The Royal Circle: What Did They Know and When?
Is There Elite Immunity or Institutional Protection?
You might ask, what kind of country do we live in? It's shocking too, like seeing your son lunge out of your neighbours bedroom beating othe kids with his fascinating new vibro-club weapon he discovered—no one can definitively say for sure how much the little bugger knew, the thing's shaped like a cock and he isn't that retarded. Maybe that's how it is with these royal scandals? Figuratively speaking. However, not to be pessimistic we should examine some of the interesting friendships our Royalty has enjoyed over the years.
The Jimmy Savile Connection: A Close Royal Friendship
I mean, yeah! This bloke? The most well-known of these creepy friendships would be him, the Savile. This fucking Captain Howdy had a decades-long relationship with King Charles when was Prince of Wales (Jimmy Savile wasn't the Prince of Wales). It wasn't just a casual acquaintance - Savile got close (ew) and Charles wanted his advice on public relations matters. The mind boggles what that was, right? More sweet shops near the palace, your Highness?
The PR Consultant to Royalty
No, seriously Mr fucking Fix' it here even put together a PR handbook for the Royal Family! Someone must have thought, 'hold on, this is quite a significant level of trust and access for anyone let alone a creepy bloke with all those accusations'. This kind of access comes from a relationship built over many years with significant trust on both sides. It is quite reminiscent of Clement Freud asking his son Matthew for PR assistance with the McCann case in Praia da Luz (2007). Public relations is a very powerful thing and maybe Charles thought that he had a great adviser in the cigar faced maniac? It's like asking Gary Glitter to babysit.
Warning Signs Were There
Anyway, yes, there were warning signs! That is precisely what still sparks this up as particularly scary; the warning signs of Dickie Arbiter, a former royal aide. As you'd expect, the gentleman later described Savile's behavior around young female staff at St. James's Palace as 'creepy' and 'suspect.'
The Key Question
If a royal aide noticed, we would all raise questions about what other people might have heard. Were these concerns passed up the chain of command? It has long since come out that people in the BBC knew Savile liked young girls, it was a common unspoken secret! They even sent cars to collect children for him! So why did the palace not know? It's like being a bicycle seat; ignoring the smell of arseholes taking you for a ride.
We can't pretend the police, security and intelligence agencies had no idea what Jimmy Savile was doing in his spare time, but still, I repeat, apparently no one informed the royals. It's not like there has ever been a Royal scandal before? Imagine if they were socialising with the enemy or hid learning disabled family members? Yeah, surely they could sort out the Savile thing.
What the Official Inquiries Found
The official inquiries after Savile's death found no evidence that Prince Charles had absolutely no direct knowledge of his criminal activities whatsoever. None of the family were aware either. Is that really a surprising? Either way, here's where it gets complicated.
The Problem with the Investigations
They were criticized for not fully grasping the extent of institutional cover-ups that enabled Savile for decades. If the official investigations missed the broader picture, what else might have been overlooked?
Other Troubling Associations: The Mountbatten Allegations
Okay, fair enough the Savile case spilt over into a massive faecal nightmare covering everything but it wasn't isolated! It was Lord Mountbatten who introduced Savile to Charles, they were bro's from the get go. Mountbatten, Prince Philip's uncle and mentor to Prince Charles, faced posthumous allegations of sexual abuse of children. It begs the question, did this Mountbatten get along well with Andrew Mountbatten?
The Kincora Connection
Arthur Smyth claimed that Mountbatten abused him at the Kincora Boys' Home in Northern Ireland during the 1970s. These are allegations in a real legal case, not proven facts, but this is another part of an interwoven tapestry with an emerging theme.
Of course, the building was eventually knocked down.
The Peter Ball Situation: 1993 Police Caution
There really shouldn't have been a Peter Ball situation after his previous toe dipping in the wrong paddling pools. This one is perhaps the most problematic of all, mainly because of what happened after concerns bells were rung. Shockingly, this Ball bloke, former bishop, was given a police caution in 1993 for sexual offenses. Despite this caution, Charles continued their friendship. And that, right there is where I add my 'Fuck right off' because, fuck right off! You can't play that ignorant, can you? After rumours from about Savile, Lord Mountbatten and and Kincora? Ball strolled back into ministry within a couple of years! Bizarrely, the prince provided him with financial support and accommodation on the Duchy of Cornwall estate during the 2000s which was public money!
Charlie's Explanation
Charles eventually made out he was 'deceived' by Bishop Ball (what a name) and he played stupid by failing to understand that accepting a police caution meant admitting guilt. While this explanation could've been the state of affairs, it still fills a skip with a shit ton of questions about the advice Charles was receiving from his top level staff. This holds some similarity to the more recent Justin Welby situation, the Archbishop of Canterbury and another 'friend' of Charles. Fuck me, I starts to take the piss, doesn't it? Is our King Charles a hypocrite? The man stripped Andrew of titles and property for hanging around a nonce and potentially sleeping with one teenager. Why? What's going on? This questionable fellow, Welby, along with other clergy covered up the abuse of around 130 boys and young men.
