The British monarchy is unable to contain the Prince Andrew abuse scandal.

LondonWith Virginia Roberts Giuffre's posthumous memoirs now in bookstores in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia, the pressure on the British Crown to draw a definitive red line between King Charles III and the still-Prince Andrew continues to grow, to the point where it can become unbearable. While the woman's account – written in collaboration with journalist Amy Wallace – does not add much new information to what was already known about the behavior of Elizabeth II's third son, it does delve into a wound that continues to bleed, and crudely exposes the lack of principles of a member of the royals and, in general, the circle of power in which he moved.

The Windsor clan, whose members should supposedly have exemplary conduct, appears once again dragged through the mud by the hand of convicted pedophile and corrupter of minors, Jeffrey Epstein. Andrés, friend, accomplice of the magnate and beneficiary of his favors, his money and his sex parties –"orgies," Giuffre says in the book–, exposes, once again, the farce and weakness of the monarchy as a family and institution, revealing without hesitation what a power structure is that, at least in Andrew's case, has served him throughout his life to benefit from his privileges and the impunity he enjoyed.

Last week, days before the book went on sale, and following the publication of a simple extract, Buckingham Palace tried to stop the coup, hoping that it would be enough. Thus, Charles III forced his brother to renounce the use of all his titles. But the storm doesn't scatter. On the contrary. To the point that Andreu's biographer, Andrew Lownie, stated this morning, in a statement to the very conservative The Daily Telegraph, that the Crown is facing "its biggest crisis since the abdication of Edward VIII [1936]" and that he wouldn't be surprised if "Andreu ends up going to trial." In fact, the police are investigating him for having tried to use troll armies to virtually harass Virginia Roberts Giuffre, as well as for asking one of her bodyguards to investigate her to obtain information with which to pressure her.

"This story won't go away"

The case speaks volumes about the unhealthy, dependent, and constantly feeding-off relationship between the Crown and the British media, capable of applauding the monarchy to the point of extreme ridicule, but also of seizing a prey between their teeth and not letting go until they have destroyed it and its remains remain exposed for all to see.

Andreu's fate is at stake these days, and Baroness Helena Kennedy Casey, a member of the House of Lords, commented on the issue on Tuesday morning's program Today, BBC Radio 4, that "this story is not going to go away, and its problems are not going to go away," not even with death –andcommitted suicide last April– by Virginia Roberts Giuffre. "Andreu should be aware that we now have a law, introduced in 2003, that allows the UK to prosecute a person for the crime of rape, even if it was committed elsewhere." So much so that the Baroness advised the prince to receive "very solid legal advice," as "there should be an investigation into the whole matter of how [Andreu] attempted to discredit her, defame her, and destroy her reputation […], and he should quietly leave and go somewhere else to leave in peace."

That the press will not stop until Buckingham Palace decides to withdraw all his titles – the refusal to use them does not mean that he has been officially stripped – has also been demonstrated. The Times, which in its Tuesday edition publishes the lease for the thirty-room mansion in Windsor where the still prince lives.

The document shows that Elizabeth II's third son has not paid anything since 2003. The literal expression is "one peppercorn (if requested)", an old British legal expression stipulating a symbolic rent, if it has been paid at all. This has allowed the beneficiary to continue living. Because, officially, Andreu has neither job nor benefit, and his only declared income is a pension of 20,000 pounds per year to which he is entitled for having been a member of the Society. BBC, often complacent and uncritical about royal affairs – although it was an interview in Andreu in 2019 which ended up precipitating his fall–, has signed up for the more than justified news pim-pam-pum. Last night, on the program NewsnightBBC2's 2012 interview with Giuffre's co-author, American journalist Amy Wallace, who said Virginia would have seen Prince Andrew's renouncing his titles "as a victory."

Stay tuned for more episodes.

The book, Nobody's girl, recounts in detail the years in which Giuffre was exploited by Epstein and Maxwell, and claims she had sex with the prince on three occasions, the third of which was on Epstein's private island in the Caribbean, during what she describes, as previously noted, as "an orgy" with eight other young men.

Andreu reached a financial settlement with Giuffre in early 2022 to withdraw the civil lawsuit alleging abuse and rape in New York, without admitting any guilt. In the BBC interview, the writer also described Epstein's private planes as "aircraft converted to house several bedrooms, veritable flying platforms for sex trafficking." According to Wallace, Prince Andrew "flew on at least one of those jets at least once."

While the decision to officially strip her brother of his titles remains in the hands of King Charles III—or Parliament if it passes a law— ad hoc, which the Starmer government does not want to push forward, at least for the moment—public calls for a more exemplary punishment continue to occupy headlines and radio and television airtime. What is surprising about the whole case is that the events of recent days have not been precipitated by the orgy scandal, impunity, and complicity with Epstein; nor even by the impact of the victim's book. The trigger has been pulled by Andreu's continued lies about his contacts with the pedophile, after having publicly stated—in the aforementioned interview—that he cut them off immediately after Epstein's release from prison in December 2010. Subsequent emails have shown that this was not the case.

Inevitably, then, the Crown's role and judgment regarding the activities of one of its members remain in question. And also that of the Labour and Conservative governments, which allowed dishonourable behaviour, not only as a member of the royal family, but also as a business representative of the executive branch. This activity allowed him to maintain all kinds of contacts, including with alleged Chinese spiesIn exchange for what? The series will undoubtedly have many more episodes.