Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor
Arrested & Released
Kentucky Connection
by Nizo Diazjec, JournalKentucky.com 2/19/2026 Thursday COMMENTARY
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly Prince Andrew, the ‘spare,’ was his momma’s (QEII) fav son, not her first-born heir to the throne, now King Charles Third (KC3/KCIII). The heir versus the spare.
This dynamic set in motion a kinetic internecine rivalry that took 66 years to explode into global headlines with the arrest of an ex-royal for the tenth time in history since 1465 when sitting Monarch King Edward IV ordered his cousin and rival King Henry VI of England (reigned 1422–1461, 1470–1471) to be arrested and then summarily murdered him.
On his 66th birthday, NOT A COINCIDENCE, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the United Kingdom’s former royal, was arrested and spent perhaps about eleven hours in a jail cell (cage for ill-behaved human beings) before being released from police custody on suspicion of misconduct in public office over allegations he sent confidential government documents to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The police claim they gave him no special treatment, meaning he was strip-searched, de-loused by forced shower in an insecticide, and lodged in a cage with a toilet and cot. THAT SCENARIO IS NOT LIKELY.
It has been common for arrestees in Britain to have a bag placed over their head during the arrest to ensure that their identity is not splattered over the front pages and their opportunity for impartial justice compromised. THAT SCENARIO IS NOT LIKELY.
BOTTOM-LINE: Andrew got special treatment.
Firstly, he was QEII’s fav son and when she could no longer ignore his alleged sexual escopades, she merely removed his royal family appearances as Duke of York, meaning all benefits remained and he was put on permanent vacation with pay. No wonder dutiful Charles was pissed-off!
Secondly, there’s no way Andrew was actually treated as any other arrestee, not in the arrest, not in being processed into the jail, and certainly will not be in the future proceedings.
History of Arrests of Royal Family Members, 1465-1685 & 2026
According to response to my query submitted to Perplexity.ai, the following history of royal arrests unfolds:
Key royal and near‑royal prisoners of the Tower
1. Henry VI (House of Lancaster)
- A. Prisoner: King Henry VI of England (reigned 1422–1461, 1470–1471).
- B. Relationship to monarch at time of death: Deposed king; prisoner under Edward IV (cousin, rival king).
- C. Monarch in power: Edward IV.
- D. Reign of monarch: 1461–1470, 1471–1483.
- E. Resolution and date:
- Held in the Tower after being captured in 1465.
- Killed in the Tower on the night of 21 May 1471, officially said to have died of “melancholy” but widely regarded as murdered on Edward IV’s orders.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- In Yorkist propaganda, his death closed the Lancastrian threat, framed as political necessity.
- Among Lancastrian sympathizers and later chroniclers, he was remembered with a quasi‑saintly aura, a meek king unjustly destroyed; later miracle stories grew around his memory.
2. Edward V and Richard, Duke of York (“the Princes in the Tower”)
- A. Prisoners:
- Edward V (uncrowned king, son of Edward IV).
- Richard, Duke of York (younger brother).
- B. Relationship to monarch: Nephews of Richard III (their uncle and protector, then king).
- C. Monarch in power: Richard III.
- D. Reign: 1483–1485.
- E. Resolution and date:
- Taken to the Tower in 1483 under the pretext of preparation for Edward’s coronation.
- Disappeared from public view; no contemporary official record of their deaths.
- Widely believed they were murdered, likely in 1483; responsibility commonly ascribed to Richard III, but never conclusively proven.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- Contemporary London rumor rapidly turned against Richard III, treating the boys as innocent victims.
- Their disappearance badly damaged Richard’s legitimacy and became a powerful Yorkist–Tudor talking point; later chroniclers (e.g., Thomas More, Tudor writers) cemented a narrative of child‑murder that made Richard a byword for tyrannical cruelty.
3. George, Duke of Clarence
- A. Prisoner: George, Duke of Clarence, brother of Edward IV and Richard III.
- B. Relationship to monarch: Brother of Edward IV.
- C. Monarch in power: Edward IV.
- D. Reign: 1461–1470, 1471–1483.
- E. Resolution and date:
- Arrested and tried in Parliament for treason against Edward IV.
- Imprisoned in the Tower and privately executed in 1478, with the famous (probably apocryphal) tradition that he was drowned in a butt of Malmsey wine.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- Seen as part of the violent intra‑Yorkist power struggles; the official story emphasized Clarence’s repeated betrayals.
- Some contemporaries and later writers saw the method and secrecy of the execution as a sign of deep family breakdown and royal ruthlessness.
4. Anne Boleyn (second wife of Henry VIII)
- A. Prisoner: Anne Boleyn, Queen Consort.
- B. Relationship to monarch: Wife of Henry VIII.
- C. Monarch in power: Henry VIII.
- D. Reign: 1509–1547.
- E. Resolution and date:
- Arrested and brought to the Tower in May 1536 on charges of adultery, incest, and treason.
- Tried by a panel including her own uncle; found guilty.
- Executed by sword (a special concession) on Tower Green on 19 May 1536.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- Official narrative: a dangerous, adulterous queen justly removed.
- Among many observers, charges were viewed as trumped‑up to clear the way for Jane Seymour; foreign ambassadors and some English contemporaries recorded strong skepticism about the evidence.
- Over time Anne became a symbol of Tudor caprice and the lethal volatility of Henry VIII’s court.
5. Catherine Howard (fifth wife of Henry VIII)
- A. Prisoner: Catherine Howard, Queen Consort.
- B. Relationship to monarch: Wife of Henry VIII.
- C. Monarch in power: Henry VIII.
- D. Reign: 1509–1547.
- E. Resolution and date:
- Arrested in 1541 over past and possibly ongoing sexual relationships, interpreted as treasonous against the king’s honor.
- Imprisoned in the Tower, condemned by Act of Attainder (no formal trial).
- Executed on Tower Green on 13 February 1542, alongside Jane Boleyn, Lady Rochford.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- The public story emphasized betrayal and sexual immorality.
- Henry reportedly reacted with intense shame and rage; foreign observers noted the pattern of queens’ downfalls as evidence of his instability.
- Her case reinforced the message that queens were personally and politically expendable.
6. Lady Jane Grey (“Nine Days’ Queen”)
- A. Prisoner: Lady Jane Grey, great‑granddaughter of Henry VII, briefly proclaimed queen.
- B. Relationship to monarch: De facto rival queen to Mary I; cousin through Tudor lineage.
- C. Monarch in power: Mary I (Mary Tudor).
- D. Reign: 1553–1558.
- E. Resolution and date:
- After Northumberland’s coup collapsed, Jane was imprisoned in the Tower in July 1553.
- Initially Mary showed some inclination to mercy.
- After Wyatt’s Rebellion in early 1554, Jane was seen as an ongoing figurehead risk.
- Executed on Tower Green on 12 February 1554, the same day as her husband, Guildford Dudley.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- Many observers regarded Jane as an instrument of Northumberland rather than a primary conspirator; she attracted sympathy as a learned, devout teenager.
- Mary’s decision was politically comprehensible but morally uneasy even at the time; later Protestant martyrology made Jane a powerful symbol of innocent victimhood.
7. Princess Elizabeth (later Elizabeth I)
- A. Prisoner: Princess Elizabeth, daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn.
- B. Relationship to monarch: Half‑sister of Mary I; princess and later heir presumptive.
- C. Monarch in power: Mary I.
- D. Reign: 1553–1558.
- E. Resolution and date:
- Arrested in 1554 amid Wyatt’s Rebellion, suspected of complicity or at least of being a rallying point for Protestant opposition.
- Imprisoned in the Tower for about two months; reportedly fearful she would meet her mother’s fate.
- Released to house arrest at Woodstock, then eventually restored to favor, and succeeded as queen in 1558.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- Many Protestants saw her imprisonment as a grim echo of Anne Boleyn’s downfall and feared another judicial killing.
- Her survival and later accession retroactively colored accounts, turning the Tower episode into an origin myth of resilience and providential deliverance.
8. Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury
- A. Prisoner: Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury, last Plantagenet of the direct Yorkist line.
- B. Relationship to monarch: First cousin of Henry VIII’s mother (Elizabeth of York); thus an elderly, very high‑born kinswoman.
- C. Monarch in power: Henry VIII.
- D. Reign: 1509–1547.
- E. Resolution and date:
- Arrested in 1538, held in the Tower on charges of treason largely arising from her family’s perceived Yorkist and Catholic threat.
- Executed on 27 May 1541; contemporary accounts describe a botched beheading.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- Even some contemporaries saw the case as vindictive and thin on concrete evidence.
- Her death contributed to an image of Henry VIII as increasingly paranoid and blood‑stained; later Catholic tradition treated her as a martyr.
9. James, Duke of Monmouth
- A. Prisoner: James Scott, Duke of Monmouth, illegitimate son of Charles II.
- B. Relationship to monarch: Illegitimate but acknowledged son of Charles II; rebel against his uncle James II.
- C. Monarch in power: James II.
- D. Reign: 1685–1688.
- E. Resolution and date:
- Led the Monmouth Rebellion to claim the crown in 1685.
- Defeated at Sedgemoor, captured, taken to London and confined in the Tower.
- Executed on Tower Hill by beheading on 15 July 1685.
- F. Public reaction / nuance:
- Monmouth had significant popular support, particularly among Protestants who saw him as a more acceptable alternative to Catholic James II.
- His execution, followed by the “Bloody Assizes” against his followers, helped fix James II’s reputation for severity and contributed to the later justification of the Glorious Revolution.Her death contributed to an image of Henry VIII as increasingly paranoid and blood‑stained; later Catholic tradition treated her as a martyr.
10. Andrew, Defrocked Prince Arrested / Spare to Heir, King Charles III
- A. Prisoner Jail Bird: Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, ex-Duke of York, spare to heir Prince Charles III, now KCIII.
- Andrew was arrested today (2/19/2026) and charged with sending confidential government documents to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He spent hours in jail and was released into an ignominious firestorm of reporters, cameras, and the opprobrium of reinvigorated notorious allegations of sexual misconduct that are possibly connected to his charged misconduct related to Epstein. Epstein was a convicted child-sex predator who was allegedly first protected by a federal judge in Florida who gave him a couple of weeks in jail and house arrest for what would have carried a possible 5-30-year sentence for the average American.
Kentucky Connection to Andrew
Queen Elizabeth II (QEII) mother of Andrew, visited Lexington, Ky., several times during her reign. When news of her fav son’s alleged sexual misconduct arose, she chose to merely suspend him from royal public appearances.
___ REF.:
History gleaned from response to original query-prompt to Perplexity.Ai
PROMPT by Nizo Diazjec, JournalKentucky.com: “Since A.D. 802, King of Wessex, and subsequently down to KCIII (current British monarch), (A) list the name of each royal who was arrested and perhaps imprisoned in the infamous TOWER, either due to internecine conflict [like Henry VIII’s arrest of his various wives who were murdered on guillotines], and other alleged improprieties [like alleged espionage, disloyalty, adultery, etc.] ; (B) their relationship to the Monarch; (C) name of the Monarch; (D) year dates the Monarch reigned; (E) resolution of the charges against the arrested royal family member or spouse and year date of the execution of sentence [e.g., year Anne Bolin was murdered]; and each other salient nuance of the arrest, trial, conviction, and execution of judgment against a member of the royal family; and, (F) perceived public reaction / support for action taken against the royal family member as recorded by historical documents, news reports, etc.”