What the Inquiry Found
Going back to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, it found no evidence to suggest Charles tried to influence police investigations. However, the continued support of his ex-bishop friend, Peter Ball, after the 1993 caution the public started to wake up and suddenly developed some misgivings.
We must remember who and what was being held to account with these investigative motions - the highest and most powerful of the UK. Of course the official narrative caused a few side glances, but all reports and proceedings trickled top down from a sovereign nation.
The Mentor's Dark Secret: Laurens van der Post
Laurens van der Post was like a long-term spiritual mentor for Charles. Can you fucking believe this? Honestly, this South African writer was an influence on Charles and was made godfather to Prince William. After van der Post's death in 1996, it emerged he fathered a child with a 14-year-old girl. He was in his fifties when it happened. Kicks his...uh...brother...er...the Gary Glitter joke is void now...How did it keep happening? Hmmm?
The Warning That Went Unheeded: The Royal Portrait Commission
Can you see what it is yet? Perhaps most defining argument is the Rolf Harris case. In 2005, The Australian artist painted a portrait of Queen Elizabeth II for her 80th birthday. It was a prestigious commission. Who chose this guy? After the backlog of predatory types in the palace did intelligence decide leave it all to the discretion of the . . . no, it's too stupid to accept!
Look, here's what's particularly off, yet again - it tool a victim to write to Buckingham Palace. Exhale, yes, the victim gave a warning about Harris's sexual crimes. The letter was supposedly filed away until 2012, when it was used as part of Operation Yewtree. Who knows how many more victims he created in those several years?
Why This Matters
This case is significant; it show how fucking stupid we all are. Direct warnings to the Royal Household. Yet, we can't forget, according to the official narrative royalty was ignorant. That in itself should make you question who is manipulating who? Why does the Royal ostrich bury its head in the sand?
What This All Means: The Official Position
Look, we can't say with certainty what members of the Royal Family knew about any of these criminals or their activities. They were clearly playing oblivious and that lad to a very poor public image. After Diana lost her life in France, the public lost love for their monarchy and Charles. Has this blog shined a little light onto why they fell out of favour for so long? No formal inquiry produced evidence to say Charles knew the gravity of the crimes surrounding those men or even of any corresponding rumours. An ostrich conveys a modicum of humour, but prosecutors, investigators, victims and their loved ones may have felt they saw injustice.
The Pattern Is Hard to Ignore
Multiple individuals with close ties to particular monarchs were later convicted of serious sexual offenses. There were warning signs, concerns raised by staff, and in at least one case, a direct warning to the Palace. Is just one rumour of child abuse enough to curse a house in your community? So what's going on here?
What The Evidence Suggests
This doesn't prove a cover-up or any type of deliberate enabling, but it does suggest an awful lack of due diligence when it came to the questionable company entertained by those people. Something was off. The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) was critical. The IICSA report reckoned Prince Charles was just 'misguided' and said Ball was an example of how a senior Anglican church member 'was able to sexually abuse vulnerable teenagers and young men for decades', but is that a fair summary? The prince was not very smart, he didn't know what was going on; do you accept that? As well as, palace security? Warnings and tip-offs? the information of Met police, Mi5 and popular mainstream culture? But yet, no one told him? The protocols for Royal embarrassment ignored?
The Uncomfortable Truth
Whether it's playing dumb, institutional protection of reputation over the victims, or simply terrible judgment, the Royal Family's associations with dubious individuals still do raise legitimate questions: what did they know?
But Who Was Targeting Who?
Prince Charles was known for wanting people to like him. He was eager to be loved like Princess Diana was, the peoples princess. Maybe there was an element of isolated, in his life. Even if there was an aspect of emotionally impoverishment in his childhood and he walked the halls of prestige and power; does it really mean he was innocent and victim to the psychopaths desire for power?
Psychopathy, sociopathy or antisocial personality disorder are known for aggression, they often involve abuse. Many other dark psychologies and sinister mentalities exist that are attracted to exerting power over vulnerable or weaker people. Was the royal family weak? Were Andrew and Lord Mountbatten both weak, easily led or gullible? Is this royal sympathy street now? We have heard child abuse has a sadistic link to domination - power is the flame to that moth. If there was something missing in the life of these sovereign people, so what? Maybe there is that 'wolf in sheep's clothing' going on: public relations skills, mentoring, spiritual advice, marriage guidance and so on, and so forth. These things were temptations to initiate friendship. We know transgressional coherence create bonds among members of secret circles.
We don't know the exact specifics of these royal friendships and may never know. But the documented connections and the handling of various warning signs can't be written off as coincidence can they? These predators circling the monarchs had secrets!
