Tag:

Royal

bitchy | Prince Andrew believes his brother wants to give Royal Lodge to Queen Camilla
Celebrity News

bitchy | Prince Andrew believes his brother wants to give Royal Lodge to Queen Camilla

by jummy84
written by jummy84

There was some buzz late in the day on Thursday that there would be some kind of big royal announcement. Alas, it did not happen. But I kind of wonder if we’ll hear something by the end of business today. One week ago, the Prince Andrew “problem” reached a boiling point, leading to Andrew’s evening announcement: he would willingly relinquish his ducal title and honors. Buckingham Palace hoped that would be the end of it and everyone would move on. Instead, the past seven days have been even more chaotic. I said earlier this week that I wouldn’t be surprised if Andrew is shoved out of Royal Lodge by the end of this week. That is the next move, but it looks like Andrew isn’t going down without a fight. This piece was published in the Telegraph on Thursday:

Prince Andrew believes the King is trying to force him out of his Royal Lodge home because he wants to give it to the Queen, The Telegraph understands.

The Prince is refusing to move out of his 30-room residence near Windsor Castle where he lives rent-free, despite coming under pressure from MPs to move to a more modest property. Andrew has what he regards as a cast-iron lease on Royal Lodge, which means his older brother cannot legally evict him. Having been forced to give up his Duke of York title – following fresh scandals over his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted paedophile, and his relationships with suspected Chinese spies – the Prince is facing a possible parliamentary inquiry into his living arrangements.

On Thursday, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, chairman of the Commons public accounts committee, confirmed he would be writing to the Treasury and the Crown Estate Commissioners “seeking further information on the lease arrangements for Royal Lodge”. The answers to the questions will determine whether the committee takes the matter further.

Family friends have told The Telegraph that [Andrew] believes the King has an ulterior motive in wanting him to leave Royal Lodge. He and Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, his daughters, have told friends that the King wants Royal Lodge to be the Queen’s base in Windsor should she outlive him. It would mirror the living arrangements of Queen Elizabeth II’s mother Queen Elizabeth, who lived in Royal Lodge when she became a widow and moved out of Windsor Castle.

The King’s aides flatly deny the suggestion, but the Prince has nevertheless become fixed on the idea, which surfaced a year ago, that Royal Lodge was being earmarked for the Queen.

In truth, Her Majesty, who became a member of the Royal family by marriage in 2005, is far less grand than Prince Andrew and is unlikely to want to live alone in such a large residence even for only part of the year. She still owns Ray Mill House, the Grade II-listed family house in Wiltshire she bought with the divorce settlement from Andrew Parker Bowles, her first husband, and it is said to be the place where she feels most at home.

Meanwhile, the Prince of Wales, who has no time for his uncle but remains on good terms with his cousins Beatrice and Eugenie, has made it known that he wants the issue of Royal Lodge settled before he becomes King.

[From The Telegraph]

That last part about Prince William “want[ing] the issue of Royal Lodge settled before he becomes King” – completely bizarre, right? William’s allies and courtiers describe his future reign as “ruthless” and “fearless about making changes.” If that’s the case, then surely William would want to wait until he’s king to take care of this Andrew Problem himself? Ruthless William should be using that as a threat to Andrew: make a deal with Charles, because you won’t like the deals on offer during my reign. William wanting Charles to deal with his brother leaves William looking like a coward who refuses to confront his rancid uncle.

As for Andrew’s conspiracy that Charles intends to put Camilla in Royal Lodge… multiple things can be true all at once. One, Andrew needs to be evicted, plain and simple. Two, Royal Lodge is much desired by multiple royals, including William and Kate. Three, while Camilla loves her private oasis (Ray Mill), she will absolutely want a home on a royal estate if she survives her husband, and Royal Lodge would suit her perfectly. Four, if Charles doesn’t settle the Royal Lodge situation during his reign, it’s guaranteed that Ruthless Scooter King would be unlikely to give the Dowager Queen Consort such a palatial mansion as her retirement home, which means Charles does need to take care of this right now if he really does want RL to go to Camilla. Five, Camilla “is far less grand than Prince Andrew and is unlikely to want to live alone in such a large residence even for only part of the year” is a complete lie.

