Did Queen Elizabeth ENABLE Prince Andrew's Crimes? Evidence Says Yes
Prince Andrew has been criticized left and right. First, his connection to Jeffrey Epstein and the sex trafficking scandal of minor-aged girls and now, illegal business transactions have been brought to light.
The Queen is apparently not in the dark of the pit the Duke of York created himself. Recent reports blame the Queen for ignoring a whistleblower that warned the monarch of the Andrew's side affairs.
Reports reveal that Senior Royals received letters of warning from a whistleblower that remained anonymous for his own safety. The letters came in August alleging that Prince Andrew may have exploited taxpayer money for his own financial pursuits.
Conflict of Interests?
The whistleblower revealed that the Duke of York had partnered with David Rowland -- a millionaire financier. The two reportedly co-own a secret Caribbean tax-free offshore fund, which was said to have lured the Prince's wealthy contacts to invest.
Prince Andrew allegedly acted on behalf of Rowland behind the scenes while he was on official royal duties as U.K.'s special envoy for International Trade and Investment from 2001 to 2011.
The Duke was said to have promoted Rowland's Luxembourg-based bank while he was on official trade missions. Such actions reportedly helped expand Rowland's bank.
Why would the Duke do those? Rowland reportedly helped pay off Andrew's ex-wife Sarah Ferguson's debts amounting to £40,000. He was also the former Conservative Party treasurer before he was tax-exiled.
Royals Cannot Condemn the Duke
The British monarch reportedly sat down with her adviser upon receiving the letters regarding the Prince's exploitation of tax funds. However, a consensus was reached that the Palace will "take no action against the Queen's second son."
Furthermore, the Duke of York was even honoured on Remembrance Sunday in November. Prince Andrew took the salute from 10,000 war veterans at the Horse Guards parade.
Why The Queen Ignored Whistleblower's Claims
A palace spokesman revealed that the Senior Royals "will not respond to all the letters sent to them." Furthermore, the Palace representative revealed that should there be "something serious raised, then it will be looked at."
Was not Prince Andrew's connection to the exploitation of tax funds serious enough that the Queen had to confer with her advisers about it?
Apparently, the British Royal family's lawyers have reportedly claimed that the whistleblower's letters had been "too vague to warrant further action."
Buckingham Palace further backed up the Duke of York, revealing that his aim during his time as Britain's trade envoy for 10 years was "not for the interests of [the Duke nor for Rowland].
Queen Lost Her Grip?
The royal spokesperson refused to reveal what Queen Elizabeth II know about the Duke's business relationship with Rowland.
After the Duke's fallout, criticisms abound that the Queen may have lost her grip within the Royal family. However, the Palace insisted that the Queen is in-charge of dealing with the recent revelations about Prince Andrew.
Her Majesty reportedly missed her husband Prince Philip's firm hand in family matters. This may be the reason why Prince Charles and Prince William were said to have key roles in removing Prince Andrew from his royal post.
Prince Andrew had already stepped down from all the charities he supports, though he was allowed to carry on with Pitch@Palace.
Further, Prince Charles is also said to step up as Prince Consort in 18 months.
As for Queen Elizabeth II, she remains to be seen with Prince Andrew who is said to be her favourite son. The two have been riding horses after the Duke stepped back from royal duties. The Queen is also said to have visited Andrew at the nearby Royal Lodge.
