DC Edit | Charles Right In Banishing Andrew

The British royal family, at an inflection point in its layered history, may have made a smart move in stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his title of ‘Prince’ and banishing him to the king’s remote Sandringham estate where he would presumably stay well out of sight. It may have been a painful decision that brother King Charles had to take to keep the monarchy relevant enough in a modern democracy.

At a time of the monarchy’s popularity further declining after the death of long reigning Queen Elizabeth, the string of scandals that Andrew was involved in had to be seen as a burden the House of Windsor did not need, especially when royalty had to be seen scaling down the pomp and splendour to try and win the support of younger generations, who are known to be opposing the continuation of the monarchy in the most modern age.

The ‘Prince’ might have a grouse that he had been singled out among the many grand political and business personalities who were said to have been involved in the sexual shenanigans that the despicable American Jeffrey Epstein was known to have set up for the rich, famous and powerful. But he had no chance to escape the opprobrium and the royal admonition after a tell-all expose stated explicitly that he had had sex with a minor who had been trafficked to him.

Knowing full well that the opinion in the court of public opinion mattered a lot more than what the courts may have debated doing in their dilemma in such high-profile cases where hard facts clash with innuendo and slander, King Charles and his elder son Prince of Wales may have done their bit to keep the royal image afloat.

By keeping their distance from the dilettante whose case was a reminder that privilege from birthright is not indefinite, the royals may be seeking the forgiveness of the public. There are many more powerful people like ruling politicians and billionaires who may have been tainted by the same Epstein scandal and who have managed to not let it consume them.