Update: Sources are now saying, as of Friday afternoon/evening, that Andrew is negotiating his withdrawal from Royal Lodge. He’s apparently hellbent on staying in Windsor or London, while King Charles wants to see Andrew shipped off to a cottage/home in Balmoral or Sandringham.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan’s publicist quit, this is the royal scandal of the week!
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan’s publicist quit, this is the royal scandal of the week!

by jummy84
written by jummy84

It seems the British media is done talking about Prince Andrew’s depravity and all of the crimes he’s committed. They’ve successfully deflected everything to “should Andrew be kicked out of Royal Lodge” and “look, the Windsors are doing another dumb half-measure to punish Andrew.” Another key part of Operation Deflect From Andrew is the British press’s favorite standard: attacking the Duke and Duchess of Sussex no matter what. Throughout this week, Mail columnists have been trying to keep up the attacks, even as it became abundantly clear that the monarchy has done the most to protect a serial sexual predator for decades. “But Meghan went to Paris,” they cried. “But Meghan’s business is struggling, we swear!”

Well, the Mail’s Alison Boshoff has a new exclusive: Meghan lost another staffer! Back in June, the Sussexes did a major housecleaning on their comms team, letting go of some of their comms people and hiring Emily Robinson, who used to work for Netflix (and did publicity for The Crown). I said at the time that Meredith Maines – the comms guru who was hired in February – was probably behind all of the June streamlining. Well, now it looks like Emily Robinson has left the Sussexes’ employ!

The Duchess of Sussex has parted company with her tenth publicist in just five years after a big name she poached from Netflix quit after just three months. Emily Robinson joined Harry and Meghan’s team as director of communications in June, but she has already jumped ship.

Ms Robinson was always a controversial hire as she had worked on The Crown for years – a show which aired a number of damaging narratives about the Royal Family. The final series included scenes in which the ‘ghost’ of Princess Diana appeared to speak to The Queen and Prince Charles, which many found insensitive.

One friend of LA-based Robinson, who built up a reputation as a ‘tough cookie’ at Netflix, said: ‘It was her decision. She left a few weeks ago. She’s not a quitter, so things must have been pretty horrible for her to go.’

Ms Robinson’s LinkedIn profile does not currently include any reference to having worked with the couple, but other roles which she has held are listed.

Ms Robinson is at least the tenth publicist to leave the employ of Meghan and Harry since they left the UK for California five years ago (although two former publicists, James Holt and Miranda Barbot, have been promoted into non-PR roles). Remaining on their team are Liam Maguire, director of communications in Europe, and Meredith Maines, their chief communications officer. They met the King’s press secretary, Tobyn Andreae, this summer – which is thought to have paved the way for Prince Harry to briefly see his father last month.

The couple have suffered numerous PR disasters, most recently the duchess’s surprise trip to Paris Fashion Week.

[From The Daily Mail]

“…Most recently the duchess’s surprise trip to Paris Fashion Week…” Ah yes, the publicity disaster of “Meghan drawing global headlines for looking amazing at the Balenciaga show.” Obviously, that’s why Emily left! She was like, no, I cannot have my client getting so much attention at Paris Fashion Week! It’s far more likely that Robinson left for a better job, or maybe there’s another restructure happening within Archewell, especially with Meghan focusing so much on As Ever. I’m defending the Sussexes’ comms team FINALLY because this year, they’ve really turned things around. Some of us had begged them for years to be more responsive, and to not allow these evil f–king narratives to fester unchallenged. And this year, we saw those changes. I believe it’s because of Maines as well.

Photos courtesy of Netflix.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Will Parliament give the monarch the power to strip all royal titles?
Celebrity News

bitchy | Will Parliament give the monarch the power to strip all royal titles?

by jummy84
written by jummy84

As an American, I am often confused by the British monarchy and government’s “separation of powers.” Before this week, it seemed like prime ministers and Parliament basically left all of the title debates and housing issues up to the monarch’s prerogative. But Prince Andrew’s situation has changed everything, as MPs are loudly fuming about the monarchy’s mismanagement of this crisis. There is a growing political consensus that Andrew cannot be allowed to live out his days in a grand and rent-free 30-room mansion on the Windsor estate. It’s very likely that Parliament will have a formal inquiry into Royal Lodge and perhaps even the wider mismanagement of the Crown Estates. But there’s also proposed legislation to give the monarch power to remove titles on his own, only needing a “recommendation” from Parliament. The NY Times tried to explain:

