After ruling for less than one year, Edward VIII becomes the first English monarch to voluntarily abdicate the throne. He chose to abdicate after the British government, public, and the Church of England condemned his decision to marry the American divorcée Wallis Warfield Simpson. On the evening of December 11, he gave a radio address in which he explained, “I have found it impossible to carry on the heavy burden of responsibility and to discharge the duties of king, as I would wish to do, without the help and support of the woman I love.” On December 12, his younger brother, the duke of York, was proclaimed King George VI.


In 1936 a constitutional crisis in the British Empire arose when King-Emperor Edward VIII proposed to marry Wallis Simpson, an American socialite who was divorced from her first husband and was pursuing the divorce of her second.

The marriage was opposed by the governments of the United Kingdom and the Dominions of the British Commonwealth. Religious, legal, political, and moral objections were raised. As the British monarch, Edward was the nominal head of the Church of England, which did not allow divorced people to remarry in church if their ex-spouses were still alive. For this reason, it was widely believed that Edward could not marry Simpson and remain on the throne. Simpson was perceived to be politically and socially unsuitable as a prospective queen consort because of her two previous marriages. It was widely assumed by the Establishment that she was driven by love of money or position rather than love for the King. Despite the opposition, Edward declared that he loved Simpson and intended to marry her as soon as her second divorce was finalised.

The widespread unwillingness to accept Simpson as the King's consort and Edward's refusal to give her up led to his abdication in December 1936. He was succeeded by his brother Albert, who became George VI. Edward was given the title of Duke of Windsor, and styled Royal Highness, following his abdication, and he married Simpson the following year. They remained married until his death 35 years later. 

POST ABDICATION

George VI granted his elder brother the title of Duke of Windsor with the style His Royal Highness on 12 December 1936. On 3 May the following year, the Simpsons' divorce was made final. The case was handled quietly and it barely featured in some newspapers. The Times printed a single sentence below a separate, and seemingly unconnected, report announcing the Duke's departure from Austria.

Edward married Wallis in France on 3 June 1937. She became the Duchess of Windsor, but, much to Edward's disgust, George VI issued letters patent that denied her the style of Her Royal Highness. The couple settled in France, and the Duke received a tax-free allowance from his brother, which Edward supplemented by writing his memoirs and by illegal currency trading. He also profited from the sale of Balmoral Castle and Sandringham House to George VI. Both estates are private property and not part of the Royal Estate, and were therefore inherited and owned by Edward, regardless of the abdication.

In October 1937, the Duke and Duchess visited Germany, against the advice of the British government, and met Hitler at his Obersalzberg retreat. The visit was much publicised by the German media. During the visit the Duke gave full Nazi salutes. In an article for the New York Daily News and Chicago Tribune of 13 December 1966 the Duke wrote that in 1937 Adolf Hitler persuaded him "it was in Britain's interest and in Europe's too, that Germany be encouraged to strike east and smash Communism forever ... I thought the rest of us could be fence-sitters while the Nazis and the Reds slogged it out."

After the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939, Edward was assigned to the British Military Mission in France. In February 1940, the German ambassador in The Hague, Count Julius von Zech-Burkersroda, claimed that Edward had leaked the Allied war plans for the defence of Belgium. When Germany invaded the north of France in May 1940, the Duke and Duchess fled to Lisbon.

Under the code name Operation Willi, Nazi agents, principally Walter Schellenberg, plotted unsuccessfully to persuade the Duke to leave Portugal, and contemplated kidnapping him. Lord Caldecote warned Churchill that the Duke "is well-known to be pro-Nazi and he may become a centre of intrigue". Churchill threatened the Duke with a court-martial if he did not return to British soil.

In July 1940, Edward was appointed Governor of the Bahamas. Edward reportedly told an acquaintance, "After the war is over and Hitler will crush the Americans ... we'll take over ... They [the British] don't want me as their king, but I'll be back as their leader." He was reported as saying that "it would be a tragic thing for the world if Adolf Hitler was overthrown". Comments like these reinforced the belief that the Duke and Duchess held Nazi sympathies and the effect of the abdication crisis of 1936 was to force off the throne a man with extreme political opinions. Claims that Edward would have been a threat or that he was removed by a political conspiracy to dethrone him remain speculative and "persist largely because since 1936 the contemporary public considerations have lost most of their force and so seem, wrongly, to provide insufficient explanation for the King's departure".

CAUGHT WITH HIS TROUSERS DOWN - Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor may not remember the 17 year old Virginia Roberts, but unless this photograph is a fake (doubtful - it must have been checked out) he did meet the young lady at some point - even if only posing at a drinks party, and Ghislaine Maxwell was at this meeting. One question we would ask is how do we know the age of the claimant from this picture? She could easily be 18 or older. Or she may have claimed to be over 18, for Ghislaine to have allowed Virginia to have been photographed with the Duke. No doubt, testimony from Ms Maxwell will clear that up. And where and when was the picture taken, and by whom? You can imagine that with US State laws varying, and this picture looking for all the world like London, where the age of consent is 16, the precise details relating to the taking of this picture are extremely important. It might be worth checking passports, etc. Not that we are saying anything did or did not happen between the Prince and Ms Roberts. For the sake of argument, if something did take place (that the Duke cannot recall) and it was in London, then no crime had been committed except under prostitution and trafficking laws - if applicable. It would not be fair to even interview the Prince, until the facts had been established, for fear of the Bill trying to trick him into something he could not possibly remember. We know of a case where penetration had been alleged during a police interview, but the evidence told only of natural marks and a hymen that could not be opened [even] with labial traction. A so-called child specialist gave evidence at trial, that the natural marks could only be explained by penetration. Legal Aid restrictions prevented the defendant in that case from instructing a specialist. Sussex police allowed the jury to hear misleading evidence, and the man was convicted on naturally occurring marks, found in females of all ages. British justice is such that despite other discrepancies being identified during the trial, such as a diary being attributed by the trial judge to the defendant, when it belonged to a psychiatric nurse, an appeal has never made it back to the Courts. And that is because there in no right of appeal in England, one has to seek permission of a single judge, and the Royal Courts of Justice refused to provide vital transcripts needed to be able to mount an appeal. Europe sent back a human rights claim after 4 years, suggesting the wrongly convicted man had a domestic remedy. Sadly, Europe is out of tune with British law. There is no effective remedy in the UK. Article 13 not being included in the HRA 1998. On that basis, good luck to anyone facing trial in the UK's 'kangaroo courts. At least Prince Andrew has unlimited funds for Andrew Brettler's legal team in the USA. In the UK, Legal Aid does not extend to seeking independent medical experts. Funding is barely sufficient to mount any kind of defence in complex cases, such as historic sex allegations, whereas the Crown Prosecution Service has virtually unlimited resources. In addition, Sussex police had raided the appellant's home and stolen privileged Rule 39 files, rendering the process null and void, recently brought to light when in another Sussex case in 2021, the CPS included stolen privileged documents in their case against another SLAPP victim (who was beaten unconscious in a police van), Also by virtue of prior involvement as a R v Sussex Justices 1924, infringement, where the victim had reported crimes to Sussex police, but they had failed to investigate the claims of 11 unrelated petitioners as to planning fraud in Wealden. A matter still outstanding, as there is no statute of limitations on such crimes. If the State refuses an audience under the 1689 Bill of Rights, the only recourse is to the International Criminal Court, in the Hague, where the European Court dullards appears to believe that in England there is an effective remedy.

NOW IS THE TIME FOR CHANGE - Under the present system where the Head of State is a royal, and there is no written constitution, politicians like David Cameron and Boris Johnson can lie with impunity - even to Queen Elizabeth - and not face penalties. Police officers can shoot unarmed civilians and not be sent to prison, and planning officers can deceive the Secretaries of State and High Court judges, and not be prosecuted. It is alleged that there is little justice in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales - indeed, when it comes to money laundering, we are the most corrupt country in the world. We aver that such machinations are costing the ordinary taxpayer, Treasury and the Crown (being the state) significant sums of money, while adding to the UK's carbon footprint. Hence, the country is not being run effectively by the at present; defective administration, not to serve its citizens, but to sustain and profit itself from consultancy fees as part time politicians. Unlike the US Constitution of 1791 that exists to serve the people. Under the administration of The Queen, as the Head of State in the at present Constitutional Monarchy, Britain has become known as the drug money laundering capital of the world. In a modern democracy, such criminalities exposes the absurdity of a hereditary system, where those in line to take the reins of the nation, have no administrative or economic qualifications, and have proven time and again that they have appointed the wrong Prime Ministers. To wit, alleged war criminal, Tony Blair, and Boris Johnson - who lied to the Queen. Not to mention the mishandling of Covid, the steep rise in energy prices (energy inflation) and the almost total lack of affordable housing - so perpetuating the renting financial-slave-trade. In addition, the planning system is held to be corrupt to the core, as is the honours system. The icing on the cake is the lack of an effective remedy, befitting the dictatorial likes of Adolf Hitler, in disarming the electorate - based on Henry VIII's statute, making his word law (off with his head 4.5 beheadings a day). It is surely time for a constitutional overhaul - to cut out the cancerous cells - and become an accountable democracy based, not based on award bribery and ranking, but based on ability and competence. In the light of these failings and the lack of suitably experienced royals to continue, especially following the fallout of the ongoing sex scandal. The monarchy may like to consider abdicating their duties and call for a referendum. In 1672, an angry Dutch electorate, killed and ate their ‘Grand Pensionary’ Johan de Witt, in effect, the prime minister of the then failed republic. They wanted strong leadership from the young Prince of Orange: Willem III, later William III of England. Perhaps, now is the time for reversal - a return to a republic based on merit, not political horseshit. We feel sure that Hannibal Lecter, would like to have some old friends for dinner. In the political sense, that is!

PORTRAIT OF HENRY VII - BEHEADING BUTCHER - KING OF ENGLAND & WOMANIZER

LINKS & REFERENCE

https://www.

Please use our A-Z INDEX to navigate this site