Also, he’s only being thrown under the bus because no one likes him anyways. Easy way to get rid of the nuisance

Despite my being American, I listen to some British media, and I think it was James O’Brien who I heard wondering about Andrew. Basically, the royal family has “an heir and a spare.” Charles the heir, and Andrew the spare.

The question really is, what if it was the heir who had been accused and not the spare? Actually, since Charles had his own heirs by then, Andrew wasn’t really even the spare. He is completely disposable. But what if Andrew had been the heir? What if he had already become king and all of this came out? What would the UK do about it?

I think the suspicion is that the investigation would have gone nowhere and not have led to an arrest in that case. Neither the current king nor the heir would have been charged with raping children or leaking confidential material, whatever they did.

They’re going after Andrew because he’s a family embarrassment anyways, and because this scandal reflects badly on the royal family, so if they have him face justice, and they can hope that it makes their image look better, then that’s what they’ll do.

There’s almost like a Royal PR campaign framing this same talking point positioning themselves “better”.

It’s everywhere.

Sometimes the official charges are determined more by what’s easiest to prove in court rather than what everyone knows is the most egregious of the crimes.

Court procedures aren’t about public opinion, and it’s easier to prove someone shared government secrets than it is to prove they did stuff that’s so heinous that they obviously hid most of the real evidence. Like it or not, a couple of creepy emails ridden with thinly-veiled euphemisms isn’t enough for the courts.

Yeah. Remember like a decade ago when papers were released exposing a massive pedophile ring implicating most of parliament and they did nothing about it?