Britain has been one of the world’s most durable constitutional monarchies, in part because its two pillars — the crown and Parliament — stay out of each other’s business. King Charles III steers clear of politics, while Prime Minister Keir Starmer leaves the affairs of the royal family to the monarch. That longstanding arrangement has come under rare stress in the last week, following scandalous new disclosures about Prince Andrew, the king’s younger brother, and his ties to the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The details were outlined in a newly published email between Andrew and Mr. Epstein, and in a memoir by Virginia Roberts Giuffre, an Epstein victim who accused Andrew of raping her when she was a teenager — an accusation he denies. They have led to calls for him to be stripped of his most familiar title, prince. This would likely require an act of parliament.

That, in turn, has set off a chicken-and-egg debate. The government says the decision of whether to deprive Andrew of his titles is one for the king, not for Mr. Starmer. Officials at Buckingham Palace say it would be improper for the king to take any position on a parliamentary act that might come before him for royal assent. Both sides are drawing on centuries of convention, a powerful argument in a country with an unwritten constitution. Yet as the outcry grows over Andrew’s alleged misconduct during his friendship with Mr. Epstein, falling back on century-old laws and even more ancient customs is proving contentious.

“The argument that this is purely a matter for the royal family will not wash,” said Vernon Bogdanor, an expert on the constitutional monarchy at King’s College London. “Our monarchy since 1689 has been a parliamentary one. It exists only so long as Parliament, representing the people, want it to continue.”

On Wednesday, a Labour member of Parliament, Rachael Maskell, introduced a bill that would give the king the authority to rescind royal titles on his own initiative, following a recommendation from a parliamentary committee. Without the government’s support, however, it has little chance to pass.

Last Friday, Andrew announced that he would stop using one of his titles, the Duke of York, a step he took under pressure from his brother Charles. But he did not formally lose either the dukedom or the title of prince, to which he is entitled under a 1917 royal prerogative, known as a Letters Patent. Under that decree, issued by King George V, the title of prince or princess is limited to the child of a monarch, the child of the sons of a monarch, and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, the heir to the throne. Amending the Letters Patent to strip Andrew of his title is possible, experts have said, but it would be such a grave, unusual step that it would probably happen only if the king and the government agreed in advance.

[From The NY Times]

This is interesting from a how-the-sausage-is-made perspective, but it also has larger repercussions. Let’s be real – everyone can agree that Andrew should be stripped of all of his titles and that he should be forced onto an ice floe and set out to sea. THAT is not the debate. The real debate is: who will do the title-stripping and what happens if and when we give the monarch power to strip titles at will, with nominal input from the government? The actual debate is “what happens when we have a king who is petty, jealous and violently unfit to lead, and who uses his power to childishly settle scores?” Gee, I wonder why everyone is hesitating to give the crown these powers???

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Mouni Roy's Diwali Dhamaka: Royal Blue Lehenga Steals The Show! | Glamsham.com
Bollywood

Mouni Roy’s Diwali Dhamaka: Royal Blue Lehenga Steals The Show! | Glamsham.com

by jummy84
written by jummy84

Actress Mouni Roy and her entrepreneur husband Suraj Nambiar made waves at a Diwali 2025 party, dazzling fans with their poised fashion and bright presence. The couple’s attire best reflected the spirit of the festival—effortless, colorful, and replete with celebratory glitter.

Mouni mesmerized in a deep blue lehenga with delicate silver embroidery, topped with a sheer dupatta with subtle detailing. She finished off the look with dramatic stone earrings, waves, and soft, radiant makeup. Suraj paired beautifully with her in a traditional white kurta with an embroidered waistcoat with delicate mirror work, adding to the visual contrast and equilibrium between the couple.

Instagram videos captured their celebratory atmosphere, replete with poise and charm. Subsequently, Mouni provided fans with more of an insider glimpse into their home party celebrations with bestie Disha Patani. She dressed in a beautiful ombre-hued yellow-and-pink saree teamed with a coordinating embroidered blouse, red bangles, and heavy jewellery pieces. Her light make-up only enhanced her naturally glowing face.

