Comments by "Ash Roskell" (@ashroskell) on "The wrong Prince has been distanced and snubbed" video.

  1. I agree with you, though I would reverse the order of action. I think they should exile Andrew immediately, firmly and without hiding anything. Then they should build bridges with Harry and Megan, but taking their time and doing so with digression. Having been a family therapist, in a former life, among the chief tools at your disposal which MUST be put to good use, is time. It takes time and processing to forgive. It begins with honesty and acknowledgement. But all parties then need time to process, to gage the sincerity of other parties, assess what they need from the process, AND what they offer. The issue is complicated in this case by the aspect of, “duty,” that is unique to a royal dynasty. And for which the, “playbook,” offers little help, as their family history involves everything from Parliamentary interventions and private negotiations, to outright kidnapping and murder to settle all manner of publicly debated disputes. What I don’t question about Harry and Megan is that they both seem like good, decent people, attempting to navigate a tempest without a compass. I can only imagine the litany of mistakes I would make in their place. But I do not doubt their fine character, or their desire to, “do the right thing,” in all cases, despite what the, “Tory, client press,” has to say about them in their usual bad faith. A good father should be seeking reconciliation and closure for his son, acceptance of his choice of wife, regardless of the manner in which the gutter press attempts to steer public opinion against them (a topic that Charles, of all people, knows about) and remember his DUTY to the crown. If we are to have any faith in this institution, then the Royal Family MUST be made to understand; The British people don’t care about the mistakes people have made nearly so much as they do about the coverups and refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing where it is unquestionably present! Everyone makes blunders. Not everyone refuses to apologise, admit to them, or correct the situation. We need to see Charles’s good will. His attempts to be both a good father and a good head of state. He must put away his brother and fire those of his inner circle who are too cosy with the far right media, along with him. He must create the space and the trustworthy environment into which Harry and Megan can gradually re-enter. Rather than the current lion’s den it comes across as now.
    3
  2.  @medievalladybird394 : I bet he was, “glowing,” in the last few days 😉
    2
  3. I hope you’re wrong about that, but my gut tells me you may be right. I think the biggest threat to the Royal Family is the people, “advising,” them. For instance, right after the Emily Maitliss interview; whomever it was that looked at Andrew and said, “nailed it!” NEEDS to be FIRED! Certainly kept far away from the less rapey royals, at any rate! He actually told his mother, the Queen, that he thought the interview had gone well!
    1
  4. Indeed, I believe that at least some of those, “advisors,” represent a bigger threat to the institution of British royalty than do the royals themselves. Charles needs to act swiftly, show good faith and good intention, and put away Andrew: exile him, sooner, rather than later. That must take place as prelude to reconciliation with Harry and Megan. Regardless of the mistakes they may or may not have made (and who among us can claim we would do any better in their shoes?) they are clearly decent people with good intentions. Andrew is demonstrably not. He represents a threat to the legacy of Queen Elizabeth II, as much as anything else. And his ongoing presence in the country is a distraction. It rests with Charles now, to take responsibility and act, as both head of his family and head of state. For the sake of his duty, he has no alternative.
    1
  5.  @norajjones3792 : I don’t believe there is any scale on which Harry and Andrew can be measured alongside each other. What Andrew did, repeatedly and unapologetically was truly reprehensible and unforgivable. If we set aside the Tory employed, “client,” press when looking at Harry, what has he done that is so terrible? Surely a good father would seek to reconcile with his son? Surely, as head of state, he would see that among his duties? If Harry actually wanted to, “destroy,” the royal family, I’m pretty sure he could have spent bigger ammunition than any he’s fired back so far?
    1
  6.  @Tvjunkieful12 : There is more evidence than that. And we know the photo has not been, “tampered with,” as it has already been tested. There are the lies Andrew has told. And I’m not just referring to risible abject falsehoods, like, “I don’t sweat.” His denials were firm in the beginning until the proof shifted him back into the retreating rhetoric of, “Well, I don’t recall.” He lied about his visit to a pizza restaurant, also now a proven fact. As other journalists have pointed out, Scotland Yard has previously opened investigations on far less evidence before. Yet his track record of lying, the photographic evidence and multiple eye witness accounts are not enough for them to even look into the case? . . . Odd, don’t you think?
    1
  7.  @feroxgordon : There is considerably more, “evidence,” than Tvjunkieful12 cares to admit against Andrew. Whether out of ignorance or omission, you decide.
    1
  8.  @Tvjunkieful12 : To your last. I think you are dressing obfuscation in high minded rhetoric, whilst ignoring the fact that Andrew is a proven liar and not to be trusted. There is nothing laudable about using the, “innocent until proven guilty,” line when, though we can all stand by that code, there are clear grounds for a serious investigation to take place. Are you not even curious as to why it is that Scotland Yard are showing no interest in pursuing this case, when they have an established track record for successful cases investigated on the basis of far less initial evidence? If your position is innocent until proven guilty, what is your position of investigating the evidence?
    1
  9.  @Tvjunkieful12  : Read my comments more carefully? Several eye witnesses + victim statements (plural) + his lies (especially when contextualised: it’s not the lies themselves, but what he lies about) = grounds for a criminal investigation.
    1