Piers Morgan’s Royal Giveaway

One quality that the media establishment manages to display rather too often, and maybe without realising it beforehand, is a total lack of self-awareness. Much of this is part of the noise floor of press and broadcast to-and-fro, but on occasion, there is an outbreak so spectacular that it gets noticed. The response to Prince Andrew’s alleged £12 million payoff to Virginia Giuffre and her charity has provided the latest example.

And what's more, Ron ...

The idea that Andy should pay such a significant wad to someone he claims he never met, for something he also claims he didn’t do, is not high on the credibility scale, Royal or otherwise. So it has provided a soft target for the punditerati, not least former Screws and Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan, recently received back into the Cosa Rupra.

“Prince Andrew’s a snivelling little coward whose denials weren’t worth the paper they were written on - and he must now be stripped of all remaining titles & privileges” he howls, although this is not nearly as edgy as he wants you to think: Creepy Uncle Rupe hates the Royals, and one of his pundits giving them a kicking fits right in.

The host-to-be of The All-New Percy Moron Show rather let himself go as he tackled the subject of Andy and his Bung: “The British public is entitled to know who paid for Prince Andrew’s settlement given some of it may have come indirectly from taxpayer money. Outrageous if it’s true the Queen’s had to contribute towards silencing his accuser - how dare he put his mother in that position?” And then came the self-awareness failure.

After the increasingly desperate and downmarket Telegraph claimed “The Duke of York will keep his remaining titles after settling his sexual abuse civil case”, Morgan indicated his displeasure. “Nonsense. If you pay an accuser $12 million to avoid being held accountable for your actions in court, you renounce your right to any titles”. Er, HELLO?

There can be only one inference: paying off to avoid going to court means guilty. So Evan Harris, who you can tell as he’s a doctor, had a question. “Who's going to break the news to [Piers Morgan] that the Mirror, to avoid being held accountable in court, have paid out far more than $12m in confidential sums to victims of phone-hacking (& other illegality) by the Daily Mirror when he was Editor?” Writer Dan Waddell was on the same page.

“He’ll be livid when he finds out how much the Mirror has paid out in confidential settlements for phone hacking when he was editor”. Meanwhile, Professor Steven Barnett of the University of Westminster had a question about Morgan’s new berth. “Interesting question for [Piers Morgan] to address, perhaps in a column for his new employer who, um, has also paid out many multiples of $12m”. To avoid going to court. Again.

Indeed, the Tweeter known as Sun Apology juxtaposed the paper’s front page with a headline from the Guardian, asking yet another of those difficult questions. “Hi [The Sun]. Are you suggesting it looks incredibly dodgy to be paying millions of ££ and settling out of court while making no admission of guilt?” Maybe Piers Morgan can tell us.

But good of him to be so unswerving in the view that paying off an accuser to avoid going to court means the party doing the paying off is guilty. And should be treated accordingly.

Not sure what Rupe and his lawyers will think, though. Still, details, eh?

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton