The REAL Reason the Queen STRIPPED Prince Andrew's Titles

#scandal #queenelizabeth #princeandrew

Here is the legal reason why Queen Elizabeth stripped her son of all his titles.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the personal video blog of personal injury lawyer Tommy John Kherkher.

Link to My Other Social Media Channels:

Biography:

Personal Injury Attorney Tommy John Kherkher
Managing Partner of The Kherkher Law Firm PLLC | Attorney at Kherkher Garcia LLP
Principal office is in Houston, Texas. Licensed in Texas(see below).

Primarily focused on representing individuals who have suffered catastrophic and high-damage personal injuries.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Use: All clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).

I do not own the music or unoriginal underlying graphics in this video.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER:

This content is the property of Attorney Tom, LLC. Anything stated on ANY form of media, either expressly or implied, is not legal advice, nor can Attorney Tom, LLC, Attorney Tommy John Kherkher, Kherkher Law Firm, PPLC, or Kherkher Garcia LLP give you legal advice. Unless otherwise stated in the specific video referenced, The Kherkher Law Firm, PLLC | Kherkher Garcia, LLP is not advertising the services and products it offers. This content, unless otherwise disclaimed, was not prepared to secure paid professional employment.

Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Nor is there intent to form a lawyer-client relationship when interacting with others on the internet and in social media outlets. Past performance talked about in any context is no guarantee of future results.

[passtheawksshow]

The crossover of interests I didn't know I needed.

[cdwrrir]

The thing is technically he still has his HRH (His royal highness) title. He’s just agreed not to use it. Removing the HRH would require a letters patent which the queen hasn’t issued. Also those military titles and patronage’s aren’t intrinsically royal. The queen could give them to anyone she wished. He still retains 3 titles in British law that would require laws to be passed to take away from him. His status as duke of york. His title of Prince, and his status as councillor of state. He’s a long way down the line of succession and being a duke isn’t intrinsically royal so only the last one is constitutionally important though. As councillor of state He could in theory act as the queens stand in if she fell ill. I would not be surprised if an act of Parliament didn’t rectify that soon because at the queens age that’s not that unlikely.

[windowsleon]

Honestly, this is an interesting legal analysis.

I think the reason for the stripping of the titles is not a monetary issue, it is a specific thing with British Royalty. To have a Royal Family Member with those titles found liable for something like that would give him claims to many of the protections Royals enjoy under British law. As this isn't the UK though, that would have the potential to bring massive diplomatic consequences as well as just weakening the institution of the Monarchy as a whole.

A default judgment privately dealt with by Andrew will be exactly what is wanted. Money is paid, and the problem goes away. The money isn't an issue really. Crown Land comes under the protection of the UK government even though it belongs to the Crown and not the UK.

[TheOmegaRiddler]

If Prince Andrew lost assets of the Queen in the US, forget stripping him of all his titles. She'd probably feed him to the corgis.

[clairmac]

It's not a money issue, it's a perception issue. There have been protests in the UK from miltary personnel and if I'm not mistaken high ranking military personnel not wanting Prince Andrew to represent them. There's a lot more to it than that too and it's really a quagmire. However at the end of the day for Royalty money will never matter more than public perception. If this lawsuit could have been settled out of court it would have and nothing would have changed so I don't truly don't see them going to a default judgement. I foresee them dragging this out for years and then quietly settling when the publicity dies down or continuously trying to get it thrown out on technically.

[carlosarana]

If you read the Queen's statement, he was stripped only of his "Military Titles" and "Patronages". That includes things like " Colonel-in-chief of The Royal Lancers" or "Commodore-in-Chief of the Fleet Air Arm". These titles are typically ceremonial only.

He is still a Prince of England and he is still part of the royal family. He also still has his title as the Duke of York. He still technically is "His Royal Higness" but will no longer officially be addressed that way by the royal family.

For what its worth, I don't think its actually possible to lose the title of Prince when it is gained by virtue of being a son of the reigning monarch. Same for being a Duke, except for maybe by treason.

[nihili]

I love watching Tom slowly realizing he's in the middle of saying LegalEagle's line. I need to see it on loop!

[wildworks]

I bet 3 times a week Tom's girlfriend has to tell him to stop gossiping about the royals.

[idontknowleavemealoneplease]

I feel like his lawyers probably advised against him giving the most incriminating interview ever with the BBC as well so hopefully he doesn't take their advice this time either. Prince Andrew and R. Kelly must have had a who can look guiltier contest.

[numero]

She will get nothing because Andrew is penniless. The titles hold the assets and the finances. That is why private person was announced. The Queen owns all titles. Also you cannot sue the Queen because she is beyond reproach.

[PaulSteMarie]

Wait a second. Andrew Windsor hasn't stripped of his title. He's had his __military__ titles and royal patronages removed. The latter are just associations with various charities. He hasn't been stripped of the title Duke of York, although he is refraining from using it for the duration. I don't think his military titles would allow the US to, for example, seize UK military vessels. I imagine it's just a matter of insulating the UK military and those charities from association with his alleged misconduct. The UK monarchy is all about preserving the image, which, frankly, is pretty much their job.

I rather imagine any private property his mother owns in her own right is buried in a sea of impenetrable LLCs, possibly based in the Bahamas to make them even more thoroughly insulated from lawsuits.

Corporation law is a sewer; I blame the thrice-damned Delaware Court of Chancery, which is run like the College of Cardinals and whose main role in the law seems to be rubber-stamping outrageous corporate forms that solely benefit CEOs and rap^Wrun roughshod over shareholders.

[andrewkent]

Tom, you only gave me 2 seconds to respond in the comments rather than the 5 you specified. I want to hire you to sue yourself on my behalf for ripping me off for 3 seconds. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[syberghost]

I know how you can avoid stepping on Devin's line: "I'm just trying to teach you to think like a catastrophic injury attorney"

[joey]

But at the time of the offense he was a royal.. So wouldn't that play a role?

[MG-hxym]

I have a feeling SA is a light term for someone for someone involved in trafficked children.

[andhisband]

What makes joint ownership in this case a good idea? Haven't lawyers been telling us for the last hundred years that a trust is the way to go? Specifically in this case, wouldn't "The Windsor Royal Real Estate Trust" have been a much better idea, as the trust could not be sued (it did nothing to the woman) and can't be forced to be liquidated, as Andrew is not an owner but a beneficiary?

[thefoolishhiker]

I find it annoying that content creators have to use acronyms when discussing a subject. It’s a bit ridiculous in my opinion when everyone knows what the acronym stands for in the video.

[obclutch]

He pulled the whole sovereign citizen routine 🤣🤣

[bethisway]

"Think. like. a lawyer, omg. That's..." 😂😂😂

[gabrielseller]

Hey Tom, I'm sure you've had tons of people ask but I'd really like to hear your thoughts on the recent The ThedaCare v Acension case. Hugely important incident I think