During the Lakshmi puja, Mouni was seen performing rituals with grace—lighting diyas and doing aarti in a serene setting. The warm golden glow of the lamps beautifully lit up her face. Suraj, dressed in a simple white kurta-pajama, stood by her side, his understated look reflecting elegance and devotion.

The warmth and love of the couple were true, further enhancing the beauty of the celebration. Disha Patani, wearing a white kurta and green bangles, was not left behind when it came to style.

Mouni and Suraj, who got married in a beach wedding dreamy affair in Goa in January 2022, met for the first time on New Year’s Eve 2019 in Dubai. After two years of low-key dating, they gave their love its grand showcase in a big fat wedding—and still provide fans with couple goals every holiday season.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | King Charles’s current Lord Steward was head of royal protection in 2011
Celebrity News

bitchy | King Charles’s current Lord Steward was head of royal protection in 2011

by jummy84
written by jummy84

Over the weekend, about a full day after Prince Andrew volunteered to relinquish his royal titles and honors, the Mail reported that Andrew asked one of his royal protection officers to dig up information about Virginia Giuffre. Andrew had gotten ahold of Virginia’s date of birth and Social Security number, and he passed the information along to the police officers guarding him. He bragged about all of this to Ed Perkins, who was then Queen Elizabeth II’s deputy press secretary. No one knows if Andrew’s RPOs actually looked into Virginia. But what is known is that many people around Andrew AND QEII knew that Andrew was trying to dig up dirt on her. Well, at the same time Andrew was ordering his RPOs to do this, the head of royal protection was a man by the name of Peter Loughborough. He’s currently known as Lord Peter Rosslyn, Lord Steward and Personal Secretary to King Charles and Queen Camilla.

A current senior member of the King’s household was the head of royal protection at the time Prince Andrew allegedly asked one of his police officers to dig up dirt on Virginia Guiffre, Sky News has discovered. Lord Peter Rosslyn, who is now Lord Steward and Personal Secretary to the King and Queen, was head of Royalty and Diplomatic Protection between 2003-2014.

It is not clear if Lord Rosslyn – known at the time as Commander Peter Loughborough – was made aware of Prince Andrew’s request. However, it reportedly happened in 2011 when it’s claimed Andrew wrote in an email that he passed the date of birth and confidential social security number of his accuser, Virginia Guiffre, to one of his close protection team to find out information about her.

At the weekend, the Metropolitan Police said it was “actively looking into the claims made”. Sky News approached Lord Rosslyn for comment, which was passed to Buckingham Palace.

A palace spokesperson said: “As you may or may not be aware, Lord Rosslyn works for The Royal Household and thus this issue has been referred to me. However, since this matter relates to his time in service with the Metropolitan Police, they would be the appropriate body to approach with media enquiries of this nature.”

The Met Police had nothing further to add. Police sources have told Sky News the officer (CPO) involved would have been expected to escalate this request from Andrew to his superiors.

While there may have been other members of senior staff between the CPO and Lord Rosslyn, the request should have been considered serious enough to be referred to the top of the Royalty and Diplomatic Service. Those with knowledge of the royal household tell us Lord Rosslyn is one of the King’s closest and most trusted members of staff. His role as Lord Steward involves managing all aspects of the King’s personal affairs, and the non-state business of the monarch.

[From Sky News]

While I’m not expecting to hear much more about this investigatory avenue, I think it’s interesting that royal reporters are at least doing some bare-bones straight reporting. They’re looking into who was part of the royal protection unit in 2011, who might have received Andrew’s information about Virginia, and whether the officers did anything about it, including “inform their commanding officers that a prince wanted them to dig up dirt on an American trafficking survivor.” If we had an FBI worth a damn, I’m sure they’d like to know if British police were actively investigating and dirt-digging on an American citizen/survivor as well. It would certainly be interesting to know if the king’s current Lord Steward has any recollection of the king’s brother ordering RPOs to look into Virginia. It would certainly be fascinating to see Ravec deal with this quandary too, especially since members of the royal households sit on the committee which assigns royal protection. It’s not so much a Venn diagram as much as it is just one big circle.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Guardian: Prince William ‘should release his children’ from the ‘royal family brand’
Celebrity News

