Posted on 02/19/2026 7:38:45 PM PST by SeekAndFind
King Charles' statement on Andrew goes as follows:
“ ‘I have learned with the deepest concern the news about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and suspicion of misconduct in public office.What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities.
In this, as I have said before, they have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.
Let me state clearly: the law must take its course. As this process continues, it would not be right for me to comment further on this matter.
Meanwhile, my family and I will continue in our duty and service to you all.
Charles R’
What’s missing are the words, ‘my brother’. There is nothing in this chilly missive to indicate that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is the King’s younger brother.
The reference to ‘my family and I’ seems designed to suggest that the family in question does not include this particular black sheep. There is in fact nothing human or personal about it at all. Charles could have been writing about a stranger – though granted, the antics of Andrew as alleged in the Epstein files must have made him seem like one.
There were ways for the King to have put things differently: if only to indicate that he feels sorrow and shame for his brother’s disgrace. As it is, he talks, with marbles in his mouth, only about ‘the news…and suspicion of misconduct in public office.’ He makes clear that ‘the appropriate authorities’ have his ‘full and wholehearted support and cooperation’. But when it comes to the man himself, he talks about Andrew as if they’ve never met.
This is of course damage limitation and no doubt it was written after being forewarned by the police and after drafting by lawyers. But there are times when the human thing is the right thing to do. Of course, Charles must say that he supports ‘the authorities’, but he could also say that he and his family are stricken by the news. He could, in short, treat Andrew as a brother, not a PR problem, even while making clear his distress and embarrassment. He has laid down his brother for his reputation and that of the monarchy, and his reputation will not be enhanced by it.
Let’s not forget that there was a time when Charles himself was far from being the people’s pet. When Diana made clear her hurt and distress that ‘there were three people in that marriage’, the third being Camilla, he brought the monarchy pretty close to the brink. But he didn’t bow to public pressure then. With characteristic stubbornness he made clear that Camilla was part of the deal if he was to be king, and so unprecedented effort was invested in transforming her from a mistress made good to a national treasure.
The Andrew episode is, of course, different. Adultery is one thing; allegedly passing on information gained while a trade envoy to someone as dodgy as Epstein is quite another (Andrew has previously denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein). The point is, that while has no choice but to support the police action and ‘the process’, there would be nothing to stop him taking the chilly edge off his statement with some familial feeling, even if that feeling is one of hurt and distress.
Did he send Andrew a card today for his 66th birthday, do you think, in his lonely Norfolk outpost? That too may have seemed too dangerous, too likely to be picked up by the press. But that too would have been the brotherly thing to do. The late Queen would, I think, also have supported the police action – she would have had no choice – but I think her statement would have been that of a mother as well as a head of state. Charles should call his brother, not to say that he’s been hard done by, but to say he’s thinking about him and praying for him. Because that’s the other thing.
The King is head of the CofE, and while that is no guarantee of good behaviour, it should be a warrant for Christian compassion towards a sinner – maybe a repentant sinner. The exclusion of Andrew from the Christmas Day service at Balmoral last year was, I think, a disgrace. Christianity is not for the perfect but for sinners.
Charles should remember that as he hangs his brother out to dry. Andrew, for all his sins, deserves to feel that his family is still his family. They’re a callous lot, the Windsors – remember how they left the Romanovs to be murdered by the Bolsheviks for fear of hampering the war effort – but I think a little humanity wouldn’t go amiss right now. Kicking a man when he’s down is a mean trick, even if he’s you’re brother and a prince.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Just like the elder brother in the parable of the prodigal son: “But when THIS SON OF YOURS...”
I imagine he’s known since they were young what Andrew is. Perhaps there’s never been any love lost between them. I do not understand those feelings between siblings; my siblings and I would never act like that. But we have cousins who don’t speak to their siblings, and I’ve heard of siblings who cheat each other. Sad.
A priest once said that the older brother gets overlooked. Per https://catholicstand.com/lessons-mercy-prodigal-sons-older-brother/
A more complex consideration is that the older brother serves as a warning against self-righteousness rooted in pride. He is understandably offended by the pain the younger brother’s selfish and irresponsible behavior inflicted on their father. But he is consumed by anger when he sees his sibling being welcomed with love instead of being condemned.
The older brother’s pride highlights the disparity between his own virtue and his brother’s vices. Yet this same pride blinds him to the hardness of his own heart. The love and forgiveness he is withholding from his brother causes his father as much pain as did his brother’s reckless living.
Whatever you think about Epstein you have to admire the success he had in life
(and maybe even still has on another Island somewhere else tropical without a doubt)
but did I, or would I ever hang out with him, oh hell no.
The parable of the prodigal son serves as a message of great hope for the infinite availability of God’s great mercy if we but repent and ask forgiveness. It also serves as a dire warning of the grave consequences for refusing to extend our own meager mercy to our neighbor. We can exclude ourselves from the banquet of Heaven with our refusal to forgive.
What a pantload this screed. His message was fine. The statement "my family and I will continue in our duty and service to you all" was perfect. The Royal Family has many official duties. Andrew will no longer be a part of them. This author wants Charles to cry and emote over it? I'm sure he is privately both enraged and heartsick at his ass of a brother besmirching everything the RF is supposed to be and do. The two key words in Charles' statement are "duty" and "service." He got that right.
What a load of poop. Did Randy Andy ghostwrite this screed? Seems like it.
Charles wrote an excellent explanation.
Big difference is that the Prodigal Son came begging for forgiveness.
Andrew has remained defiant.
Personally, I’ve always had sympathy for the older brother in this story. The point that he has been responsible and loyal to the father throughout his life is confirmed by the fact that his father seeks him out to explain his (the father‘s) actions.
there is an 11 year age difference between them
Royalty has been doing this to each other for a thousand years. 😆
Each generation of royals has at least one. The next up is Harry. And while it is cute in toddlers, neither George nor Charlotte were as uncontrolled as Louis. I fear the future may not be kind to that one.
It sounds like he is being charged with treason.
Trade or war?
Is there a difference.
Charles is 12 years old than Andrew, not a lot in common to begin with. By all accounts, their parents were not much of Charles’ life in his early years. But they doted on and spoiled Andrew, something that continued well into both men’s adulthood. I’m guessing that’s a long way of saying Charles has probably been sick of his stuff for decades.
We can pick our noses but not our relatives.
If Andrew can slay a fire breathing dragon he will be exonerated.
“With characteristic stubbornness he made clear that Camilla was part of the deal if he was to be king, and so unprecedented effort was invested in transforming her from a mistress made good to a national treasure.”
That’s never gonna happen. In the UK she’s almost universally despised.
CC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.