1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:03,720 This is a story that has totally run ahead of the palace. 2 00:00:03,960 --> 00:00:06,040 They've lost control of the narrative. 3 00:00:06,320 --> 00:00:10,480 The disparity between the way in which the Labour Party is self 4 00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:14,600 flagellating and apologizing and decapitating themselves, and in 5 00:00:14,600 --> 00:00:18,040 comparison with the royal family who finally had managed to admit 6 00:00:18,040 --> 00:00:22,800 to concern but no apology, is. It's a gulf of accountability. 7 00:00:22,800 --> 00:00:26,040 It's extraordinary. Andrew does not have any kind of 8 00:00:26,040 --> 00:00:29,440 Crown immunity that applies only to the sovereign, so he can be 9 00:00:29,440 --> 00:00:31,840 summoned in a Criminal Court in this country. 10 00:00:31,960 --> 00:00:39,040 Is the monarchy finished? Hello and welcome to the 11 00:00:39,040 --> 00:00:40,760 forecast. Andrew Mountbatten. 12 00:00:40,760 --> 00:00:44,000 Windsor is once again at the centre of serious allegations 13 00:00:44,000 --> 00:00:47,160 connected to the late paedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, 14 00:00:47,320 --> 00:00:50,320 with police now assessing whether a criminal case will 15 00:00:50,320 --> 00:00:54,080 follow and his brother the King not apparently standing in their 16 00:00:54,080 --> 00:00:55,880 way. So could the former Prince 17 00:00:55,880 --> 00:00:58,560 really face a trial and even jail time? 18 00:00:58,960 --> 00:01:01,960 But beyond the legal questions lies a deeper one about power, 19 00:01:01,960 --> 00:01:04,440 privilege, and of course, accountability. 20 00:01:04,720 --> 00:01:07,840 Will this just be another royal scandal that fades with the news 21 00:01:07,840 --> 00:01:11,920 cycle or a real moment of reckoning for the crown itself? 22 00:01:12,440 --> 00:01:15,120 Joining me today to discuss this is Doctor Tessa Dunlop, royal 23 00:01:15,120 --> 00:01:17,960 historian and host of the podcast where politics Meeks 24 00:01:17,960 --> 00:01:21,240 History and Professor Jeremy Horder, professor of Criminal 25 00:01:21,360 --> 00:01:22,720 law at the LSE. Welcome to you both. 26 00:01:23,280 --> 00:01:27,040 Tessa, let me start with you. Things have changed quite 27 00:01:27,040 --> 00:01:28,960 dramatically, haven't they, in the last week. 28 00:01:28,960 --> 00:01:31,560 Tell us how. Well to give you some idea of 29 00:01:31,560 --> 00:01:34,680 just how much things have changed, you will recall Keir 30 00:01:34,680 --> 00:01:39,880 Starmer returning from his Asia tour and he shot from the hip in 31 00:01:39,880 --> 00:01:42,320 an unprecedented way. So much so that it made the 32 00:01:42,400 --> 00:01:45,360 front pages of some of the Sunday papers when he said that 33 00:01:45,360 --> 00:01:49,320 in order to be victim centred, Andrew should testify. 34 00:01:49,320 --> 00:01:50,720 He didn't. You know that that's to 35 00:01:50,720 --> 00:01:53,240 paraphrase him. This was before the whole Mandel 36 00:01:53,240 --> 00:01:55,360 thing and. That's the first time he'd said 37 00:01:55,360 --> 00:01:57,040 that about. Andrew the first time previously 38 00:01:57,040 --> 00:01:58,160 he said it was a matter for Andrew. 39 00:01:58,560 --> 00:02:01,560 This is him coming front and centre and placing Andrew in the 40 00:02:01,560 --> 00:02:05,360 narrative. I happened to have from a good a 41 00:02:05,360 --> 00:02:07,440 reliable source within the palace to know that they were 42 00:02:07,440 --> 00:02:11,240 very displeased with this because not only had Keir 43 00:02:11,240 --> 00:02:15,120 Stamelot consulted the palace, but also he'd trodden on that 44 00:02:15,120 --> 00:02:17,040 terrain. You know, he was muscling in 45 00:02:17,040 --> 00:02:20,080 with his big political nose in what they considered to be their 46 00:02:20,080 --> 00:02:23,280 family matter. Now scroll forward a week and a 47 00:02:23,280 --> 00:02:26,280 half and how things have changed. 48 00:02:26,520 --> 00:02:31,120 This is a story that has totally run ahead of the palace. 49 00:02:31,320 --> 00:02:34,080 They hate that they like to be able to curate everything. 50 00:02:34,280 --> 00:02:37,640 They've lost control of the narrative and the only thing 51 00:02:37,640 --> 00:02:40,840 that's arguably in some ways playing in their favour is the 52 00:02:40,840 --> 00:02:43,360 story has been somewhat capped by Mandelson. 53 00:02:43,440 --> 00:02:48,320 However, the disparity between the way in which the Labour 54 00:02:48,320 --> 00:02:51,480 Party are self flagellating and apologizing and decapitating 55 00:02:51,480 --> 00:02:54,840 themselves, and in comparison with the royal family who 56 00:02:54,840 --> 00:02:59,120 finally had managed to admit to concern but no apology is. 57 00:03:00,040 --> 00:03:02,160 A gulf of accountability. It's extraordinary. 58 00:03:02,160 --> 00:03:03,720 And shame as well. Yeah, it's appalling. 59 00:03:03,720 --> 00:03:06,880 And I think the general public, most of whom sort of sit in the 60 00:03:06,880 --> 00:03:09,120 middle and go yell right there, monarchy, you know, a bit 61 00:03:09,120 --> 00:03:12,160 apathetic, but they'll go with it, are feeling, I think, 62 00:03:12,160 --> 00:03:12,920 deeply. Perturbed. 63 00:03:12,920 --> 00:03:15,480 But the So the other thing is that the King has come up with a 64 00:03:15,480 --> 00:03:17,960 statement, hasn't he? And what does that statement 65 00:03:17,960 --> 00:03:20,400 exactly say? And how significant is that? 66 00:03:21,200 --> 00:03:24,560 I think it's it's very important for what it doesn't say, it 67 00:03:24,560 --> 00:03:27,960 doesn't apologize. So we have Keir Starmer saying, 68 00:03:27,960 --> 00:03:30,280 I apologize for appointing Madison. 69 00:03:30,720 --> 00:03:35,400 But what we have from the king is a sentiment, an idea really, 70 00:03:35,400 --> 00:03:37,960 that he's already almost done enough because it says the King 71 00:03:37,960 --> 00:03:41,480 has made clear in words and through unprecedented actions 72 00:03:41,720 --> 00:03:43,480 his profound concern at allegations. 73 00:03:43,480 --> 00:03:46,720 And you think, OK, what words? What unprecedented actions. 74 00:03:46,720 --> 00:03:48,760 I'll just leave that hanging and perhaps you can come up with the 75 00:03:48,760 --> 00:03:51,680 answers there. But he doesn't say sorry, sorry. 76 00:03:51,680 --> 00:03:55,800 We stood by our man, the Prince from 2011 when that photograph 77 00:03:55,800 --> 00:03:58,800 was put out in the public. And we now know because there's 78 00:03:58,800 --> 00:04:02,480 been this corroborative e-mail sent in 2015 by Angela that that 79 00:04:02,480 --> 00:04:06,520 that that photograph was real. In other words, they protected 80 00:04:06,760 --> 00:04:10,800 Prince Andrew. And when you have the ultimate 81 00:04:10,800 --> 00:04:14,280 institution of state, the royal family, basically trolling, 82 00:04:14,280 --> 00:04:18,880 you're effectively saying to the the late Virginia Dufrey, you're 83 00:04:18,880 --> 00:04:21,480 a liar. That has profound consequences. 84 00:04:21,480 --> 00:04:22,800 And by the way, she's no longer alive. 85 00:04:22,800 --> 00:04:25,120 But the significance of the King's statement in terms of 86 00:04:25,120 --> 00:04:27,440 what he did say is that if there were a criminal. 87 00:04:27,440 --> 00:04:29,880 That's the second part. He would not stand in their way. 88 00:04:30,080 --> 00:04:32,640 And this is also key. The King's a constitutional 89 00:04:32,640 --> 00:04:34,840 monarch. Really he shouldn't be 90 00:04:34,840 --> 00:04:39,160 prejudicial either side of a of a legal case, whether it's in 91 00:04:39,160 --> 00:04:42,560 America or Britain. And he made that quite clear. 92 00:04:42,680 --> 00:04:46,080 He actually said in his statement, you know, that's a 93 00:04:46,080 --> 00:04:49,080 matter for Andrew Macbatten. You know, his, his case with the 94 00:04:49,080 --> 00:04:51,640 police, his but, you know, but we are open. 95 00:04:51,640 --> 00:04:55,080 We are open to be cooperative. In other words, drawing a line 96 00:04:55,080 --> 00:04:58,840 between him and his brother. But can the can the royal family 97 00:04:58,840 --> 00:05:00,720 do that? Is there a clear line between? 98 00:05:00,720 --> 00:05:02,320 This because there's the law and we'll talk about that in a 99 00:05:02,360 --> 00:05:03,680 second. And then there's politics. 100 00:05:03,720 --> 00:05:06,320 Politics around the monarchy, around the crown, the firm 101 00:05:06,320 --> 00:05:08,200 indeed. And I know it's only one or two 102 00:05:08,200 --> 00:05:11,760 hectares, that is, you know, shouted out at the king and and 103 00:05:11,760 --> 00:05:13,880 they were shouted down by the crowd around him. 104 00:05:14,040 --> 00:05:15,880 But this has happened twice now. It has I. 105 00:05:15,880 --> 00:05:17,240 Don't think the Queen ever got heckled. 106 00:05:17,560 --> 00:05:19,320 No. Well, I think hecklings long 107 00:05:19,320 --> 00:05:21,600 existed. I think that the mass media, 108 00:05:21,600 --> 00:05:24,360 which is generally on side for the monarchy tries to curate 109 00:05:24,360 --> 00:05:28,240 around hecklers and seen as rather sort of distasteful and 110 00:05:28,240 --> 00:05:31,360 inappropriate. But it the problem is it's 111 00:05:31,360 --> 00:05:33,360 speaking to the majority in some ways. 112 00:05:33,360 --> 00:05:35,160 Those questions. How long have you known? 113 00:05:35,320 --> 00:05:36,560 And it wasn't even a rude Heckle. 114 00:05:36,560 --> 00:05:39,680 It wasn't an egg or something, but it was a question that I 115 00:05:39,680 --> 00:05:42,240 think is forefront. And when Prince Edward, who was 116 00:05:42,240 --> 00:05:44,720 the first person to speak to this problem because he was 117 00:05:44,720 --> 00:05:48,080 bounced into it on stage, I think representing the British 118 00:05:48,080 --> 00:05:50,720 embassy over in Dubai and he said, well, I don't think anyone 119 00:05:50,720 --> 00:05:52,840 who's interested actually know Edward. 120 00:05:53,040 --> 00:05:55,880 That's what everyone's thinking about at the moment. 121 00:05:56,080 --> 00:05:59,000 And it it was extraordinary that they thought they could do that. 122 00:05:59,280 --> 00:06:04,160 And that again, speaks to the level of sort of entitlement and 123 00:06:04,360 --> 00:06:07,000 almost a detachment from reality. 124 00:06:07,000 --> 00:06:09,520 Yeah. Jeremy the when it comes to the 125 00:06:09,520 --> 00:06:12,280 law, yes. What can they do now? 126 00:06:12,360 --> 00:06:15,920 What do you think they will do now regarding Andrew and in what 127 00:06:15,920 --> 00:06:17,280 particular case? I mean, because there are two 128 00:06:17,280 --> 00:06:19,280 areas. There's there's, you know, abuse 129 00:06:19,280 --> 00:06:22,600 of public office, you know, was he selling or showing secrets, 130 00:06:22,600 --> 00:06:26,840 trade secrets to Epstein or indeed the other case, you know, 131 00:06:26,840 --> 00:06:29,760 the victims, the girls, Virginia, the late Virginia 132 00:06:29,760 --> 00:06:31,320 Jeffrey and so on. Yes, indeed. 133 00:06:32,200 --> 00:06:35,920 The short answer to the question of what can they do is that 134 00:06:37,400 --> 00:06:41,120 Andrew does not have any kind of crown immunity that applies only 135 00:06:41,120 --> 00:06:42,960 to the sovereign. Only to the King. 136 00:06:43,000 --> 00:06:45,480 Yeah, query his wife as well, don't know. 137 00:06:45,480 --> 00:06:48,480 But we don't have to worry about that because the key thing is, 138 00:06:48,480 --> 00:06:52,120 does Andrew and he doesn't, he doesn't have immunity. 139 00:06:52,120 --> 00:06:56,360 So he can be summoned to in a Criminal Court in this country. 140 00:06:57,160 --> 00:07:00,560 Now, the position may very well be different in terms of whether 141 00:07:00,560 --> 00:07:02,920 he should be giving giving evidence in the United States. 142 00:07:03,400 --> 00:07:07,240 We'll see what comes with that. But I think that what's 143 00:07:07,240 --> 00:07:10,360 happened, of course, as we all know, is that the king has 144 00:07:10,360 --> 00:07:13,160 created distance between himself and Andrew by stripping of his 145 00:07:13,160 --> 00:07:15,320 titles. So that means they're not bound 146 00:07:15,320 --> 00:07:18,760 together in quite the same way. He's not part of the firm, if 147 00:07:18,760 --> 00:07:20,440 you like, in quite the same way that he was before. 148 00:07:20,920 --> 00:07:24,200 Secondly, there's been this from the point of Andrew's, from from 149 00:07:24,640 --> 00:07:27,240 Andrew Macbatten Windsor's point of view, this very ominous 150 00:07:27,240 --> 00:07:30,720 statement from the King that he won't stand in the way of any 151 00:07:30,720 --> 00:07:33,560 criminal investigation. And of course, he's absolutely 152 00:07:33,560 --> 00:07:36,280 right that the King has said that, but what I think that 153 00:07:36,280 --> 00:07:37,760 means? Quite late in the day. 154 00:07:37,760 --> 00:07:41,400 He has, absolutely. But I think that the timing is 155 00:07:41,400 --> 00:07:45,520 significant, I think because it it must be remembered that from 156 00:07:45,640 --> 00:07:48,520 the King's point of view, whatever you might think about 157 00:07:48,520 --> 00:07:51,480 this, Andrew continues consistently to deny any 158 00:07:51,480 --> 00:07:55,880 criminal wrongdoing. So unless and until we have 159 00:07:56,920 --> 00:08:01,040 substantive proof of that, then the King would not be expected, 160 00:08:01,040 --> 00:08:04,200 I think, to make an adverse statement about his brother. 161 00:08:04,480 --> 00:08:07,880 And just just to clarify one point, there was no immunity for 162 00:08:07,880 --> 00:08:10,360 him whatsoever, even when he was still a Prince. 163 00:08:10,760 --> 00:08:14,760 Absolutely not OK. So his legal status, yeah, 164 00:08:14,800 --> 00:08:16,720 having been stripped of the title has not changed. 165 00:08:16,760 --> 00:08:20,680 No, OK. So there are three potential 166 00:08:20,680 --> 00:08:23,600 cases, aren't there? There's just a testifying before 167 00:08:23,600 --> 00:08:29,080 Congress over Virginia, Jeffrey and the women there is the 168 00:08:29,080 --> 00:08:33,120 criminal case against him on business interests here in the 169 00:08:33,159 --> 00:08:34,799 UK. What he was doing is you know, 170 00:08:34,799 --> 00:08:38,720 business envoy and then also the question of of women and 171 00:08:38,720 --> 00:08:40,840 underage sex here. Yes, right. 172 00:08:41,200 --> 00:08:43,960 Three cases. How likely is it, do you think, 173 00:08:43,960 --> 00:08:45,920 that he'll end up in the dock for one of those three, or 174 00:08:45,920 --> 00:08:48,920 perhaps all of them? It's extremely difficult to say. 175 00:08:48,920 --> 00:08:50,360 I mean, I know that's frustrating when people say 176 00:08:50,360 --> 00:08:55,960 that, but I would have thought that the most likely 177 00:08:55,960 --> 00:09:00,240 investigation would be the one where you have victims of 178 00:09:00,240 --> 00:09:02,520 alleged sexual abuse. I think that's the. 179 00:09:02,520 --> 00:09:05,200 Most likely investigation. Yes, I think so, because in the 180 00:09:05,320 --> 00:09:09,760 UK, yeah, well, I think that's right because I would say those 181 00:09:09,760 --> 00:09:11,720 are the ones that have the highest degree of public 182 00:09:11,720 --> 00:09:15,280 interest, that would command the most resources and the most 183 00:09:15,280 --> 00:09:17,920 police time. It seems to me there may be more 184 00:09:17,920 --> 00:09:21,280 evidence in relation immediately on, in relation to the 185 00:09:21,280 --> 00:09:26,280 misconduct case. But whilst there maybe will be a 186 00:09:26,280 --> 00:09:28,640 strong case of misconduct in public office and some of us 187 00:09:28,640 --> 00:09:31,480 have been arguing that about his activities for years, it's only 188 00:09:31,480 --> 00:09:35,360 now that we're being paid that attention is being paid to those 189 00:09:35,360 --> 00:09:39,440 allegations. But in the end, a breach of 190 00:09:39,440 --> 00:09:42,760 public trust in relation to the disclosure of information is not 191 00:09:42,760 --> 00:09:45,600 of the same order as sexual offending, which is obviously 192 00:09:45,600 --> 00:09:47,600 extremely serious. But. 193 00:09:48,240 --> 00:09:51,680 I, I'm fascinated to hear you say that because I was informed 194 00:09:51,680 --> 00:09:53,960 this morning that Thames Valley Police, which I believe is 195 00:09:53,960 --> 00:09:57,400 overseeing both the criminal investigations here in the UK, 196 00:09:57,640 --> 00:10:03,000 has paused the inquiry with regards to abuse of women and at 197 00:10:03,000 --> 00:10:07,400 the moment is pursuing the one regarding possible abuse of 198 00:10:07,600 --> 00:10:09,960 public office when he was a trade envoy. 199 00:10:10,280 --> 00:10:14,000 And we know historically it's incredibly hard for women to 200 00:10:14,000 --> 00:10:17,560 bring sexual predators to justice because the two chief 201 00:10:17,560 --> 00:10:19,240 witnesses are the accused and the accuser. 202 00:10:19,440 --> 00:10:22,680 The case of Virginia Dufres no longer even alive. 203 00:10:23,000 --> 00:10:26,080 And so while it might be the juicy of bone, the bigger, 204 00:10:26,080 --> 00:10:32,000 deeper, darker story actually in terms of hard proof, something 205 00:10:32,000 --> 00:10:34,400 that you can rely on. It's all there in the e-mail 206 00:10:34,400 --> 00:10:37,040 cache when it comes to him spilling over about Helmand 207 00:10:37,040 --> 00:10:39,280 province and investment in Singapore and Vietnam. 208 00:10:39,520 --> 00:10:44,160 Whereas actually how do you prove a non consensual sex that 209 00:10:44,160 --> 00:10:47,320 took place 20 years ago? I agree that it's difficult. 210 00:10:47,640 --> 00:10:49,920 It's a question of where the public interest lies. 211 00:10:49,920 --> 00:10:55,360 And it seems to me that there is a case for saying that pursuing 212 00:10:55,360 --> 00:10:57,920 the misconduct case, although the evidence might be clear, 213 00:10:58,240 --> 00:11:03,080 would be in itself very damaging to the king, For example. 214 00:11:03,080 --> 00:11:05,840 It, it, it, it casts a shadow on his reputation as much as it 215 00:11:05,840 --> 00:11:07,680 does on Andrew. Whereas in relation to the 216 00:11:07,680 --> 00:11:09,800 sexual offending, you're not, you're not going to worry about 217 00:11:09,800 --> 00:11:12,280 that because it's much more important to get justice for 218 00:11:12,280 --> 00:11:14,680 victims of sexual offending than it is to worry about the 219 00:11:14,680 --> 00:11:16,320 reputation. But in other words you're saying 220 00:11:16,320 --> 00:11:20,360 while he has no immunity being an ex Prince and didn't even 221 00:11:20,360 --> 00:11:22,640 when he was a Prince, you're saying he does actually have 222 00:11:22,640 --> 00:11:24,600 immunity because of the family he belongs to. 223 00:11:25,400 --> 00:11:27,360 Well, he doesn't have immunity, No, it's a question. 224 00:11:27,360 --> 00:11:29,240 Of protected to an extent. To an extent. 225 00:11:29,400 --> 00:11:32,320 Which is the biggest shadow is the biggest shadow he gets, you 226 00:11:32,320 --> 00:11:35,960 know, he ends up in, you know, in his staying court and is 227 00:11:35,960 --> 00:11:38,280 convicted. That's a shadow or nothing is 228 00:11:38,280 --> 00:11:40,680 done. That's also a shadow, possibly a 229 00:11:40,680 --> 00:11:42,640 bigger shadow. Absolutely it is. 230 00:11:43,280 --> 00:11:46,600 But it's a question of I think where the public interest really 231 00:11:46,600 --> 00:11:49,520 lies and what the and where the public feeling really lies. 232 00:11:49,520 --> 00:11:52,640 And I think that most people are, it seems to me, rightly 233 00:11:52,640 --> 00:11:56,480 concerned about the element of of possible sexual abuse that 234 00:11:56,520 --> 00:11:59,040 even though the evidence may be clearer on the misconduct, which 235 00:11:59,040 --> 00:12:01,360 I think it probably is. But to what extent does public 236 00:12:01,360 --> 00:12:05,160 interest dictate what actually gets investigated and finally 237 00:12:05,160 --> 00:12:06,880 ends up, well, I think, an indictment? 238 00:12:07,000 --> 00:12:07,760 It's crucial. It's. 239 00:12:07,800 --> 00:12:10,200 The evidence that's available. Well, the prosecutors have to 240 00:12:10,200 --> 00:12:12,640 take into account two things. First of all, whether the 241 00:12:12,880 --> 00:12:15,080 evidence provides a reasonable prospect of conviction. 242 00:12:15,080 --> 00:12:18,040 So that's the evidence point. But secondly, they have to 243 00:12:18,040 --> 00:12:20,520 decide whether there's a public interest in prosecution 244 00:12:20,600 --> 00:12:23,640 essentially. And on that, that's in both 245 00:12:23,640 --> 00:12:25,480 cases. And that's a very wide set of 246 00:12:25,480 --> 00:12:27,320 considerations. There are a lot of issues there 247 00:12:27,800 --> 00:12:30,560 in relation to the public interest and all I'm suggesting 248 00:12:30,560 --> 00:12:34,080 it's not. I mean, I personally feel that 249 00:12:34,080 --> 00:12:36,320 it's right to pursue this case. That is my personal view. 250 00:12:36,360 --> 00:12:38,080 It should be which? Case both cases. 251 00:12:38,240 --> 00:12:40,880 Both cases, yes, they should be including the Muskanic, and I 252 00:12:40,880 --> 00:12:45,160 merely predict it that there will in the end be a feeling 253 00:12:45,160 --> 00:12:46,480 that it wouldn't be right to pursue it. 254 00:12:46,560 --> 00:12:49,440 How difficult is it to prove misconduct in public office? 255 00:12:50,040 --> 00:12:54,640 It's a high bar because you have to approve not merely that 256 00:12:54,640 --> 00:12:56,720 something was done that was wrong, that shouldn't have been 257 00:12:56,720 --> 00:12:59,400 done, but there was an abuse of the public's trust. 258 00:12:59,560 --> 00:13:02,760 Now there there are two factors that might lead you to think 259 00:13:02,760 --> 00:13:07,240 that in this case. 1 is that he allegedly disclosed information 260 00:13:07,240 --> 00:13:09,800 for the private financial gain of another person. 261 00:13:09,800 --> 00:13:11,800 That's seriousness element number one. 262 00:13:11,800 --> 00:13:13,640 Yeah. The second is that he may have 263 00:13:13,640 --> 00:13:16,440 done so as part of an exchange of favours. 264 00:13:16,440 --> 00:13:18,400 In other words, there's a corruption element to it. 265 00:13:18,400 --> 00:13:22,080 So that's, that's seriousness element #2 and if you put those 266 00:13:22,080 --> 00:13:25,720 together and it's the same two issues in the Mandelson case at 267 00:13:25,720 --> 00:13:29,520 stake there, then you've got a case where you might say there 268 00:13:29,520 --> 00:13:31,200 was an abuse of the public trust. 269 00:13:32,720 --> 00:13:36,840 Yes, it's it's so complex on a number of levels. 270 00:13:36,880 --> 00:13:39,560 At the moment. If you go to the National 271 00:13:39,560 --> 00:13:43,680 Archives, the public records office, you will not be able to 272 00:13:43,840 --> 00:13:51,440 access Prince Andrew's papers as a trade envoy until 2065, now 273 00:13:51,440 --> 00:13:55,600 262065. 60 year. Yeah, to guarantee that 274 00:13:55,600 --> 00:13:58,200 basically that he's dead by the time you have access to his 275 00:13:58,200 --> 00:13:59,520 papers. So in terms. 276 00:13:59,520 --> 00:14:01,080 That's not normal though, is. It and of course it's not 277 00:14:01,080 --> 00:14:02,440 normal. It's 20 years. 278 00:14:02,440 --> 00:14:05,480 It's. 20 years, 100% it's 20. He's now Andrew Mountbatten 279 00:14:05,480 --> 00:14:07,000 Windsor. He's no longer. 280 00:14:07,000 --> 00:14:10,080 But at the moment, you still can't, from what I gather, you 281 00:14:10,080 --> 00:14:13,120 still cannot access those files. So if we're talking about full 282 00:14:13,120 --> 00:14:16,640 transparency and the king saying we're leaning into this, what 283 00:14:16,640 --> 00:14:19,440 does it actually mean? Does that exemption get lifted? 284 00:14:19,440 --> 00:14:23,000 Because in order to really dig down into Andrew as a trade 285 00:14:23,000 --> 00:14:25,360 envoy, we need to get into those files. 286 00:14:26,120 --> 00:14:28,120 Well, that may be, I mean, I can't answer the question about 287 00:14:28,120 --> 00:14:30,080 whether it could be lifted in certain circumstances. 288 00:14:30,080 --> 00:14:33,400 I mean, that might very well be. But the trouble for Andrew 289 00:14:33,400 --> 00:14:36,440 Macbatten Windsor is that other evidence is coming out that is 290 00:14:36,440 --> 00:14:37,600 not covered. But what's? 291 00:14:37,720 --> 00:14:40,760 Really interesting is Andrew Macbatten Windsor often pops up 292 00:14:40,760 --> 00:14:42,640 in other People's Court cases. There was the case of the 293 00:14:42,640 --> 00:14:45,360 Chinese spy, and again, that's how we suddenly rumble to what 294 00:14:45,360 --> 00:14:47,920 Andrew may have been doing is sort of nefarious parties and 295 00:14:47,920 --> 00:14:52,960 connections, but it's very hard to actually catch him on his own 296 00:14:52,960 --> 00:14:56,200 terms because of so much documentation not being 297 00:14:56,200 --> 00:14:58,600 available to the public because of this royal prerogative. 298 00:14:58,600 --> 00:15:00,480 Right. But if it is 20 years, yeah, 299 00:15:00,480 --> 00:15:02,760 then we should be looking at the stuff now because he was active 300 00:15:02,760 --> 00:15:06,840 as a trade envoy in in 20. 2 thousand 2001 to 2011 I believe 301 00:15:06,840 --> 00:15:08,720 very active date. So arguably, yes, some of his 302 00:15:08,720 --> 00:15:10,520 papers we should have the. Papers should be available, 303 00:15:10,520 --> 00:15:12,640 yeah. But as we've established, he may 304 00:15:12,640 --> 00:15:15,640 no longer be a Prince, but he's still not one of us. 305 00:15:15,760 --> 00:15:18,880 But and so imagine if that issue that you've just raised, you 306 00:15:18,920 --> 00:15:20,800 know, becomes part of the public conversation. 307 00:15:20,920 --> 00:15:22,440 Yeah. I mean this is really toxic 308 00:15:22,520 --> 00:15:25,200 stuff for the royal family and you're protecting this 309 00:15:25,200 --> 00:15:27,320 exclusion, which by the way we don't understand why it should 310 00:15:27,320 --> 00:15:29,840 exist in the 1st place for the sake of someone we all think 311 00:15:29,840 --> 00:15:31,480 should be investigated non trial. 312 00:15:31,680 --> 00:15:34,360 And by the way, at some point here, I think almost the 313 00:15:34,360 --> 00:15:36,480 subjects need to lead their sovereign. 314 00:15:36,480 --> 00:15:40,600 I think it's very, very hard to reform yourself and the royal 315 00:15:40,600 --> 00:15:43,640 family have been led by this kind of Bible. 316 00:15:43,640 --> 00:15:47,520 It was Walter Badger, I think it was 1867, his English 317 00:15:47,520 --> 00:15:51,720 Constitution book where he said you must not let the daylight in 318 00:15:51,720 --> 00:15:55,480 upon the magic. Well, OK, we need to flip that 319 00:15:55,480 --> 00:15:57,520 right over and let the daylight in as. 320 00:15:57,720 --> 00:15:59,880 Pig lights more than daylight. But the sovereign isn't. 321 00:15:59,880 --> 00:16:01,680 The King's not going to go. Come on, bring it on. 322 00:16:01,680 --> 00:16:03,640 You know, here, all my here's all my lobbying with 323 00:16:03,640 --> 00:16:05,600 politicians. We need to push this. 324 00:16:05,600 --> 00:16:08,240 But at the same time, you know if this is one of those 325 00:16:08,240 --> 00:16:10,480 existential issues for the future of the. 326 00:16:10,480 --> 00:16:14,400 Crown, and it is. And it is then surely it's 327 00:16:14,400 --> 00:16:16,880 better and it's more in their interest to kind of cut off the 328 00:16:16,880 --> 00:16:20,680 cancerous limb, as it were, that is Andrew, and say you're on 329 00:16:20,680 --> 00:16:22,440 your own mate. You know, this is what you did 330 00:16:22,560 --> 00:16:23,640 and we had nothing to do with it. 331 00:16:23,880 --> 00:16:26,280 Even if people start saying, well, we should look at their 332 00:16:26,280 --> 00:16:28,640 tax affairs and what about this and what about the exemptions 333 00:16:28,640 --> 00:16:29,800 there? What do you think, China? 334 00:16:30,000 --> 00:16:32,760 Well, I think that's the process we're seeing now, which I 335 00:16:32,760 --> 00:16:35,320 referred to as early on. It's the question the King is 336 00:16:35,480 --> 00:16:39,040 distancing himself from Mountbatten Windsor in order to 337 00:16:39,040 --> 00:16:41,320 make it possible. And you see this in relation to 338 00:16:41,320 --> 00:16:43,480 corporate crime as well, that there's an effort to try and 339 00:16:43,600 --> 00:16:46,800 focus in on one individual who the company claims was to blame. 340 00:16:47,120 --> 00:16:50,320 And so they're going to make it possible to isolate Andrew. 341 00:16:50,320 --> 00:16:54,560 Does that work? Well, that is the, that is what 342 00:16:54,560 --> 00:16:56,320 you're getting the house on. It seems to me. 343 00:16:56,360 --> 00:17:00,760 And I personally think that the if whatever happens to 344 00:17:00,760 --> 00:17:05,200 Mountbatten Windsor, that the king will feel that he's, he's 345 00:17:05,200 --> 00:17:07,880 doing enough at the moment to preserve the his reputation and 346 00:17:07,880 --> 00:17:09,920 that of the monarchy, even though it's been damaged. 347 00:17:09,920 --> 00:17:13,319 I think that that enough is being done at the moment, but we 348 00:17:13,319 --> 00:17:16,560 don't know What more may come out about what interactions have 349 00:17:16,560 --> 00:17:18,040 been between the two of them. We don't know. 350 00:17:18,240 --> 00:17:19,440 It's the danger. Sorry, Go. 351 00:17:19,480 --> 00:17:22,319 On no, it's just so you have on the one hand, access to Andrew's 352 00:17:22,319 --> 00:17:26,000 files, which you've established as a as a sort of separate or an 353 00:17:26,000 --> 00:17:28,600 anomalous case, but you also have the question for all 354 00:17:28,600 --> 00:17:30,400 finances. And if we take, for example, 355 00:17:30,400 --> 00:17:32,880 some of these mainstream television shows as as a 356 00:17:32,880 --> 00:17:35,520 barometer for public opinion. One of the other debates I was 357 00:17:35,560 --> 00:17:39,280 asked to contribute to was, you know, should Charles be paying 358 00:17:39,280 --> 00:17:41,840 for Andrew's house, Marsh Farm in Sandringham. 359 00:17:42,320 --> 00:17:45,480 Now that then means Andrew's story is bleeding into royal 360 00:17:45,480 --> 00:17:48,800 finances, which is another massive no go area for the royal 361 00:17:48,800 --> 00:17:51,040 family. I mean, Williams Worth and his 362 00:17:51,040 --> 00:17:53,040 father as the Dutchie of Cornwall. 363 00:17:53,440 --> 00:17:55,080 He he doesn't publish his tax returns. 364 00:17:55,240 --> 00:17:58,400 He's the now the new head of the Dutchie of Cornwall, the Duke of 365 00:17:58,480 --> 00:17:59,880 Cornwall. We don't see them. 366 00:18:00,040 --> 00:18:02,480 Charles actually used to at least publish his tax returns 367 00:18:02,480 --> 00:18:03,680 from the the Dutchie of Cornwall. 368 00:18:03,920 --> 00:18:06,760 And and there is there really is no transparency and they operate 369 00:18:06,760 --> 00:18:09,240 under entirely separate, no inheritance tax for the 370 00:18:09,240 --> 00:18:12,680 sovereign to the heir apparent. They don't pay capital, capital 371 00:18:12,680 --> 00:18:15,800 or or corporation tax on their Dutchie profits. 372 00:18:15,920 --> 00:18:18,640 Which means that probably the late Queen's pay off to Andrew 373 00:18:18,800 --> 00:18:21,400 was tax exempt. Which means probably we did, as 374 00:18:21,440 --> 00:18:23,760 a taxpayer, pay for. It so at some stage we can 375 00:18:23,760 --> 00:18:26,880 expect maybe even someone in the royal household, I, the brother, 376 00:18:26,880 --> 00:18:30,760 the king to say we we are going to tell the public where this 377 00:18:30,760 --> 00:18:34,520 money is from and and when it was paid and to whom it was 378 00:18:34,520 --> 00:18:36,080 paid. I mean, I think without that the 379 00:18:36,080 --> 00:18:37,160 question marks will always be there. 380 00:18:37,240 --> 00:18:41,080 They linger the. Problem is the great winsome 381 00:18:41,080 --> 00:18:44,360 story for the royal family over the last 50 years and they've 382 00:18:44,360 --> 00:18:48,880 had their problems has been the majestic popularity of the late 383 00:18:48,880 --> 00:18:52,120 queen and you go to. That fainted to the rear mirror, 384 00:18:52,120 --> 00:18:54,240 doesn't it? Eventually. 385 00:18:54,480 --> 00:18:56,960 I don't know. I think I think we need to be 386 00:18:56,960 --> 00:19:00,000 able to hold up certain personalities from our recent 387 00:19:00,000 --> 00:19:03,480 past and believe in them. And if you overturn that sum of 388 00:19:03,480 --> 00:19:06,640 money and find out who was behind it and why it was paid 389 00:19:06,640 --> 00:19:08,520 and when it was paid, do you all remember this was paid in her 390 00:19:08,520 --> 00:19:10,920 final year. It was her Platinum Jubilee 391 00:19:10,920 --> 00:19:13,360 year. They needed the Andrew problem 392 00:19:13,360 --> 00:19:15,760 to go away. Another reason we know is a lot 393 00:19:15,760 --> 00:19:19,080 of money just make the problem go away because we've got a big 394 00:19:19,080 --> 00:19:20,880 Platinum Jubilee to celebrate and then we didn't. 395 00:19:20,880 --> 00:19:24,480 Do but pay 10 to £12 million to someone if you haven't done 396 00:19:24,480 --> 00:19:26,560 something with and that's what the public will. 397 00:19:26,840 --> 00:19:29,320 Ask or. Or ask a lot of money to pay for 398 00:19:29,320 --> 00:19:32,320 nothing. Except what they could argue the 399 00:19:32,320 --> 00:19:34,160 royal family. And it's one of the reasons. 400 00:19:34,400 --> 00:19:37,280 And the other thing that I was told off record was that when 401 00:19:37,280 --> 00:19:39,280 Keir Starmer had said he should testify, was that, well, I 402 00:19:39,280 --> 00:19:41,600 really don't want him to testify because we know he's loose from 403 00:19:41,600 --> 00:19:43,640 the truth with the truth. And he's all over the shop and 404 00:19:43,640 --> 00:19:45,400 goodness knows what he'd say in front of a congressional 405 00:19:45,400 --> 00:19:47,520 committee. The same could be said for not 406 00:19:47,520 --> 00:19:50,680 wanting him to go and give evidence in this civil case that 407 00:19:50,680 --> 00:19:54,320 was bought against him in 2022. Andrew is a liability. 408 00:19:54,320 --> 00:19:57,600 We didn't need the 29 interview to prove that, but it sure did 409 00:19:57,600 --> 00:19:59,480 prove it. OK, it's still a lot of money, 410 00:19:59,800 --> 00:20:03,960 Jeremy, if he so, if he were to testify before Congress, which 411 00:20:03,960 --> 00:20:06,280 is what, you know, the Democrats certainly are calling for, even 412 00:20:06,280 --> 00:20:08,800 if you're Republicans, I'm not sure exactly where the king 413 00:20:08,800 --> 00:20:11,520 stands on this, but I think he'd find it difficult to oppose that 414 00:20:11,520 --> 00:20:14,600 as well. How would that work and what 415 00:20:14,600 --> 00:20:16,080 does it actually mean legally for him? 416 00:20:16,680 --> 00:20:21,720 Well, I think legally it means that he's in broadly the same 417 00:20:21,720 --> 00:20:24,880 position he was when he was being interviewed by Emily 418 00:20:24,880 --> 00:20:27,400 Maitlis. That is to say, he, he, he, he, 419 00:20:27,400 --> 00:20:30,760 he will be asked questions about what he knew, what his underoath 420 00:20:30,760 --> 00:20:31,840 was. Yes, absolutely. 421 00:20:31,840 --> 00:20:32,920 He. Wasn't Underoath with Emily 422 00:20:32,920 --> 00:20:34,520 Maitlis, no. No, no, no. 423 00:20:34,520 --> 00:20:36,480 But it's going to be the similar situation. 424 00:20:36,800 --> 00:20:40,440 And so he is going to be asked what he knew, what his 425 00:20:40,440 --> 00:20:46,720 involvement was very clearly and those questions may incriminate 426 00:20:46,720 --> 00:20:49,080 him or? Or that testimony before 427 00:20:49,080 --> 00:20:51,680 Congress, whether it's impersonal or on a video link, 428 00:20:51,880 --> 00:20:53,960 could lead to an actual indictment. 429 00:20:54,080 --> 00:20:57,320 Yeah, it could, which which is why I think he that for me 430 00:20:57,320 --> 00:21:00,680 personally, I don't think that's going to happen because well, I 431 00:21:00,680 --> 00:21:04,240 just don't think there is anything for him to be gained in 432 00:21:04,240 --> 00:21:08,000 cooperating with it essentially and not cooperating is not going 433 00:21:08,000 --> 00:21:10,280 to make any difference to his current level of reputation. 434 00:21:10,520 --> 00:21:14,080 Because because if he's, because if he does cooperate, there's 435 00:21:14,080 --> 00:21:16,240 the risk him being a loose cannon that yes, you know, he 436 00:21:16,240 --> 00:21:18,640 might incriminate himself and end up in a, in a court of law 437 00:21:18,640 --> 00:21:20,400 in the United States. If you lie underoath in the 438 00:21:20,400 --> 00:21:22,400 United States, you can end up where Jolene Maxwell. 439 00:21:22,400 --> 00:21:25,720 Is, of course, yeah, yes. Exactly so you but I mean his so 440 00:21:25,720 --> 00:21:28,400 you're saying his reputation is already so rock bottom he might 441 00:21:28,400 --> 00:21:30,800 as well just, you know, soldier this one through and and not 442 00:21:30,800 --> 00:21:32,840 bother turning up. Yes, although the pressure from 443 00:21:32,840 --> 00:21:35,240 the king might become bigger and bigger. 444 00:21:35,240 --> 00:21:38,840 If you believe the King is placing pressure on Andrew to 445 00:21:38,840 --> 00:21:40,280 give evidence at a congressional committee. 446 00:21:40,280 --> 00:21:41,640 If you cause you've assumed that. 447 00:21:41,680 --> 00:21:42,800 I don't, no, I don't assume anything. 448 00:21:42,800 --> 00:21:44,920 I'm just OK, it's possible it's but you don't think. 449 00:21:45,000 --> 00:21:46,080 He is. Let's just know. 450 00:21:46,080 --> 00:21:47,960 I'm absolutely sure he isn't because he knows what would 451 00:21:48,000 --> 00:21:48,480 happen. But. 452 00:21:48,600 --> 00:21:50,120 He knows what's too dangerous way. 453 00:21:50,280 --> 00:21:51,720 Too dangerous? Absolutely that. 454 00:21:53,000 --> 00:21:54,600 So what do their family? They're all in there, but 455 00:21:54,720 --> 00:21:56,120 they're putting a wall around it at the same time. 456 00:21:56,120 --> 00:21:57,800 Several things. This is the wonderful thing 457 00:21:57,800 --> 00:22:00,160 about the royal family which are, and I quote David Dimbleby 458 00:22:00,160 --> 00:22:02,720 from his documentary The End of last year. 459 00:22:02,720 --> 00:22:05,360 They're as rich as plutocrats. Actually, if you're Dutchie of 460 00:22:05,360 --> 00:22:09,560 Lancaster, is making profits untaxed really of over £20 461 00:22:09,560 --> 00:22:11,360 million a year? Are they untaxed? 462 00:22:11,560 --> 00:22:13,920 Yeah, they're effectively they don't pay capital gains or 463 00:22:13,920 --> 00:22:16,600 corporation tax Dutchess so and and inheritance. 464 00:22:16,600 --> 00:22:18,600 All the stuff he got from the Queen was funnelled through 465 00:22:18,600 --> 00:22:21,880 Charles because from sovereign to air it doesn't you don't, you 466 00:22:21,880 --> 00:22:24,320 don't pay tax. So actually therefore is 10 467 00:22:24,320 --> 00:22:27,280 million when one year you can probably shoulder that. 468 00:22:27,960 --> 00:22:31,240 The the other thing is the fascinating thing here is he's 469 00:22:31,400 --> 00:22:33,600 the defender of the faith. He wants to be the defender of 470 00:22:33,600 --> 00:22:35,920 more than one faith. Actually, Charles and I believe 471 00:22:35,960 --> 00:22:37,840 on, on some level he is a compassionate man. 472 00:22:38,640 --> 00:22:42,160 And I think this is so egregious for them as a private family 473 00:22:42,400 --> 00:22:45,400 because actually, and here I got really trolled actually, because 474 00:22:45,400 --> 00:22:47,840 I came out saying on a on a Sunday morning program where I 475 00:22:47,840 --> 00:22:50,600 felt it was fit to talk about the idea of mercy and 476 00:22:50,600 --> 00:22:53,840 redemption, that actually, if I'm a private family member, 477 00:22:53,840 --> 00:22:56,440 let's hypothesize, you're my brother and you've been accused 478 00:22:56,440 --> 00:22:59,760 of equivalent things. I would hope, Matt, that I 479 00:22:59,760 --> 00:23:03,240 wouldn't cut you off. I might be furious with you. 480 00:23:03,360 --> 00:23:06,800 I might be pushing you towards a congressional course and berate 481 00:23:06,800 --> 00:23:08,960 you every time I see you. But I would hope that I wouldn't 482 00:23:08,960 --> 00:23:12,000 cut you off never to be seen again standing next to you, not 483 00:23:12,000 --> 00:23:14,360 allowing you at a public funeral or at a Christmas lunch. 484 00:23:14,560 --> 00:23:18,920 But that's really what we're asking of the private family, 485 00:23:19,000 --> 00:23:22,400 the Windsors, to do with Andrew. And one of the reasons we're 486 00:23:22,400 --> 00:23:25,400 asking them to do that, I think is because he hasn't been 487 00:23:25,400 --> 00:23:27,800 convicted in a public court. And so because he's gone away. 488 00:23:28,040 --> 00:23:30,120 Social. Conviction, Yes, which is almost 489 00:23:30,320 --> 00:23:32,080 more dangerous. Which is also kind of weird, 490 00:23:32,080 --> 00:23:33,960 right? So he's not gonna be convicted 491 00:23:33,960 --> 00:23:35,800 in court. We don't want any of that to 492 00:23:35,800 --> 00:23:37,320 come, you know, out or to be too. 493 00:23:37,320 --> 00:23:38,920 Scary for the. Institution Sorry for the 494 00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:41,440 institution, but we're gonna never, ever see him again at a 495 00:23:41,440 --> 00:23:44,120 Christmas lunch. Which is morally repugnant 496 00:23:44,120 --> 00:23:46,160 because it was Winston Churchill, you know, said the 497 00:23:46,160 --> 00:23:48,880 way in which you, you treat your criminals is a is a barometer 498 00:23:48,880 --> 00:23:51,640 for for judging civilisation. You know, are we gonna 499 00:23:52,000 --> 00:23:54,640 effectively, if you extrapolate the narrative and say, well, 500 00:23:54,640 --> 00:23:55,800 Andrew really should be in prison? 501 00:23:55,800 --> 00:23:57,280 OK, we've got no proof for that at the moment. 502 00:23:57,520 --> 00:24:00,640 But what you're suggesting is then somebody who's convicted of 503 00:24:00,640 --> 00:24:03,120 an equivalent crime, you know, isn't worth a prison visit. 504 00:24:03,280 --> 00:24:05,240 Well, then you're in the sort of terrain of wanting to 505 00:24:05,240 --> 00:24:08,120 reintroduce the death penalty. It's properly dark, actually, 506 00:24:08,120 --> 00:24:10,960 where this narrative's going because of the brain mob, right? 