It is almost 25 years since this newspaper published worrying whispers suggesting that the then Prince Andrew might be a danger to the Royal Family.
In October 2001, for example, we reported that his suitability as Britain’s roving trade ambassador had come into question. It emerged he had spent time on an official visit to New York having dinner with a supermodel. After she responded with coolness, he was said to have transferred his attentions to a group of ‘flashily dressed young Russian women’.
Our report also mentioned that he was accompanied by a new female private secretary, who had been ‘appointed in an attempt to curb Andrew’s penchant for late nights with young women’. The events appear to have taken place at the Manhattan townhouse of Ghislaine Maxwell.
Almost every aspect of the unfolding disaster we all know so well was already visible. And, as the years have unfolded, this newspaper has continued to monitor the embarrassing and worrying exploits of the former prince, most notably on February 27, 2011, when we published the momentous picture of Virginia Giuffre (then Roberts) with Andrew and Ms Maxwell, which has haunted him, and Buckingham Palace, ever since.
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, it must be stressed, has consistently denied any wrongdoing. He has not been charged with any offence, nor tried, nor convicted. It is always important to remember the presumption of innocence – one of the most important features of our constitution.
But that does not mean his known behaviour was not damaging to the monarchy, the Royal Family and, ultimately, the nation. And that is only half of the story. The rest concerns allegations that Andrew was exploiting his trade envoy post to benefit controversial friends – allegations that are now being investigated by the police.
As The Mail on Sunday reports exclusively on Sunday, King Charles was warned as long ago as 2019 that the Royal Family’s name was being ‘abused’ by Andrew’s handling of his position as trade envoy. We detail several of the allegations involved.
Well, it is now 2026 and seven years have passed. What has been done about all this?
It may be reasonably said that the late Queen Elizabeth II felt protective towards her wayward son, and that this may have guarded him from the criticism that surrounded him before her death in 2022. That was the late Queen’s mistake, for which some still feel it is hard to blame her.
But even her admirers have to admit that her tolerance of his boorish and unappealing lifestyle was an unfortunate and damaging lapse in an otherwise superb record as Head of State.
Be that as it may, things have surely been allowed to slide far too long in the years since Charles became King.
Brothers are not, in general, sentimental about each other, and Charles has always been keenly conscious that the monarchy is constantly in danger and must be carefully protected. Yet the events of the past few days have dealt a blow to the Crown’s prestige and reputation, from which it will be very hard to recover.
Was it really not possible for the authorities to take action more quickly and more ruthlessly, before we got to this wretched position?