bitchy | Guardian: Prince William ‘should release his children’ from the ‘royal family brand’

by jummy84
written by jummy84

Do you believe that Prince Andrew’s many sordid scandals will mark a turning point for the Windsor clan? Do you think it’s all downhill from here, and that the Windsors will never recover from it? Eh. I don’t know. Granted, I think Andrew has been completely awful for decades, and it says something about the institution that he’s still being protected and coddled to this degree. I’m just not sure how much of it is really being absorbed by the general public. What’s changed, this week, is that there’s been a willingness to write about how bad it actually is for the Windsors as a whole. The Guardian’s Simon Jenkins wrote this: “The latest Prince Andrew abuse claims are a new low for the Royal Family. In this form, it can’t survive.” Some highlights:

A disaster waiting to happen: The royal family was always a disaster waiting to happen. Its creation as a marketable entity in the 1960s by the late Queen Elizabeth II was meant to “modernise” the monarchy for the 20th century. It worked, but only up to a point. Her son Prince Andrew has long been its biggest liability, this week in trouble yet again due to his alleged behaviour within that ghoulish circle, the friends of Jeffrey Epstein.

The postwar Windsors: Queen Elizabeth was not to retreat like other postwar European monarchs at the time into an anonymous obscurity, to stick to their bicycles. She would refresh Britain’s semi-divine concept of monarchy as embodied in an “ordinary family”. It was portrayed as “the Firm”, a term that originated with Elizabeth’s father, George VI. It worked. The family looked lovely as their young children picnicked by a Scottish loch. The film was watched and admired by millions. But there was a lurking risk. One day the same children would be different. They would be tormented teenagers, rampaging twentysomethings and matrimonial casualties. They might be offered grand palaces and safe jobs, “representing” the monarch the length and breadth of the land. But then what? Would they all behave? It was like writing a play when you have already cast the actors. The children became instant global celebrities.

So many crises in the 1990s: Another crisis came in 1997 with the death of Diana and its initially woeful mishandling by the late queen. Her personal approval rating sank to an all-time low of 57%. Charles’s fell to 40%. Serious questions were raised of the future of the crown. At such times monarchy has nowhere to turn for sustenance but to public opinion. Its image is dependent on the media and the reaction to how it performs its rituals.

The bicycle monarchies: The so-called cycling monarchies such as Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Belgium did not go down the same path as the late queen. They became figureheads, anthropomorphic thrones, legacies of history and tradition, but they hold office strictly at the declaration of elected parliaments. Such monarchs practise none of Britain’s nonsense about religious anointment. They head up no “family firm”. Their relatives, close and distant, can go about their normal lives and do normal jobs. The king of the Netherlands still occasionally pilots a KLM jet.

William must plan a different kind of monarchy: Prince Andrew was already being eased out of the limelight before the publication of Virginia Giuffre’s memoir. The next move is for the future king, William, to plan a refashioned monarchy. He has already indicated his intention to live not in London but in a modest house in Windsor Park. He will presumably hand his Westminster estate to the government, and its gardens to the public. That would be all to the good. But above all, William should release his children. He should do away with the royal family brand, disband the Firm and take to his bicycle. No more Andrews.

[From The Guardian]

The thing is, Prince William has been telegraphing his agreement with this advice for some time. His view of the British monarchy is one of radical downsizing. Mostly, his idea of a downsized monarchy is that he still has all of the money, castles and power, but very few of the responsibilities and a fraction of the workload of his father, grandmother or great-grandfather. The idea of William “releasing his children” is interesting too, and I suspect that William actually has no desire for any of his children to “work for the Firm” in any way. When we talked about his appearance on the Reluctant Traveler, I brought up the old gossip, the pre-Sussex gossip, that there was always a sense that William was a closet republican anyway, and that he didn’t actually want to be king. Post-Sussex, it often feels like William now wants to be king solely because it’s something his brother can’t have.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Prince Andrew has given up his royal titles & honors, but he’s keeping Royal Lodge
Celebrity News

bitchy | Prince Andrew has given up his royal titles & honors, but he’s keeping Royal Lodge

by jummy84
written by jummy84

I swear, the Windsors really have to stop with these late Friday news dumps. When I left my house this afternoon, there were several increasingly urgent stories about Prince Andrew, the Duke of York. Last weekend, Andrew’s 2011 email to Jeffrey Epstein was published by the Daily Mail – that email proved that Andrew lied about when he broke off contact with Epstein, and the email also suggested that Andrew and Epstein planned to continue seeing each other and abusing women and girls together. Throughout the past week, the fallout has been limited to palace sources openly dithering about what to do next, all while emphasizing that they believed dealing with Prince Harry was a “greater priority” for the Firm. Well, I was wrong – I thought nothing would come out of this latest round of dithering about Andrew. But something happened. Andrew is now giving up all of his titles and honors.

Prince Andrew is discontinuing the use of his royal titles and honors.

In a statement released by Buckingham Palace on Friday, Oct. 17, Prince Andrew said he will no longer use his title or honors as it distracts from the work of King Charles and the royal family.

Andrew, 65, said in the statement, “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. 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,” he continued. “As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

To officially strip Prince Andrew’s titles, it would require an act of parliament.

Andrew’s ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, will no longer use her Duchess of York title. She has long gone by Sarah Ferguson professionally and will now use that name in all areas of her life, PEOPLE understands. The former couple will also continue to reside at their residence, Royal Lodge, on the Windsor Castle estate, as Andrew has a private tenancy agreement with The Crown Estate, which is unaffected by issues relating to his titles.

PEOPLE also understands that Andrew will not attend any of the royal family’s Christmas celebrations.

The former couple’s daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, will not have their titles affected by this decision.

Prince Andrew has been styled as “His Royal Highness” since birth. Upon his marriage to Sarah Ferguson in 1986, his mother, Queen Elizabeth, gave him the titles of Duke of York, Earl of Inverness and Baron Killyleagh. The Duke of York is the traditional title for the sovereign’s second son, and the elite peerage has a rich royal history. According to British etiquette expert Debrett’s, the dukedom has been traditionally conferred upon the second son of the monarch since Edward IV in 1474. Queen Elizabeth’s father, King George VI, was also known as the Duke of York prior to the shocking abdication of his elder brother, King Edward VIII, in 1936.

[From People]

The Royal Lodge thing is interesting, almost as if that was part of the agreement – Andrew gave up his titles and honors, in exchange for keeping his lease on Royal Lodge. I’ve got to wonder if Charles threw in a few more perks to sweeten the deal, like Andrew will still be allowed to host shooting parties on privately-owned royal property (Windsor, Sandringham, Balmoral). It’s also interesting that Sarah is officially giving up her Duchess of York title too, although people already went back to using her maiden name anyway. Whew… well, it had to be done. And a lot more should be done as well, including Andrew agreeing to be interviewed in the long-running criminal investigations in the UK and America. Also: should we call him Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor now?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Prince Andrew confirms he will relinquish all of his royal titles including Duke of York
Celebrity News

Prince Andrew confirms he will relinquish all of his royal titles including Duke of York

by jummy84
written by jummy84

Prince Andrew has confirmed he will relinquish all of his royal titles including Duke of York.

Prince Andrew has confirmed he will relinquish all of his royal titles including Duke of York

The disgraced 65-year-old, who has been mired in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal for years, made the announcement in a statement released on Friday (17.10.25), hours after reports he had held talks with King Charles about giving them up.

He said: “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.

“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.”

Charles is reportedly “glad” with the outcome.

Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, 65, were given their titles Duke and Duchess of York on their wedding day in 1986 – and she will also drop her Duchess title.

Andrew remains Duke of York but the title will not be used and

he will not attend family celebrations for Christmas at Sandringham, according to The Sun.

Despite handing his royal titles back he will remain at Royal Lodge as he has a “cast iron” tenancy until 2078.

It follows a series of damaging revelations about Andrew’s continued contact with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The Sun on Sunday reported the Duke of York was found to have lied about cutting ties with the disgraced financier, after an email surfaced in which he told Epstein: “We are in this together.”

The message, dated 29 February 2011, came just one day after the now-infamous photograph of Andrew with Virginia Giuffre was made public.

According to The Telegraph, the King met with his brother at Buckingham Palace earlier this week, after which Andrew agreed to give up his remaining royal titles.

