Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is 96 years old, and this year the Queen should have happily celebrated the Platinum Jubilee celebration of the 70th anniversary of her succession, but because of her second son Andrew, the old man was violently attacked at the beginning of the year.
In January of this year, the Queen issued a statement stripping Prince Andrew of all honorary ranks and royal patronships retained, announcing that he would be tried by the judge in his civil lawsuit with the plaintiff, Virginia Joffre, and eventually the prince reached a settlement with Ms. Joffre in the form of private compensation, but such a result also rekindled the anger of the outside public.
The British people believe that even if Andrew "escaped sanctions", he should be completely reduced to a commoner, so people asked the queen to deprive Andrew of the royal succession, titles and monarch adviser status, but jack Royston, a British royal expert, sneered that the queen could not do this, just as she did not want to deprive Harry Meghan of the honor and royal patron status she retained in the past.
Mr Royston pointed out that the Queen's stripping andrew Andrew of his royal title, military title or royal patron status last month was certainly popular, but it was "too late" to do so.
The expert stressed that this should have been what the Queen should have done after Andrew was interviewed by Newsnight in November 2019 (when Andrew was forced to resign from the royal office because of public outrage over his friendship with Epstein who was convicted of sexual assault), and even if the Queen did not want to do so at the time, she should have taken back Andrew's authority with her public stripping of Hermeghan's military and patron positions in February 2021.
Mr Royston said: "Andrew was being charged with serious criminal offences at the time Harry Meghan was stripped of his military and patron positions, but the Queen did not do the same to him, which is a very stark contrast. ”
What does this discrimination mean? This means that the queen had tried to wait for the situation to calm down and resume his royal position after Andrew had committed his crimes, so it was not until Andrew was about to be tried and the royal family would be implicated that the old man had to abandon her plan.
Mr. Royston's statement was immediately infuriated by royal and Harry fans, who were surprised that the queen had made such a ridiculous mistake, while Harry Meghan's supporters were angry that their idol had been "treated unfairly" by the queen.
One netizen wrote on social media platforms: "I can understand that a mother does not want her child to be imprisoned, so I agree that the Queen funded Andrew to reconcile privately with the defendant, but I cannot agree that she tried to restore Andrew to the royal family after he made a big mistake, what qualifications does such a person have to continue to work on behalf of the royal family and the United Kingdom?" ”
Another added: "By contrast, I'd rather the Queen keep his rank and patron status for Prince Harry, at least I know he really loves the work, including, of course, Meghan." ”
In the past, there were rumors that Andrew was the queen's favorite child, but now it seems that the queen's favor for him seems to be a bit "overdone", what do you think?