The heckler’s question, shouted at King Charles III across a cordon of protection officers in a rainy Essex village on Thursday, was neither abusive nor incoherent.
In fact, it was what everyone is thinking.
“Charles, Charles! Should the police be investigating Andrew?” the man said before he was led away by the police.
The King, of course, did not answer. He walked on, smiling bravely and shaking hands—the routine business of monarchy grinds on.
Yet few at the palace are likely to be unaware that Andrew was stripped of his titles (and home) days after the last time Charles was so publicly heckled on the matter.
So what does Charles think?
Sources tell the Royalist that Charles absolutely does not want his brother to face a police investigation.
“The monarchy has shielded Andrew from any accountability for his actions for decades,“ one former royal staffer said. ”That’s not about to change.”
“The entire situation with Andrew is a nightmare, but if he ends up in court, it’s only going to get worse,” a friend of the King added. “He could inflict enormous reputational damage on the institution.”
Unsurprisingly, as is so often the case with his father, William disagrees.
Friends of the prince have told the Royalist that William would have “no hesitation” in letting it be known that Andrew should face a “proper” police investigation if he were King.
Those in the King’s camp argue that it’s ‘easy’ for William to say this in his current position as heir to the throne, likening it to an opposition politician promising the earth while they are not in power.
But William, his friends say, earnestly believes that the British monarchy (and monarch) cannot remain popular and respected if they do not at least even give the appearance of respecting the basic principle that no man is above the law.
He may get the opportunity to express himself as soon as next week, when he flies to Saudi Arabia with his wife, Catherine, Princess of Wales, for their first joint state visit since her cancer diagnosis.
The couple will be accompanied on their trip by journalists, of course. It will be interesting to see how William responds to questions about Andrew, if any member of the press pack dares ask.
But the reality is that Andrew, specifically how to deal with him, has long been a major bone of contention between the King and his eldest son, as I have devoted much time and energy to reporting over the past few months.
The tension and differences of opinion on this matter first flared into public view in August 2023 at Balmoral, when Andrew was driven to church by William and Catherine at the King’s express demand.
In the first summer of his reign, with the monarchy still recalibrating after Elizabeth’s death the previous September, Charles wanted a tableau of familial calm. To that end, he had even invited Andrew, banished for the final year of the late Queen’s reign, to join the family for Christmas.
The Waleses driving Andrew to church was supposed to suggest that the worst was behind the family and that family values and unity could trump even the most toxic problem.
But within hours, pointed briefings from William’s office began to circulate, making clear that he had not suggested the ride-share photo op, nor was it something he regarded as acceptable.
This pattern of indulgence on Charles’ part has been repeated many times over the next two years. Let us not forget that it was Charles who gave express permission for Andrew to attend the Duchess of Kent’s funeral last summer, where William made his disapproval of his uncle viscerally (and visibly) clear.
A friend of William’s once told the Royalist that William was “right about Andrew and is right about Harry,” who he wants totally exiled from the family.
Incredibly, Charles still seems to be leaning toward protecting his brother, believing the institution is best served by shielding its own and not doing its dirty-linen washing in public.
The official line coming out of the palace is that the King wants Andrew to consult his conscience and decide to co-operate with U.S. authorities, and that there is nothing further he can do.
Of course there is. He could say publicly that he is urging his brother to do so. He could say publicly that the British police should, of course, investigate Andrew, just like any other citizen, if they suspect criminal behavior.
If Andrew is disgraced enough to lose his titles, why can the King not offer even a single sentence acknowledging the public demand for accountability?
There is, of course, a constitutional argument. The King does not interfere with police investigations. He cannot comment on legal matters. He must remain neutral. All of this is familiar.
But the question was whether he believes scrutiny should occur, not whether he would control it. A brief statement affirming the independence of the police and the primacy of the law would not break convention.
The images and emails circulating this week of a corrupt prince, untroubled and unaccountable, are a mortal threat to the monarchy.
That is why the heckler’s question carries such weight. It cuts through. It asks, simply, whether the rule of law applies to the monarch’s family.
It goes to the heart of the bargain on which the monarchy rests, that the individuals who enjoy such great privilege will not abuse it.
If Charles won’t answer it, then let us hope William will.
Want more royal gossip, scoops and scandal? Click through to follow all Tom Sykes’ reporting at The Royalist on Substack.
The post King Charles’ Failure to Answer the Andrew Question is Prince William’s Problem, Too appeared first on The Daily Beast.