507 00:24:11,000 --> 00:24:12,360 Because that's where we're at at the moment. 508 00:24:12,360 --> 00:24:14,960 The public's deciding. And we'll, we'll, we'll ask the, 509 00:24:15,120 --> 00:24:17,040 the story about monarchy right to the end of the podcast. 510 00:24:17,040 --> 00:24:21,200 But the, the role of the Met Police and Andrew's protection 511 00:24:21,200 --> 00:24:23,640 officers who would have been, you know, around him while some 512 00:24:23,640 --> 00:24:26,920 of this stuff allegedly, supposedly possibly took place. 513 00:24:27,280 --> 00:24:28,840 What did they have to answer for? 514 00:24:28,840 --> 00:24:30,360 What should what should they do now? 515 00:24:30,440 --> 00:24:33,640 I'm not sure that I mean the risk of being proved 516 00:24:33,640 --> 00:24:36,200 dramatically wrong. I, I'm not sure that's a huge 517 00:24:36,200 --> 00:24:39,880 problem because I, I very much doubt that they would have been 518 00:24:40,400 --> 00:24:45,240 Privy to or would have known about any significant systematic 519 00:24:45,240 --> 00:24:48,400 or or serious offending. I mean, I just don't see that as 520 00:24:48,400 --> 00:24:50,120 very likely. But it's worth asking the 521 00:24:50,120 --> 00:24:52,280 question isn't. It Oh, of course, yeah. 522 00:24:52,920 --> 00:24:55,840 But I, I think it, it, it raises some difficult questions because 523 00:24:55,920 --> 00:24:58,760 all protection officers acting for everyone under their 524 00:24:58,760 --> 00:25:01,480 protection will see things that they would rather not have seen, 525 00:25:01,720 --> 00:25:04,960 that will see things that they in some circumstances might 526 00:25:04,960 --> 00:25:06,760 disclose. Testify about them or do do they 527 00:25:06,760 --> 00:25:09,400 sign an NDA with the royal family that says that they 528 00:25:09,400 --> 00:25:10,560 never? Well, they obviously they're 529 00:25:10,560 --> 00:25:12,720 going to be under confidentiality agreements. 530 00:25:12,720 --> 00:25:13,960 Yeah. Confidentiality agreements 531 00:25:13,960 --> 00:25:17,280 shouldn't mean that you are under obligation not to report a 532 00:25:17,280 --> 00:25:19,440 serious crime. I think clearly that Trump's any 533 00:25:19,440 --> 00:25:22,600 confidentiality. But I just don't think that 534 00:25:22,600 --> 00:25:24,960 whatever their suspicions might have been, there would have been 535 00:25:24,960 --> 00:25:28,520 enough for them to say we should have gone to the police about X 536 00:25:28,520 --> 00:25:29,720 or Yi. Just don't see that as. 537 00:25:29,720 --> 00:25:32,280 Which takes us back to the question at the beginning where 538 00:25:32,280 --> 00:25:34,320 you said what's the most likely to be convicted for? 539 00:25:34,560 --> 00:25:36,200 And you said you thought it was sexual misconduct. 540 00:25:36,200 --> 00:25:38,320 And I would go back and say no. I think every time it's about 541 00:25:38,600 --> 00:25:42,320 abuse of a public office because it's so difficult to prove, 542 00:25:42,320 --> 00:25:45,520 which is why the case of abuse against women but remains this 543 00:25:45,520 --> 00:25:47,560 elephant in the room that's never properly dealt with 544 00:25:47,560 --> 00:25:51,320 because how do you prove something's happened between two 545 00:25:51,320 --> 00:25:53,840 individuals? Well, if I, if I may, Ted, I 546 00:25:53,840 --> 00:25:56,400 think you've got to be careful here because testimonial 547 00:25:56,400 --> 00:26:00,840 evidence is evidence. And so if a woman says I was 548 00:26:00,880 --> 00:26:03,560 raped or I was abused by someone, that is evidence that 549 00:26:03,560 --> 00:26:06,120 it happened, and the mere fact that the other person denies it 550 00:26:06,120 --> 00:26:07,480 doesn't undermine that as evidence. 551 00:26:07,480 --> 00:26:11,400 OK, so can you then explain how Virginia Du Frey today is dead 552 00:26:11,440 --> 00:26:14,880 and and apparently no justice was done and instead a load of 553 00:26:14,880 --> 00:26:18,560 money across the Atlantic that doesn't feel like her testimony 554 00:26:18,560 --> 00:26:21,240 stood for anything and no wonder she felt crazy. 555 00:26:21,800 --> 00:26:24,400 Well, absolutely correct. I mean, and it's in a tragic and 556 00:26:24,400 --> 00:26:28,600 appalling situation, but there are other women who may well be 557 00:26:28,600 --> 00:26:31,120 willing to stand up and give testimony and they need to be 558 00:26:31,120 --> 00:26:35,320 given support and to to find their feet and to do that. 559 00:26:35,320 --> 00:26:38,840 And if they do, then I think what we need to do is give 560 00:26:38,840 --> 00:26:42,280 credibility to their evidence. And how much credibility are you 561 00:26:42,280 --> 00:26:44,720 gonna give to Andrews evidence compared to one of those women? 562 00:26:44,880 --> 00:26:47,040 And to bring us this background to a broader question for 563 00:26:47,040 --> 00:26:49,280 monarchy. That is one of the, I think the 564 00:26:49,720 --> 00:26:53,320 the deepest problems. We had a photograph, you know, 565 00:26:53,800 --> 00:26:56,680 we he. Platformed, I mean, Andrew 566 00:26:56,680 --> 00:26:58,760 denies any wrongdoing. He was, you know, so there's a, 567 00:26:58,760 --> 00:27:00,360 there's. A photograph with his arm around 568 00:27:00,360 --> 00:27:02,960 this girl, you know, there's and, and he said that doesn't 569 00:27:02,960 --> 00:27:04,120 exist. That's just, you're imagining 570 00:27:04,120 --> 00:27:06,560 that it's not a real photograph. And we platformed him. 571 00:27:06,560 --> 00:27:09,120 We allowed him to do that. And because he had the heft of 572 00:27:09,120 --> 00:27:11,800 the establishment and his family behind him at that time until 573 00:27:11,800 --> 00:27:16,840 2019, fully behind Andrew, you know, he got away with basically 574 00:27:17,000 --> 00:27:20,080 denying what you said, which is a woman's testimony as evidence 575 00:27:20,200 --> 00:27:22,760 as well as a photograph. And that's why the royal family 576 00:27:22,760 --> 00:27:24,440 is so implicated. Which takes me back to the 577 00:27:24,440 --> 00:27:26,200 original statement of profound concern. 578 00:27:26,400 --> 00:27:30,240 We need an apology. Is he getting legal advice at 579 00:27:30,240 --> 00:27:32,520 the moment and who? Who's giving him legal advice? 580 00:27:33,680 --> 00:27:34,720 He must be getting. He's paying. 581 00:27:34,720 --> 00:27:39,960 For painful. Well, he, I would imagine, I 582 00:27:39,960 --> 00:27:41,440 would imagine he must be getting legal advice. 583 00:27:41,520 --> 00:27:44,280 I don't know who it's from, but it would be extraordinary if he 584 00:27:44,280 --> 00:27:46,680 wasn't. So yes, I would think that that 585 00:27:46,680 --> 00:27:49,000 must be the case, yes. OK, so let's end on the broad 586 00:27:49,000 --> 00:27:51,800 question then. You know, and we've said this so 587 00:27:51,800 --> 00:27:53,840 many times before when there've been moments of, you know, 588 00:27:53,840 --> 00:27:57,600 crisis for the royal family, but is this the biggest 1 compared 589 00:27:57,600 --> 00:27:59,880 to all the other ones we've had in the last 40 years or so? 590 00:28:00,960 --> 00:28:05,080 I think why this is enormous is because the Sword of Damocles 591 00:28:05,080 --> 00:28:07,800 has hung over Andrew's head and therefore implicating his whole 592 00:28:07,800 --> 00:28:09,920 family for so long. Now. 593 00:28:09,960 --> 00:28:14,640 It's like this seeping saw. It's like the dripping roast and 594 00:28:14,680 --> 00:28:17,720 actually it's hugely generational and that's where 595 00:28:17,720 --> 00:28:20,560 the royal family have a real problem. 596 00:28:20,840 --> 00:28:24,600 We see with the whole Harry and Meghan Ferrari, there was about 597 00:28:24,600 --> 00:28:30,200 25% of young people not just being ambivalent but actively 598 00:28:30,200 --> 00:28:33,000 being anti monarchy. They lent in briefly thinking it 599 00:28:33,000 --> 00:28:35,160 was going to change and then they got burned and now they're 600 00:28:35,160 --> 00:28:37,880 actively anti. And we've never had that before. 601 00:28:37,880 --> 00:28:42,840 A hard kernel of anti monarchy sentiment that's growing. 602 00:28:43,120 --> 00:28:45,960 And the problem is you can have apathy when you're young because 603 00:28:45,960 --> 00:28:48,960 young people don't really go in for big traditional symbols that 604 00:28:48,960 --> 00:28:53,360 the state makes you celebrate. But if that anti sentiment is 605 00:28:53,360 --> 00:28:57,000 then carried forward, where does the support come from when they 606 00:28:57,000 --> 00:28:59,520 grow up? And today I heard, I mean, 607 00:28:59,520 --> 00:29:01,760 obviously it came from the Republic campaign who are 608 00:29:01,760 --> 00:29:05,440 heavily agenda saying that today for the first time, support for 609 00:29:05,440 --> 00:29:09,400 monarchy is below 50%. It is around about 50% at the 610 00:29:09,400 --> 00:29:11,680 moment. This has been a unprecedented 611 00:29:11,680 --> 00:29:15,640 drop. The first polling was around 86% 612 00:29:15,640 --> 00:29:18,240 in the 1980s and it's now down to 50. 613 00:29:18,240 --> 00:29:20,200 They're skating on increasingly thin ice. 614 00:29:20,200 --> 00:29:23,360 But the institution. You know, even ancient ones like 615 00:29:23,360 --> 00:29:26,520 the monarchy have the ability to reform themselves, to reinvent 616 00:29:26,520 --> 00:29:27,640 themselves. Hugely. 617 00:29:27,680 --> 00:29:29,440 They're tied into the. Do you think that would work, 618 00:29:29,440 --> 00:29:32,800 Jeremy, if they if they use this opportunity of crisis, yes, to 619 00:29:32,880 --> 00:29:35,800 say let's open up the tax books. You know, let's let's do this. 620 00:29:35,800 --> 00:29:38,160 I mean, whatever the the 50 things that McKinsey would 621 00:29:38,160 --> 00:29:40,080 advise them to do. To stay alive, let the daylight 622 00:29:40,080 --> 00:29:42,000 in, yeah. I don't see that happening. 623 00:29:42,040 --> 00:29:46,800 I, I think the strategy of isolating Andrew and treating 624 00:29:46,800 --> 00:29:51,240 him as persona non grata, as we say, is the royal family's hope 625 00:29:51,240 --> 00:29:56,240 to survive damaged, yes, for a period of time, but to survive 626 00:29:56,240 --> 00:29:58,240 this particular controversy. I I think. 627 00:29:58,240 --> 00:30:01,520 And they, and that enables them also to resist these other 628 00:30:01,800 --> 00:30:03,920 demands on the grounds that those are quite separate. 629 00:30:03,920 --> 00:30:07,800 And, you know, I mean, they can look at them on their merits, 630 00:30:07,800 --> 00:30:09,400 but essentially they're a different thing. 631 00:30:10,120 --> 00:30:14,560 So wouldn't it be ironic if Keir Starmer was failed by this and 632 00:30:14,840 --> 00:30:16,240 and the monarchy just kind of sailed on? 633 00:30:16,320 --> 00:30:19,480 Yeah, I wish I could be in on their weekly audiences at the 634 00:30:19,480 --> 00:30:24,120 moment, actually, because there is such a clear disparity the 635 00:30:24,120 --> 00:30:26,880 way in which Keir Starmer's, if you like, become the whipping 636 00:30:26,880 --> 00:30:31,160 boy for the Epstein scandal when it's been, I think, a far 637 00:30:31,160 --> 00:30:33,840 longer, deeper problem for the royal family. 638 00:30:33,840 --> 00:30:36,560 And I also think the idea of just singling out Andrew in the 639 00:30:36,560 --> 00:30:39,040 royal family, taking no responsibility for him is a 640 00:30:39,040 --> 00:30:43,400 particularly cruel one, and one that means they are not taking 641 00:30:43,400 --> 00:30:45,560 any accountable. So the Labour Party, the Prime 642 00:30:45,560 --> 00:30:48,440 Minister takes accountability, but somehow the royal family now 643 00:30:48,480 --> 00:30:51,080 it's just one rotten apple. It doesn't work like that. 644 00:30:51,080 --> 00:30:54,840 The level of privilege Andrew's exhibited is something that that 645 00:30:55,040 --> 00:30:57,680 that's institutionalised that level of privilege. 646 00:30:58,080 --> 00:31:00,560 Jeremy, you seem to be saying it's it's cruel but necessary. 647 00:31:00,960 --> 00:31:03,200 That would basically be in my judgement, yes. 648 00:31:03,520 --> 00:31:05,800 Final question then short answer. 649 00:31:05,800 --> 00:31:08,760 Is the monarchy finished? The monarchy is not finished 650 00:31:08,760 --> 00:31:10,600 because we are a constitutional monarchy. 651 00:31:10,600 --> 00:31:16,480 They are baked into all areas of our state and they have huge 652 00:31:16,480 --> 00:31:19,120 support not only but particularly from the 4th 653 00:31:19,120 --> 00:31:21,920 estate. The press hand in glove 1 needs 654 00:31:21,920 --> 00:31:23,720 the other. So in the end, they'll keep 655 00:31:23,720 --> 00:31:26,080 moving forward. Yep, Charles and Camilla and 656 00:31:26,080 --> 00:31:28,600 William collectively will save the monarchy. 657 00:31:28,600 --> 00:31:31,120 Yes. For the time being, but but the 658 00:31:31,200 --> 00:31:34,480 the bigger problem is will the I think the bigger question here 659 00:31:34,480 --> 00:31:37,480 is the existential 1. The monarchy will survive, but 660 00:31:37,480 --> 00:31:40,440 will it keep working for us as a nation? 661 00:31:40,560 --> 00:31:44,560 Will it be the glue, the social and national glue that it once 662 00:31:44,560 --> 00:31:48,120 was, for example, in the 1980s, which is a different question, a 663 00:31:48,120 --> 00:31:50,800 very different question. But when an institution that's 664 00:31:50,920 --> 00:31:54,960 based on popularity is no longer working for the nation, what 665 00:31:54,960 --> 00:31:56,520 then? Well, then it might be finished. 666 00:31:57,840 --> 00:31:59,680 But then rooting it out will take some time. 667 00:31:59,680 --> 00:32:01,120 Save the King at the end of this podcast. 668 00:32:01,640 --> 00:32:03,680 I'm a monarchist. I'm just very disappointed. 669 00:32:03,680 --> 00:32:04,960 I'm one of those floating voters. 670 00:32:04,960 --> 00:32:06,200 Appointed. Monarchy, but I don't get a 671 00:32:06,200 --> 00:32:09,920 vote. Jeremy Horde, Tessa Dunham, 672 00:32:09,920 --> 00:32:12,080 thank you very much indeed. That's it from the forecast. 673 00:32:12,320 --> 00:32:13,920 Hope you enjoyed it. See you soon.