Sources told the newspaper palace aides had reached “tipping point” and believed the monarchy had “no choice but to act” following the latest disclosures about Epstein.

The decision marks the most severe action yet taken against Andrew, who was stripped of his military titles, royal patronages and HRH style by Queen Elizabeth II in January 2022 after a US judge ruled he must face a civil sexual assault case brought by Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking victim Virginia Giuffre.

Andrew later settled the case for an undisclosed sum without admitting liability and has consistently denied having sex with her.

Virginia, who died by suicide in April aged 41, is making posthumous claims in her forthcoming autobiography Nobody’s Girl, alleging she was trafficked to Andrew by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell as a teenager.

In the book, due to be released on 21 October, she reportedly writes Andrew viewed their encounters as his “birth right” and said “thank you” to her in a “clipped British accent”.

Virginia also claims Maxwell told her the morning after the alleged encounter: “You did well, the prince had fun.”

Earlier this year, Andrew was also linked to a separate controversy involving alleged contact with a Chinese spy.

Leaked documents from 2019 showed that he had met with Chinese officials, including Yang Tengbo, and sought to use his royal connections to raise £2.4 billion for an international technology initiative.

Security sources later described the relationship as a potential “threat to national security”.




0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Prince Andrew Gives Up Royal Titles Amid Jeffrey Epstein Allegations
Celebrity News

Prince Andrew Gives Up Royal Titles Amid Jeffrey Epstein Allegations

by jummy84
written by jummy84

While Epstein died by suicide in 2019 in a New York jail while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, Giuffre filed a federal lawsuit against the Prince Andrew in 2021.

The royal settled the suit the following year, though he has continued to deny that the two engaged in any sexual relations.

“I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady,” Andrew said during a BBC Newsnight interview at the time, “none whatsoever.”

The is now the second time that Prince Andrew has had changes to made to his titles, as in 2022 Queen Elizabeth, months before her death, stripped him of his military affiliations and royal patronages amid the sexual abuse case.

“With the Queen’s approval and agreement, the Duke of York’s military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to the Queen,” Buckingham Palace said in a statement in January of that year, per BBC. “The Duke of York will continue not to undertake any public duties and is defending this case as a private citizen.”

Andrew isn’t the only royal who has made headlines this year. For more news from royals around the world, keep reading…

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
The Most Epic Reunion Of The Year! Taylor Zakhar Perez And Nicholas Galitzine Return In Red, White & Royal Wedding! | Glamsham.com
Lifestyle

The Most Epic Reunion Of The Year! Taylor Zakhar Perez And Nicholas Galitzine Return In Red, White & Royal Wedding! | Glamsham.com

by jummy84
written by jummy84

Prime Video has officially released Red, White & Royal Wedding, the long-awaited sequel to its worldwide LGBTQ+ rom-com success Red, White & Royal Blue. After the original received a tidal wave of fan affection, the follow-up will further explore the touching romance of Prince Henry of Britain and Alex Claremont-Diaz, the United States’ First Son.

Actors Taylor Zakhar Perez and Nicholas Galitzine will reprise their fan-favourite roles as Alex and Henry, while director Jamie Babbit — known for But I’m a Cheerleader — steps in to helm the project. Matthew López, who directed the original film, returns as co-writer and producer, alongside bestselling author Casey McQuiston and screenwriter Gemma Burgess.

The original movie was a cultural hit, admired for its humor, emotional resonance, and affirming queer portrayals. Viral moments, fan illustrations, and TikTok edits propelled Red, White & Royal Blue into one of the most-viewed Amazon Prime romantic comedies, particularly in India.

Red, White & Royal Wedding follows the next chapter of Alex and Henry’s journey to forever as they dive into royal customs, self-discovery, and the scrutiny of life in the public eye.

Director Jamie Babbit stated, “After But I’m a Cheerleader, I’m delighted to return to queer love stories. We all need this type of optimism and gay joy.” López further stated, “It’s been a pleasure to co-write the next chapter. Jamie brings the perfect mix of wit and heart.

Author Casey McQuiston revealed, “Jamie has the sensitivity to care about Alex and Henry’s tale. I am waiting for the fans to see what’s next.”

As a celebration of love without borders set to be, the sequel reiterates that romance, even between politics and royalty, is always worth fighting for.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts