditions. Maybe the Monarchy will finally be classy again.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R14 Sarah Ferguson ceased being known as the Duchess of York when she divorced Prince Andrew in 1996. Since then she's been known as Sarah, Duchess of York, as his ex-wife. Now she's back to being Sarah Ferguson again.

R75 Sarah hasn't been "The Duchess of York" since her divorce in 1996. As the ex-wife of the Duke of York she was known as "Sarah, Duchess of York", no matter what she chose to call herself.

[quote]That said, statutory rape of a 17 yo prostitute is hardly an earth-changing event

Tell that to Virginia Giuffre you callous fucking ghoul.

Oh wait, she killed herself over this "hardly an earth-shattering event." Maybe you could pass it on to her three children.

[quote] I guess this means he's still an HRH.

That’s right, he’s still an HRH, but he will no longer use it, nor the title the Duke Of York.

But he can still love off the gubbermint teet.

Shame The Windsors is probably over for good. You just know they would have been savage about Andrew and Fergie becoming commoners again. But Haydn Gwynne was perfect as Camilla. I can't see them recasting her. Plus, they might be skittish about mocking the royals after all the health problems they've had over the last few years.

R106, it appears the portrayal of Fergie in The Windsors was not too far off the mark.

By having the title but not 'using' it does this mean Andy's business cards and letterheads must read only 'Prince' Andrew, like some pathetic Eurotrash who buys Prince titles like they're baubles from Bimini?

r104, he's not an HRH if his brother has said he no longer is. It's the monarch's right to add/remove the HRH honorific at will. This was posted upthread. Charles doesn't even need a Letters Patent to accomplish this, he just needs to tell Andrew he's no longer an HRH, and that's it.

Andrew has some kind of airtight lease on Royal Lodge, which is why Charles has been unable to dislodge him from there, so far. There are enormous upkeep costs involved, but somehow Andrew has managed to do the bare minimum to stay put (probably help from his daughters and in-laws). As long as Andrew can barely afford to live there, the lease has to be honored.

[quote]So is he just Prince Andrew now? Or Andrew Windsor? Windsor-Mountbatten? Andy from the block?

Just Andrew. The one and only.

[quote] Andrew has some kind of airtight lease on Royal Lodge, which is why Charles has been unable to dislodge him from there

Royal Dis-lodge!

[quote] I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first.

Sure, Jan.

NYT has the tea:

“After the two brothers consulted, Andrew acted preemptively.”

Not “decided.” “Forced”.

They’re coming for you Meghan Markle. And I shall wear my brooch on the day they do.

R109, in Andrew’s statement, he said he will no longer use his honours on, not that Charles has officially taken them away. It was a very carefully worded statement.

[quote] l"With His Majesty's agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

But has he given up the royal tittays?

I don’t think Harry is next. His betrayal was personal. Exile and loss of the use of HRH is punishment enough.

Andrew betrayed the public as well as the family.

I suspect he was given an ultimatum—give up Royal Lodge or lose the title. He chose wisely.

Agree r117. Tell me the crime that Harry and Meghan have committed. I get why people don't like them, and I can really see the resentment. But talking shit about the BRF on Oprah is not in fact a crime, as much as some DLers would like it to be.

I want to know if Charles is going to allow him and Sarah to stay in Royal Lodge. From what I've read they're not taking care of the place and I've seen a few recent photos that show lots of big areas of paint in the outside that have just fallen off.

He apparently has an ironclad lease. His use of the Lodge is not at the King’s pleasure. If it were, he’d be long gone.

[quote] Prince Andrew made major royal news on Friday, October 17, when he finally decided to give up his Duke of York title following the growing accusations and his involvement with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. However, the disgraced prince reportedly doesn't have any plans to move out of his Windsor home, Royal Lodge.

[quote]Despite receiving pressure from his brother King Charles for over a year to leave the residence, BBC royal correspondent Sean Coughlan reports that Andrew is expected to stay in the Royal Lodge.

[quote] "The royals are being decisive after months of scandal," Coughlan said. "Prince Andrew's loss of the use of his titles is taking immediate effect. But he is still expected to stay in his Windsor home, Royal Lodge, on which he has his own private lease which runs until 2078."

[quote] Last year, the tensions over the residence reached a boiling point when Charles attempted to evict Andrew from the 31-room estate by cutting off his private security and allowance. Andrew, however, reportedly found the funds to remain living on the property, per Keeper of the Privy Purse Sir Michael Stevens.

What good is a title if you're forbidden from using it?

He lost his titles. Arguing otherwise is ridiculous hairsplitting for dick-riding Royalists. The rest of the world knows he lost his titles, and rightly so.

Andrew's ironclad lease on Royal Lodge is his 75-year lease as long as he maintains the upkeep of the place, which is no small expense.

Andrew does not still have the full 75 years since he's been living at Royal Lodge for many years. But the lease has enough years still on it to last him until his death. But does he have enough money to pay for the upkeep for many years to come?

And no, they cannot nor will they just toss Sarah out. Whatever the arrangement, Andrew and Sarah are a couple, friends, lovers, companions, whatever, etc. Call the relationship what you will, but they are not going to leave Sarah, mother of two royal princesses, four grandchildren, without a home. Andrew and Sarah may eventually give up Royal Lodge, but another more modest royal home will be bestowed upon them.

[quote]Shame The Windsors is probably over for good.

When one women's quest to hold onto her title at all costs takes precedence over everything else.....

This is not William's fault. Or throwing Harry and Meghan into the mix as usual.

The Queen should have stepped down a good twenty years prior and allowed Charles the throne while working behind the scenes to patch her fractured family up. Harry could have gotten the help he so clearly needed for starters. Andrew's mess could have been dealt with before it reached a public breaking point. It's embarrassing that she let things get so out of control, but pride and ego go before the fall.

William is left with a mess.

I think we would all envy that "mess." There is actually no good reason for Britain to abandon one of the few things that makes them internationally interesting as a country. It's fine. Prince William will become King William and there is no reason to panic about what Elizabeth should or should not have done a hundred years ago. Nobody gives a fuck except a few aging obsessives, and the monarchy is not in any real danger.

R125, I think affection for the Queen is a large part of what kept the British monarchy going through the twenty-first century. I don't think her abdicating in favour of Charles would have been a popular decision in the 2000s.

Didn’t Sarah just sell a big pile in Central London?

I hope Sarah's eventual grave stone acknowledges her as Duchess of York. Queen Elizabeth supposedly promised Sarah a gravesite at Royal Burial Ground, Frogmore, near the very grand Frogmore House (not to be confused with the more modest Frogmore Cottage) .

The Duke and Duchess of Windsor, formerly Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, are also interred at Royal Burial Grounds, Frogmore.

R125, The Windsors is a parody show of the British royal family.

The big problem is when you start fucking around with the underlying concept of "titles for life" you start to fuck with the whole damn system. I think Fergie could keep using the damn title and she'd be more in the spirit of the whole thing than some goober at Buckingham Palace blathering about some chart or some letters patent or any other nonsense.

He only did this now because he's victim's book is about to be posthumously released.

The 16 MILLION pounds only bought her silence temporarily. She was always going to put out a book 18 to 24 months after he paid her that giant settlement.

She had EXCELLENT attorneys

Andrew did this now so that the press will go easy on him and the royal family.

Dershowitz must be plotzing

[quote]Releasing news late on a Friday evening used to be an attempt to get ahead of a big story / scandal in one of the Sunday tabloids..

It still is. Here's the real story

Dershowitz joined the cult. He'll be fine.

Good riddance to him.

As for etiquette, Fergie is The Princess Andrew.

[quote] I think Fergie could keep using the damn title

R131. I agree. Andrew fucked up her life. So big deal, she wrote an email to Epstein in 2011.

PRINCE ANDREW BANISHED! Andrew gives up ALL royal titles before Virginia Giuffre’s book is released next week.

A statement was released from Buckingham Palace.

Prince Andrew has announced he has given up all his royal titles, including those of Prince, and Duke of York.

“In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family,” Andrew said in an official statement by Buckingham Palace. The shocking move comes a few days before Virginia Giuffre‘s posthumous memoir is released next week, which includes claims alleging Andrew viewed sleeping with her as his “birthright” when she was just 17 years old.

Andrew’s statement continued: “I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life. “With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me. “As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

It’s believed the decision was made alongside both Charles, Prince William and other members of the royal family. The decision means his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson will also lose her title as Duchess of York, although Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie will keep theirs.

Andrew first stepped back from royal duties in 2019, He has always denied Virginia’s accusations that she had sex with Andrew on three separate occasions. She sued him but they settled out of court with an admission of no guilt.

Virginia, 41, took her own life in April. Her book Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir Of Surviving Abuse And Fighting For Justice is due to be released next week. Before she died earlier this year, she sent an email to her co-author, journalist Amy Wallace, saying that she wanted the book to be released “even in the event of my passing.”

They covered for him - or looked away - for far too long. NOW we learn about what a pompous and demanding asshole he was on tours. How he just loved to party - which we now know with Epstein went too far.

He was Elizabeth's favorite - and he typified the 80s young rich preppie with charm and no care for anyone else.

Fuck him. And that ginger ex-wife is just as bad.

[quote] As for etiquette, Fergie is The Princess Andrew.

She is no longer married to him, so she cannot use that title.

She is just Sarah Ferguson now.

Can’t Sarah make up a title like the Queen Mother did?

[quote] She is no longer married to him, so she cannot use that title.

Prince Andrew gives up royal titties

reading between the lines., this is less about pushy and more about the money PA received from Epstein for access to the royal family

Just to clarify...

The titles are in abeyance, meaning they are still Andrew's and Sarah's titles, but Andrew has agreed not to use them, which means Sarah cannot use her title because British royal titles go through the male line. They were not "stripped" of their titles, but in essence, the titles go quietly into "storage." "Stripping" Andrew of his titles would be reserved as an act of Parliament. However, on the other hand, agreeing to "abeyance" means that Charles can avoid making a formal request of Parliament in which the UK governing body would have to vote on the matter, a longer and more public damaging process.

No, R126, Sarah Ferguson hasn't been "Duchess of York" since 1996 - i.e. almost 30 years ago. As her ex-husband is no longer the Duke of York, why would she be buried as anything other than "Sarah Ferguson"? She's a crook. A grifter who has been trying to monetise her former royal title and style since her divorce.

Apologies R126 - that was meant for R129, not you.

When women who have previously been married to men with titles are either widowed or divorced, they are newly styled as FirstName, TitleOfFormerHusband.

Hence "Sarah, Duchess of York", or "Diana, Princess of Wales". It keeps things simple as so many of the British aristocracy divorce so regularly.

How old is he? 70-something?

Who gives a fuck, at this point?

He’s lived the majority of his life in absolute & complete privilege, due to popping out of the birth canal of a woman who was the Queen of England, & therein lies the irony of it all.

No big loss to any of us, however, MOST certainly, no big loss to him, either.

He placed his bets, & because he’s now an old man, he won every single bet he took, & that’s the truth of the matter, isn’t it?

Sarah will have to remarry Andrew, and then she will be Princess Andrew, since Andrew's princely title is still active. Maybe even be HRH Princess Andrew...just like HRH Princess Michael of Kent.

It’s humorous that you actually “dime” out Sarah Ferguson’s future, R150.

She should establish residency in the U.S., become a staunch MAGA, & let the cash flow into her bank accounts.

It’s the easiest grift available for those who haven’t scruples or dignity.

It's a funny situation. There are two ways to go with royal titles: either they are nothing and silly and nobody cares or should care. Or they are these things that people have through birth or marriage and nobody can really change that. This attempt to make them some legalistic thing that people can give and withdraw just doesn't work. In other words, Fergie is still the Duchess of York if you ever cared about it at all. Or it was all false from start to finish. But you really can't do both.

For a moment put aside that Andrew treated Sarah poorly and was neve home due to his naval duties when they first married. Much of this situation stemmed from when Andrew and Sarah got divorced. Sarah and her lawyers did not fight for a big settlement. Sarah was never going to get as much as Diana, but she could have gotten more than the paltry sum she got.

Royal and semi-royal women are frowned upon if they work, but Sarah had to work once she got divorced, and all she could do was go from one public job to another, none of which paid enough. She spent her formative years when she should have been gaining work experience being royal unable to work and being a mother. Perhaps Sarah would not have lived wisely or spent a possible large divorce settlement money prudently, but maybe it would have allowed her to hire a financial manger and keep her on a short leash. As it turned out, she was just making enough money (or not) to barely get by even though she was royal and then royal adjacent. Yes, her lifestyle is expensive. No one in her place is simply going to get a flat in London and to to pay rent.

As a result, she spent her life just getting by, beating herself up and scraping by to get back into the royal family. Fortunately and ironically, in recent years, Sarah has been the breadwinner in the York household making some good hard cash as a romance novel author--and as a result, she is no longer in desperate financial trouble. But early after the divorce, Sarah only appeared independent, but she was still quite dependent on the bum Andrew. And it all started with a shitty divorce settlement. It can wear a girl down.

This is all so unfortunate. In the past several years, Sarah had really made great strides in getting back into the good graces of the royal fold. It's really all she ever wanted.

Her life today seems to be so much more balanced and calm. All the bullshit she gets criticized for happened many years ago. Oh yes, she made some bad mistakes and poor choices, but that was a lifetime ago. Her life now and for the past several years has been fine. It' simpler, she's not out looking for money, her daughters are grown with families of their own. And now she's losing her status once again for yes, mistakes she made long ago and for the behavior of her awful former husband. You can't absolve Sarah totally, but Andrew has made Sarah's life fucking hell.

And yet she has persevered. But this is a blow at this stage in life.

^^^^She sucked up to a human trafficker and rapist after claiming she cut ties with him. Your fawning sympathy is disgusting.

R131 is a perfect example of someone who knows nothing about a topic, talking out of their arse.

Sarah Ferguson was styled as "HRH The Duchess of York" from her wedding day until she and her ex-husband were divorced in 1996. From that day - 29 years ago - she was styled as "Sarah, Duchess of York" as the ex-wife of a royal duke, no matter what she chose to call herself.

As of yesterday she is plain old Sarah Ferguson. Emphasis on the "plain".

You don't get it at all r156. These things are about blood and marriage, or they aren't about anything at all. You are trapped in a bureaucratic mindset. That is what is happening here. You can decide the whole thing is nonsense, but you can't decide it matters but it's also a bureaucratic category. Both can't be true.

You mean stripped of Royal titles. Meanwhile Dump is POTUS.

R157 yes, I don't get it. I've read your post three times now and I still have no fucking idea what it is that you are tempting to communicate.

I'm saying that Prince Andrew is a prince by birth, and also Duke of York, which really was a thing that happened because he was the second son. And Fergie is his duchess because she married him, and really that's kind of it. Even with the divorce, she has this title cause that's how royalty and marriage works. Really. She got this thing when she married him, and since there is no other Duchess of York now, she gets to keep it.

[quote] You're correct on that too-Sarah could do that& be known as Princess Andrew or HRH Princess Andrew. like the Princess Michael woman.

No, she could not do that. S

She negotiated to still be known as "the Duchess of the York," which was not hers automatically to retain, in the divorce settlement--she had to be specially granted that right by the Queen; otherwise she would then have been known simply as Sarah Ferguson (or at most, "Sarah Mountbatten-Windsor") after the divorce.

Since she is no longer married to Prince Andrew, and she did not negotiate for the title of "The Princess Andrew" in her divorce, she absolutely cannot call herself The Princess Andrew now, She would have had to have asked for that right in the divorce settlement.

No R161, you couldn't be more wrong. But you do you, bless your heart.

r161:

[quote] His ex-wife will be known as Sarah Ferguson and no longer Duchess of York, but their daughters will continue to have the title of princess.

Historically, it is how it works. Divorce of course being a minor, and really impossible blip in the scheme of things. We're just all going to have to assume this is a "separation" or blow up the whole thing.

And really, these two belong together, so let's all just stop the nonsense and get them reunited, as Duke and Duchess of York.

Maybe he can do Ozempic commercials with Fergie…

Andrew will always be Prince Andrew. I don't think Parliament can strip that away. He is no longer a duke, but he is a Prince of the Blood, as the son of the Queen, so he will always be a Prince . At least that's what I was told. I am sure I will be ridiculed for being an ignorant American, but I'm just making an observation. I am sure I will be corrected if I am wrong.

Yet another reason to stop giving titles, or literally any credence, to people just because of who their family is. The entire idea of “royalty” or “nobility” is blatantly elitist and people who take it at all seriously are mentally damaged.

[quote] Andrew will always be Prince Andrew.

He will always have the title Prince Andrew as long as the idiot UK indulges this "royal" family.

The UK is as gullible as the US.

[quote] The entire idea of “royalty” or “nobility” is blatantly elitist

Gee, do you think?

The sympathy shown here for Sarah Ferguson is utterly mystifying. The woman is a disaster. Anyone who reads the Andrew Lownie book must know that her only talent is for burning through cash (preferably other people’s cash). She borrowed £100K from a “friend” to pay for a holiday, and paid back only £5000, claiming that it was a gift. The friend had to threaten litigation to get his cash.

At every opportunity, she indulged to excess, to the extent that The Queen was forced to pay off £500K of debt to Fergie’s bankers to avoid yet more bad publicity. She treats spending as a delightful, totally mindless hobby, taking the kind of careless approach to spending which you can only take if you are sure that more cash will always turn up and if you don't really care too much who provides it.

Both she and Andrew are the authors of their own demise. Their entitlement and greed have led them to seek cash wherever they could find it, because they think that they are too special to live like mere minor royals, with only a comfortable home, an unearned place in high society, and the lifelong cushion of a well-stocked trust fund. Their own hubris and stupidity made them easy meat for any number of dodgy businessmen like Epstein, and they deserve their downfall.

How did it all go so wrong? I remember the 198Os as such a fun positive time.

I guess the truth, the whole truth is about to drop, huh?

R163 where did you hear that about Fergie negotiating to be styled The Duchess of York after her divorce? She may have been okay with people wrongly calling her that but as the ex-wife of the Duke of York she was properly styled as "Sarah, Duchess of York" in the same way that her late former sister in law was styled as "Diana, Princess of Wales" after her divorce.

I get why this is big news but…he is still legally HRH The Duke of York. He just isn’t supposed to be referred to that way. He’s still Prince Andrew. I don’t think this will do much to tamper the scandal although I understand Charles had to do something.

R81, you missed out the bit where not only has Andrew never been found guilty of anything, but he has also never had federal charges made against him.

Both Diana and Sarah were both divorced in 1996 (Diana in August, Sarah in May), and special letters patent were issued by the monarch in August of that year to make their positions as former wives of royal princes clear. (It had not been before.):

[quote] On 21 August 1996, letters patent declared that former wives of British princes, other than widows who did not remarry, were not entitled to the style of Her Royal Highness. Meanwhile, divorced peeresses (such as duchesses) cannot "claim the privileges or status of Peeresses which they derived from their husbands", but may continue to use the peeress title.

Since there had been no rule before (given that no women who had married into royalty had divorced her husband in modern times), this arrangement would have had to have been negotiated through both women's lawyers with the Palace.

Americans and Datalounge, never change. A lively discussion of British royal titles and nobody calls out the typing of the nonexistent title: Queen of England.

“Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.”

R138 thank you for posting a news report of the events, but we managed to figure it all out by post one.

[quote]She should establish residency in the U.S., become a staunch MAGA, & let the cash flow into her bank accounts.

Given her close ties with Epstein, even Dee Plorable wouldn't return her calls. She and her husband are now yet more toxic untouchables on both sides of the Atlantic.

"ties" with Epstein?

not a deal breaker for maga, the same group who have meltdowns with drag queen reading books to kids.

R178, there may have been no precedents in the royal family, but the title thing was well established standard practice among the peerage, where there had been plenty of divorces.

[quote] He will always have the title Prince Andrew as long as the idiot UK indulges this "royal" family. The UK is as gullible as the US.

What beliefs do you imagine Britain has about the royal family that are gullible? It’s hard to understand your statement unless you tell us what they naively believe.

More than 50 percent of Americans thought Trump was fit to be president. That is undeniably naive. I don’t understand the comparison off the bat.

He’s doing the right thing

Does he keep the title Randy Andy?

R169, that’s truly IT.

No Kings, no Princess or Prince.

It’s astonishing that the UK still buys into this bullshit gobbledygook.

If the worldwide media weren’t complicit, all of these “aristocrats” would be forced to undertake the lives of the pedantic working class.

It’s baffling how these assholes constantly give Meghan Markle shit, yet she’s out here rolling up her sleeves, & doing whatever it takes to make an honest & decent life for herself & her family.

In this specific time & place, royalty has no room to casually breathe, & tell us what to do or how things work.

We no longer give a fuck, & once the old guard dies off, the British royal family will have to figure out if selling stories to the tabloids, is worth the values instilled upon them, that emphasize the idea that aristocrats do NOT work, because that’s solely for the peons below them.

Personally? I do have some empathy towards Sarah. She was pushed out of the royal family, & her broke ass Prince couldn’t successfully provide for their children, along with simultaneously providing for her. Fortunately, his mother could & did while she was still around.

That’s not her fault, & I sincerely believe she did her best to successfully mitigate/navigate her unique circumstances.

That stated, Sarah deserved better.

MUCH better.

Tragically, she’s caught up in a system that doesn’t support women unless they’re THE Queen, & she did her best to do make money or borrow it, even if it meant groveling to a pedophile.

The idea and manifestation of a royal family is a fucked up system.

It’s financially, & emotionally unhealthy, & it’s a goddamn shame that anyone with a lick of sense, or a good heart, got caught up in the bureaucracy of it all.

Sarah’s ex husband likes to fuck girls under the age of 18, and just because she married and divorced him, she must now live a life where she’s frowned upon because she’s attempting to survive.

How is any of this fair or just?

UK?

You’ve gotta get these people out of your fucking house, once & for all. They survive off your teat. How is that OK, & why do so many of you outside the bloody media put up with this bullshit?

Life was so much simpler when Andrew was dating that Asian porn actress.

[bold] BUT WHY NOW?[/bold]

In my opinion, one or more of European countries have copies of the Epstein files. (We know from the Russians the Israelis have them; Bill Barr probably kept a copy for himself, rumors the Dutch (of all people) have them.) Maybe the BRF is simply trying to get ahead of those files leaking out. They don't have to come out all at once. A great many are already public.

The best way to use that information is drip-drip-drip. Each person on the files doesn't know when his number comes up. So they know they're in danger, but have time to make arrangements.

I think Andrew's latest removal of irrelevant titles (except to him, just as Duchess of Sussex in irrelevant except to H&M) is cautious tidying up. It is also a veiled threat to Trump from the UK -- 'see we are getting ready for the info dump, are you?'

(I assume British Intelligence has its own part of the file. The whole Epstein file -- my money is on Bill Barr.) At any rate, after Trump's meeting with Putin, where this will come up again re Ukraine, we'll see if anything changes in Trump's posture). Right now, I don't believe it does.

[bold]There is kompromat and there is gossip.[/bold]

Trump in an orgy, or with a teenager that's gossip. Trump raping anyone, that worse but it will be he said/she said - wanted it rough, it was a sex club., etc. Trump raping a girl under 14 yet older than 12, that's bad but it will run it course. He'll brazen it out. Younger than 12 is horrific, over politically but he can still serve out his term. However, beating and killing (or appearing to kill) a child under 12 - it's over. Impeachment, removal from office, a gunshot in West Wing.

Despite the smart money stating that the kompromat film is kind of snuff film, I don't believe he would kill anyone. But he can imagine him in situation where someone dies and it looks he did it. He may even believe it himself.

R187 I suppose the luxury ski chalet in Villars was another minimum necessary portfolio for an ex Duchess to raise her royal princesses. My heart bleeds with compassion for how hard it was for Sara to raise her family in a modicum of integrity and comfort.

[quote] Sarah’s ex husband likes to fuck girls under the age of 18, and just because she married and divorced him, she must now live a life where she’s frowned upon because she’s attempting to survive. How is any of this fair or just?

It’s fair because she only had access to the privileges of royal life through her (ex-)husband, so it’s logical that she loses them when he does.

And more crucially, she had her own links to Epstein, who is one of many shady figures who she accepted cash gifts from. And she lied about that fact too.

It’s really amazing how many of us manage to survive without cash transfers from criminals and conmen, even when we don’t have Andrew’s trust funds, homes and a sympathetic public to fall back on.

Well, Sarah will learn now whether the public is still sympathetic to the many heartbreaking trials she has suffered. According to D/L she may find a sympathetic audience in the US, but I sense that we in the UK may, at long last, have had sufficient.

[quote]More than 50 percent of Americans thought Trump was fit to be president.

Not accurate. It was more than 50 percent of the Americans who got off their asses and voted.

Seems to me she was Queen of England by virtue of her her title “of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen”

Just as she was Queen of Canada.

Not her “title,” perhaps. But accurate.

In fact, I suspect that there are little formalities in all of the constituent countries formerly declaring the person who is “of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King” to be King of each nation, including those parts of the Commonwealth that retain the monarchy.

R177, that's because he REFUSES to cooperate with the authorities. He will never, ever step a foot inside of America (and probably not Canada either)

[quote]Personally? I do have some empathy towards Sarah. She was pushed out of the royal family, & her broke ass Prince couldn’t successfully provide for their children, along with simultaneously providing for her. Fortunately, his mother could & did while she was still around. That’s not her fault, & I sincerely believe she did her best to successfully mitigate/navigate her unique circumstances.

Yes, this is her fault. Your type always say that 18 yr old Princess Diana knew she was just going to be used as a brood mare and willingly and happily went along with it. Well, Sarah was 26 yrs old & she knew damned well she was marrying the second son of the Queen, who didn't have a dime to his name. SHE INSISTED on living some bizarre lifestyle where she thought she was some jetsetter on par with Princess Diana (whose husband had a yearly income between £6 million to £10 million a year), despite the fact Andrew earns less than £75,000 a year in a military pension. She chose to get divorced & was a damned fool who REFUSED to ask for a decent divorce settlement. Instead she just wanted "the Queen's friendship". What a stupid idiot. That got her NOWHERE. She was friends with all of Andrew's skanky, criminal friends. She helped Andrew sell access to the Queen, to Andrew & to rent out the palaces for private use. And when news of Andrew being linked to Epstein got out, she ham-fistedly tried to do damage control for him, over and over again.

She is responsible for every bit of trouble that she's ever gotten into. She allowed her best friend, the Queen to treat her like a second or third class citizen and to keep her away from her daughter's on holidays. All of her "charitable endeavors" were a scam. They were a way for her to travel around the world cos-playing at trying to convince the world she's a jet setting philanthropist. She was a thief. She used other people's money. She never earned that much money on her own either. The most she earned from weight watchers was $3 million (and that's a high estimate). Many other estimates put that figure at between $1 million and $1.7 million. That's a lot to you and I, but that was a drop in the bucket for Sarah who insisted on living the lifestyle of Princess Diana. She and Andrew had servants, chefs, butlers, personal assistants, etc., etc. That was INSANE.

The minute she was divorced she should have lived a normal lifestyle. She could have managed it if she didn't insist on being seen as some global jetsetter. All she managed to do is make a gigantic FOOL of herself because she wanted to compete to be Princess Diana. She was NOTHING like Princess Diana. She didn't have Diana's looks, money or Diana's well deserved reputation as a hard worker. More importantly, Sarah wasn't relevant. No one wanted her around. She insisted on trying to make herself on par with the royals. She reminds me so much of Meghan and Harry. Sarah & Meghan have so much in common. Except some of you have always given Sarah the screwup the benefit of the doubt for close to 4 decades, when she doesn't deserve a thing. She's the architect of her own disaster.

Even after the entire Epstein situation, she and Andrew refused to live private lives. Even after the gigantic settlement to his victim, and the disastrous BBC interview, Andrew & Sarah insisted on spending Christmas with the royal family and show off to the crowds by attending church with the rest of the family. They have no shame at all. NONE

I guarantee you that right this minute Sarah's cooking up some scheme how she can get her side of this out to the media. And Andrew is privately encouraging her - even though his victim's book is going to be released any day now

[quote] I think we would all envy that "mess."

No, actually, we don’t.

Every time I scroll by this thread, I read its title as: "Prince Andrew gives up royal titties."

R189’s post reminded me of that scene in the Godfather, where the senator thinks he killed that girl, but he obviously did not.

R187 I'd love to know what "the pedantic working class" means.

R199 — my thought since the beginning. I just don’t see him killing someone. But he’s stupid enough to think he did on the flimsiest evidence.

Sarah knew the Royal Family from a very young age. As a young child, she wanted to be in the Royal Family. In this picture, you can see the slapper in the red shirt working her evil ways.

What the hell is going on with Sarah’s arm in that photo at r196. Is that just major jiggly flab, or does she have two elbows?

So he's 65 - has lived a life of privilege without having to do much - engaged in multiple illegal activities, fucked underaged girls - and his punishment, after taxpayers paying out 12 million pounds - is to have a bit of public humiliation.

Sorry - the punishment does not fit the crime. This is nothing. He's just retiring and will go back to doing the same shit as ever with the elite.

This isn't a punishment - losing your reputation is not a punishment.

The grifting family lets go of the worst grifters.

No loss, let me know when they're all tossed.

[quote]... losing your reputation is not a punishment.

It is if your entire self-worth, ego and entitlement was bound up with a super-high social position you did nothing to earn, and nothing adequately to justify and fulfil. All those images of Andrew in complicated military garb festooned in medals now go for nothing, he looks like someone cosplaying in operetta. That role-playing has gone forever.

Whatever you think of Charles, Anne, Edward and William, they're out there doing their Royal duties and earning respect. Andrew will spend the rest of his life observing his family doing Royal duties and having to acknowledge his total exclusion, permanently devoid of respect. It's not a prison sentence, but it's certainly publicly justifiably punitive.

Taxpayer’s didn’t pay for his settlement. The Queen did. The family has a personal fortune.

The big deal is that Andrew and at least one current and/or former American president walked into a big sticky Mossad honeytrap, which is especially awkward given that the current prime minister of Israel is carrying out a massive genocide.

For those who did not read the article:

[quote]Prince Andrew is giving up his titles, including the Duke of York, following “discussion with the King”. In a statement, Prince Andrew said that the “continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.” Prince Andrew will remain a prince, but will cease to be the Duke of York - a title received from his mother, the late Queen Elizabeth - as well as giving up membership of the Order of the Garter, the oldest and most senior order of chivalry in Britain.

So, he will remain Prince Andrew, as that's his birthright, but looks like he's giving up everything else. Frankly, this is doing Charles and William a favor in that they don't have to do it.

His “crime” was having sex with a 17-year-old prostitute who was paid $15,000 for it. In London, the age of consent is 16, and prostitution is not illegal, so though one might call him a pedophile and a rapist, the law does not.

He is not being punished for being a criminal. He us being punished for terrible personal behavior and for lying about it.

One third of eligible voters do not vote. So when they say maga is 1/2 of the country, they are lying again.

I mean come on, even without the sex trafficking accusations, the guy is such a putz.

[Quote] On 8 March 2011, the Daily Telegraph reported: 'In 2010, the Prince spent £620,000 as a trade envoy, including £154,000 on hotels, food and hospitality and £465,000 on travel.

[Quote] Abroad he travelled with a team of at least six equerries and private secretaries-including a valet with an ironing board so that he could have perfect creases in his trousers. Visiting Bahrain he sent ahead instructions that the water should be served at room temperature. The deputy head of the mission there, Simon Wilson, said his behaviour was 'boorish' and 'rude', and he regarded himself as an expert on every matter. Wilson said that Andrew was 'more commonly known among the British diplomatic community in the Gulf as HBH: His Buffoon Highness. This nickname stemmed from his childish obsession with doing exactly the opposite of what had been agreed in pre-visit meetings with his staff.'

From Humphrey’s book.

What on earth is Sarah Ferguson spending her money on. Its not as if she is a clothes horse. What is the problem

Drip-drip-drip

New York Times NEW: We obtained a trove of emails detailing Jeffrey Epstein’s relationship with the Wall Street billionaire Leon Black. The emails show Epstein demanding tens of millions of dollars from Black, insulting his kids and advising on a settlement with a woman.

Senator @RonWyden responds to today’s @nytimes article by raising prospect that Epstein was blackmailing Black. (Black’s reps deny this.)

[quote] His “crime” was having sex with a 17-year-old prostitute who was paid $15,000 for it. In London, the age of consent is 16, and prostitution is not illegal, so though one might call him a pedophile and a rapist, the law does not.

You don't know shit. They met up in New York too. And consent doesn't enter into it if you're trafficked. It was a crime.

His very presence is afront to the Crown.

Giuffre, a victim of Epstein, claims she endured unspeakable acts at Andrew’s hands, alleging that he kissed her feet before sexual encounters. “He was friendly enough, but still entitled — as if he believed having s-- with me was his birthright,” she stated.

The ramifications for Ferguson are equally grave. As a result of the latest fallout, she has faced backlash from numerous charities. Organizations such as Julia’s House, a children’s hospice, and the Teenage Cancer Trust have severed ties with her, citing it was “inappropriate” for her to remain associated. Ferguson’s past controversies are also resurfacing, including her admission of borrowing nearly $20,000 from Epstein, which only adds fuel to the fire.

20 grand was not a one off. I am certain Epstein and his girlfriend paid out a lot more and offered sex from young women to gain further access to the royal family.

r202's photo is what Edward should use on Coming Out Day to show he was always a Big Ole Mary!

LMAO

Of course Fergie is standing by her man! If she didn’t, she’d be homeless.

[quote] She borrowed £100K from a “friend” to pay for a holiday, and paid back only £5000, claiming that it was a gift.

I cannot get my head around spending £100K on a holiday. How is that even possible? Was it a trip to the moon?

r145/r158/r168: The sitting monarch as FULL power over use of the HRH honorific, AND use of any Prince/Princess titles (aka "princely" titles). He/she alone has total say over the bestowment of these, and usage. Parliament has nothing to do with it, and no say. This has been discussed at length here on DL, over many years.

The UK monarch is the "Fount of all Honour" in the UK, and as such determines who can have or use these honors. They can issue a new Letters Patent (overriding the 1917 LP, which stands today as the main guide), to make it public and official; or they can simply state/note their wishes on the matter to the individuals in question, in private. Parliament recognized some time ago that they don't have oversight over HRH and prince/princess usage.

If Charles told Andrew he was going to take these from him, then it was wise of the latter to "get ahead of the train" and issue a statement that he would cease to use them. If anyone here believes that Andrew decided to abstain from them out of some kind of new shame or newly-discovered sense of family duty, I have a bridge to sell.

It is far more murky, however, when dealing with royal ducal titles. Those are granted by the monarch, however removal of them is thought to be more complicated, since these are passed down ad infinitum (if there are heirs available). But there's no confusion regarding HRH usage or princely titles.

[quote] Was it a trip to the moon?

No, silly!

R222 a suite at Hotel du Cap-Eden-Roc, Le Byblos, Le Cheval Blanc, Le Cap Estel in summer high season = 10k the night.

He and Fergie are fucking repulsive.

[quote] [R178], there may have been no precedents in the royal family, but the title thing was well established standard practice among the peerage, where there had been plenty of divorces.

That doesn't automatically translate to the British royal family. They always have their own singular precedents (or lack thereof).

And it's a moot point anyway: she was allowed after the divorce to be the Duchess of York but nothing else, and now she's prohibited from using the Duchess of York title, so she's only Sarah Ferguson again from now until her death.

womp womp

[quote] now she's prohibited from using the Duchess of York title, so she's only Sarah Ferguson again from now until her death

She could marry a duke and again be a duchess. She may even in her old age marry Prince Louis and again be the Duchess of York! A girl can dream!

His Royal Perveyness will always be my Prince of Pedos

It must be horrific to deal with so any crabs in a bucket, the hierarchy is inhumane for everyone involved

[quote]The sympathy shown here for Sarah Ferguson is utterly mystifying.

And the worship of the Royals isn't? Elizabeth gets fawned over her constantly. For what? Blood diamond collector with a nazi sympathizing husband who raised shit children who indulged in corruption and befriended sleazy criminals.

R232 if you haven't figured it out by these posts : Royalass are UK equivalent to MAGA. Cultists who worship white is right. Andy is their Trump

A friend in the UK said there were some unsavory business deals including with some Chinese communist types and Andrew was once again embarrassing to Charles and that is why this is happening now. Charles is attempting to get ahead of a news story. The thing is Epstein is just tip of the iceberg with Andrew and Fergie. They have been sleezy and up to all kinds of no good, for years.

My eyes are really gone. When I first read the title to this thread I thought is said "Prince Andrew gives up royal titties"

Philip was hardly nazi sympathising, having served in the Royal Navy in WWII. Additionally his mother Princess Alice was awarded Righteous Among the Nations by Yad Vashem for hiding a Jewish family in her house in Athens during WWII. She is buried on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem.

It was his four sisters who each married German aristocrats and princes between the wars when their parents separated and each of these Germans became Nazis of varying degrees of commitment.

R235, you're not the first one on this thread to do so.

Prince Andrew also gave up his LOOKS a long time ago.

Philip's father was also a Nazi sympathizer.

Even so, it's of course RIDICULOUS to think children and siblings should be castigated and should suffer for the sins of their family members. Only children and extremely childish people believe that sin is transferable that way. Of course, it were true we would have had to have tortured Svetlana Stalin to death when she emigrated to the US for her father's crimes.

Drag queens reading books to children sounds like something from Mars. About as idiotic as it gets. I preferred it when it was all underground somewhat perverse funny and delightful. Bringing our entire culture into the light was very very stupid and has taken away its fun and has only diminished the LGB community.

Anyway the entire royal family is a posse of grifters who have as much right to their fortunes from the sweat of centuries from the British taxpayers and colonialism as any of us do. Charles is as much a creep as Andrew spending his life with besties like Savile, Mountbatten and that clergyman who was allowed to resign rather than be brought to trial for hiding(and probably involving himself in)child abuse byf clergymen. We're talking about child abuse central with Charles as the sun king. And the Queen knowing everything but not about to get involved in any of it.

[quote] We're talking about child abuse central with Charles as the sun king.

Link, please.

Well at least Nick is of legal age.

Her WIkipedia article still calls her "Sarah, Duchess of York", although there is a note in her biography that says she will no longer use the title. I think it should be changed to plain "Sarah Ferguson".

Maybe Fergie can do OF

Just looked in the "talk" section of Wikipedia for Sarah and it looks like they're going to change the title of the article to plain "Sarah Ferguson".

She had her kids with her while she got sucked off.

Isn't her divorced rced name Sarah York?

R222 R225 - A friend of mine spent $600,000 for an extended cruise (in one of the duplex suites) on the QM2 a number of years ago. "I overspent my annual vacation budget by a hundred grand, but it's for my 60th birthday!".

Or Sarah Mountbatten-Windsor

Welp, that kinda sucks. His mother was the Queen. He fucked up royally.

Sarah Plain and Ferguson

Sarah, Duchess of Pork

R251 is not r23.

The Windsor Family's presence is an afront to the Crown.

fixed for 216

I'm Ferguson now, haven't you heard?

I thought the title was :

Prince Andrew gives up royal titties.

I’m Pork now, haven’t you heard?

[quote] Her WIkipedia article still calls her "Sarah, Duchess of York", although there is a note in her biography that says she will no longer use the title. I think it should be changed to plain "Sarah Ferguson".

Usually it takes the titles of wikipedia pages longer to change than their content.

But he's retaining the Royal Titties.

This joke about the confusion of "royal titles" and "royal titties" is hilarious even the thousandth time....

...said no one ever.

William is not f’ing around when it comes to his uncle Andrew.

Andrew’s daughters seem to be well adjusted responsible young women.Too bad daddy’s a douche.

It's significant that whereas "The Windsors" always portrayed Beatrice and Eugenie as lovable ding-a-lings, and Fergie as a sweet but pathetic grifter, Andrew was always portrayed solely as an unfunny and cruel monster.

[quote]It's significant that whereas "The Windsors"

That show was brilliant. There’s one episode where Fergie is sitting at the table in her small, dingy apartment and she has a cardboard cutout of Andrew sitting across the table from her.

“Hello, guhls…”

The two girls who played Beatrice and Eugenie were so hilarious. The actresses invented this weird accent for the princesses because they said no one in the UK ever hears them speak very much, so they thought they could just invent whatever they wanted for them. It was this bizarre combination of slurring their vowels with vocal fry, so that when Beatrice told her temporary boyfriend on the show Jeremy Corbyn, "Jeremy, I've decided Marxism isn't for me," it came out as "Jummy, eh've duh-syi-ded Mok-zyiz-um ez-zunt for meh."

This thread is so revealing.

This morning's 'Sunday Telegraph' headline: "Andrew sought to dig up dirt on Giuffre." Within the lead article, Andrew Lownie the biographer is quoted: "This is just the tip of the iceberg. I think the palace is worried about new allegations that will emerge Stateside, they know there is more damaging stuff to come."

[quote] It's significant that whereas "The Windsors" always portrayed Beatrice and Eugenie as lovable ding-a-lings, and Fergie as a sweet but pathetic grifter, Andrew was always portrayed solely as an unfunny and cruel monster.

Andrew has been deeply disliked by the general public for decades and that dislike is exceeded only by the dislike felt by those who have actually met him.

He’s giving up royal titties.

Are there jobs for people like him - schoolmaster, girl’s Lacrosse, coach teen counselor?

I have a feeling William is enjoying this. How relieved he must feel.

Prince Andrew facing police investigation over Giuffre smear claims

The Metropolitan Police is “actively looking into” claims that Prince Andrew passed his alleged teenage sex abuse victim’s private information to his protection officer.

The Prince asked his taxpayer-funded police bodyguard to investigate Virginia Giuffre and passed him her date of birth and social security number, a leaked email revealed.

He then told Buckingham Palace aide Ed Perkins, who at the time was Elizabeth II’s deputy press secretary, that he had asked one of his personal protection officers to dig up information about Ms Giuffre.

A Met Police spokesman said: “We are aware of media reporting and are actively looking into the claims made.”

The Prince could potentially face a criminal investigation in the US for sharing Ms Giuffre’s social security number without her consent.

Sarah Ferguson, and her daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, were the first people to visit Epstein after his release from jail for child sex offences, according to Epstein;

The paedophile financier claimed he bankrolled Sarah Ferguson for 15 years;

Fergie begged Epstein to lend her up to $100,000 while he was still under house arrest and pleaded to be allowed to visit his notorious private island;

Ex-minister Peter Mandelson warned Epstein his relationship with the Yorks would end badly.

Andrew secretly told Epstein 'we are in this together' 12 weeks after he had supposedly cut all ties with him.

The dirt is spilling now.

The pro-child sex trafficking contingent is on this thread like maggots on a rotting carcass.

Andy was Lilibet's favorite. When he was on the grounds, she was reportedly aflutter and blushing.

R274 once again the Royalass posters here who support any white Windsor child rapist are the UK version of same apologists who ignore white Trump's pedophilia. White makes right. Klan Grans are still Klan Grans even when they speak with Scouser accents mate. No institution symbolism the ingrained racism of the UK like the worthless lilly white Windsors. Racist UK scum cheer them on. Call them MEGA.

R260 speak for yourself dour cunt

R277 WRONG stupid American

Pink Titties Make Right.

Leave Sarah alone!

I keep misreading this thread title as “Prince Andrew gives up royal titties”.

[quote]Leave Sarah alone!

That's what Andrew has effectively done, having cancelled plans for her 66th birthday party.

Sarah's birthday was 15 October.

Charles and William: This is a helluva birthday present, you bitches.

[quote] I keep misreading this thread title as “Prince Andrew gives up royal titties”.

Wow! No one else has said that yet!

Sorry, R284. Have only just dipped into the thread. 284 posts on that piece of shit royal is altogether too much to stomach.

When the musical question

[Quote] Don’t drink don’t smoke, what do you do? Subtle innuendos follow, there must be something inside

… was posed, who knew the answer would be

[Quote] I rape sex slaves all round the world, eh wot

What a useless piece of shit.

I just read the title of this to say he’s giving up royal titles, but perhaps I was mistaken and he’s giving up royal titties instead?

Precisely what are those, pray tell?

You’d have to ask Fergie, R288.

I’m getting this now when I try to reply to this thread. I guess my fun here is at an end.

R241 obviously has no idea who Jimmy Savile and Mountbatten and that Bishop or whatever he was were and what close friends they were to Charles. He is a very stupid individual(241) and knows nothing of the sexual predilections of those people. Your brain please. Must be the ghost of Her Majesty the late great Queen Elizabeth who was known to demote people if they told her about what was going on with Andrew.

How ironic that she was staunchly trying to hold up the monarchy for herself but was destroying its longevity. At least in terms of it having any integrity.

Oh it was Archbishop Welby who crowned the King!!!

He should have been brought up on criminal charges yet gets to crown Charles and resign!

The royal crown and king really have as much to do with a monarchy as a burger fast food chain.

And the Queen colluded with Andrew because he and Fergie were getting so much money from Epstein. It wasn't coming out of her wallet.

"The royal crown and king really have as much to do with a monarchy as a burger fast food chain"

??

No collusion!!!!!

Once they've dealt with Andrew, Harry comes a knocking, again.

Sounds like there is no love lost between Wills and The Yorks. He's been waiting for this, and Fergie's birthday was the perfect time to twist the knife.

You Sarah Ferguson sympathizers are complete idiots. As has been said, she's a disgusting grifter who even cheated her own charities and her employees, never paid her own bills, sucked up to Epstein, then denounced him publicly, only to email him with a groveling apology, all to stay in the good graces of a pedo so she could get more money out of him. She's a raving cunt. Shut the fuck up about "poor Sarah" and "she'll always be Duchess of York to me." Your inanity is pathetic.

I suspect the last straw for William was Andrew’s behaviour after the Duchess of Kent’s funeral, where he behaved more like the guest at a wedding, once again elbowed his way to the centre of things and attempted to make conversation with William, who was having nothing to do with him.

Sarah will always be the Duchess of Cunt to me.

The Royal Accent. Keep your jaw very stiff.

But she has such personality!

We will most likely to find outCharles has three nipples and ywo anuses as he is a chimera and aaQTHAT is why QEIi held on for so ling. The recunstructed jand from his flippers and crafted him a chinz…..

Put the pipe down, R302.

R281, lol! It’s soooooo funny that you listed the title!!!! That’s hilarious. What else have you misheard or read incorrectly?

You know, Andrew is the worst by far, but they're all grifters in their way. If I am not mistaken, Charles, while Prince of Wales, caused a comparatively minor kerfluffle for accepting sizeable monetary "gift" from some Middle Eastern or other dignitary or businessman. Not sure. Details are foggy now, but I remember it.. His aide took the brunt of the shit storm for Charles.

Ironic how Fergie was writing children’s books while she was associating with a pedophile.

No Words.

Rachel Meghan Markle Could star with the rest of the dead beats in a RHOUK

Turns out Andrew gave Virginia's birth date and social security number to a public policeman(tax payer funded) to dig up dirt on her. But he never met her! So why would he do that and have that information?

Andrew did not give up anything. He like Harry just decided not to use a title. And we know how that works out. Puny pathetic Charles gives in again.

Prince Andrew gives up royal titties.

R305, IIRC the cash was delivered to Charles in a suitcase.

Thanks R312! I'm glad others remember it.

Trump and the Repigs in Congress are going to play this for as long as they can making Prince Andrew the scapegoat for all the sex with young girls and thereby try to absolve and distance Trump from the entire scandal and therefore justify not releasing the Epstein files.

Don't let the Repigs do it. Trump is part of this whole sex scandal and abuse of underage women.

Release the Epstein files now.

[quote]Puny pathetic Charles gives in again.

Death by a thousand cuts. When more emerges from the Giuffre book, and the book creates impetus for more external revelation, public outrage will increase accordingly. And then Charles is likely to take that next serious step, and have Andrew's titles officially revoked in Parliament.

I suspect this was a short term face-saving exercise for the Royal Family. I'm guessing there is a larger strategy being planned behind the scenes to fully revamp the royal system to be more similar to the Danish and Swedish Royal Families who were slimmed down in 2022 and 2019 respectively. This will address the Sussex problem and all the other hangers on. Whether Charles has the balls to implement a new letters patent himself or whether he'll leave it for William to address upon coronation, who knows. Also, they may be waiting for the older generation to die off so they don't have to be demoted in their final years after a lifetime of service. Who knows, but I predict an overhaul is coming and this announcement by Andrew was merely a temporary salve.

Charles and William really need to think this through, right? Don't many UK charities rely on Royal patronages and visibility to keep donations coming in? If the lose visibility vis a vis the absence of Royals, will it mean their cause may lose donations, too?

[quote] At least that's what I was told. I am sure I will be ridiculed for being an ignorant American, but I'm just making an observation. I am sure I will be corrected if I am wrong

How prescient.

Reading for the first time about the way in which Maxwell stalked and delivered Giuffre to Epstein is just disgusting. These were (and are) terrible people.

Giuffre was working as a "part-time locker room attendant" in Mar A Lardo- mens room at 15years old. Her father got her the job. IRS records proved it but Giuffre didn't remember "Just that job"

Giuffre was supposed to be the STAR WITNESS against Maxwell in her trial, however the Prosecution pulled her as their main witness. The 4 women who testified against Maxwell all said Giuffre recruited them, told them what they had to do& then told them about the job, The defense attorneys got all 4 women to testify that Giuffre was 19 years old at the time she was recruiting for Epstein.

^^^ I forgot, Giuffre took a large settlement from Alan Dershowitz when she settled a lawsuit, he brought against her^^^

I know Dershowitz is a Lying scumbag but I never believed Giuffre either.

What no one is talking about is Katherine. She was absolutely horrified and disgusted at the Epstein connection, the lawsuit, and she never cared for Andrew in general, but William made it very clear to The Queen and his father that t hey would not spend Christmas with the RF if Andrew was part of it, so it was announced that the young family would divide their time between the Middletons and the RF over the holidays. This was some years ago.

That's what really started the ball rolling. it was made easier because no one really liked Andrew anyway. Sophie and Edward didn't stick their necks out, rationalizing it because they wanted to support the Queen, but they quickly fell in line. William has clout because he is the future King, just like Charles was when all this was breaking. Keep in mind, that nothing at all would have happened to Andrew if it had not become a public issue. The RF is notoriously good at covering up things and managing the Press. This time that was impossible. And you have to know t hat any number of scandalous things about Andrew and Fergie have been squelched by The Palace over the years.

Andrew hasn't paid rent on Royal Lodge for two decades.

Which explains how he has been able to keep living there.

I'm losing sympathy for Beatrice and Eugenie. I felt sorry for them at first, because you can't choose your parents. But it's becoming increasingly apparent that they were aware of their parents' connection to Epstein, and they still haven't distanced themselves. They're in their mid-thirties.

[quote] But it's becoming increasingly apparent that they were aware of their parents' connection to Epstein, and they still haven't distanced themselves. They're in their mid-thirties.

"If Mommy is a Commie then ya gotta turn her in," eh?

I think Beatrice and Eugenie have done their best to distance themselves from their parent's difficulties but these are their parents and they're especially close to their mother. And who knows what kind of platitudes the Queen fed them. She was close to both girls. However. I have nothing but deep sympathy for them. Because it is clear that there were times when Mummy used them to smear some respectability on her escapades. Bringing them with her to anywhere Epstein was present disgusts me. And she did that after she knew about Epstein. I think if they were not decent kids Charles and William would have kissed them good bye long ago. I believe they were shamefully exploited by their parents, especially Fergie. Now we may get new information but that's how things seem to me r ight now.

Didn't they knowingly receive at least one expensive present, a necklace, from at least one of Andrew's Middle Eastern potentate "friends?"

Link please, r327.

Two examples of Fergie's "parenting".

Being photographed poolside topless next to her "financial advisor" John Bryan who kissed her feet while toddlers Beatrice and Eugenie watched on;

and

Having an affair with Steve Wyatt while pregnant with Eugenie.

All class as always was Fergie.

Yep, R327.

R327 more likely Fergie accepted the necklaces on her daughters' behalf then promptly pawned them.

They probably would not question anything their father did for them. Oh, look , a pretty necklace. Remember. All of these people live in a fucking bubble. Middleton is different because she was raised in the real world. So was Sophie. Now Anne is incredibly sensible, down to earth, and very discreet. For all we know she may have been gifted with a herd of prized Arabian horses, but we will never know. She doesn't strut around being "royal."