King’s threat to shame Andrew by stripping titles… Monarch made clear he would take ‘further action’ to remove the prince’s honours after disgraced royal tried to dig heels in

The King has threatened to have Prince Andrew officially stripped of his titles unless he ‘thinks logically’.

Charles, 76, made clear he would not hesitate to take decisive ‘further action’ if his brother refused to give up the dukedom and other honors after he lied about cutting ties with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

The Daily Mail understands that despite the mounting evidence against him, the former Duke of York, 65, acted immediately with a ‘staggering lack of remorse’.

Sources said it was a situation the King described as ‘unbearable’.

The only way Charles could legally strip Andrew of his titles would be to pass it through Parliament, and he never wanted to take up Parliament’s valuable time and resources in dealing with the matter.

But he made it clear to Andrew privately last week that he had many options open to him if he did not fall on his sword.

Some have questioned whether Queen Elizabeth’s action to set aside her second son’s titles was sufficient under the circumstances.

But sources say involving Parliament when dealing with major domestic and economic challenges, as well as major global security issues, could be seen as a waste of resources and could take months, even a year, to finalize.

Forcing Andrew’s hand would produce the same result, much more quickly.

Prince Andrew, Prince William and Prince Charles arrive to attend a Christmas Service at Sandringham Estate in 2011

The Palace made its move on Friday as the window of opportunity narrowed before the situation spiraled further out of control.

The fact that courtiers were even willing to consider taking the matter out of his hands – through Parliament or otherwise – is believed to have ‘shocked’ Andrew into finally taking action.

A royal source said yesterday: ‘The thought of him continuing to exercise the titles and honors he has been given for another day, month or year, while other options were explored and implemented, was unacceptable for the sake of the wider family. And in the end, for the greater good, Andrew acted sensibly.’

Yesterday, in another world-shattering exclusive, The Mail on Sunday revealed that Andrew was trying to involve the Metropolitan Police and one of Queen Elizabeth’s most senior aides in a campaign to smear Virginia Giuffre, who accused him of assaulting her as a teenager.

A bombshell email has revealed how Andrew asked his taxpayer-funded police bodyguard to investigate the ‘lying’ young woman.

Surprisingly, the prince passed on details of his date of birth and social security number, presumably given to him by Epstein.

He also claimed that Virginia, who committed suicide earlier this year, had a criminal conviction, but this was vehemently denied by her family.

An earlier email revelation proved Andrew lied to Buckingham Palace and the British public by claiming he had cut off all contact with his close friend in December 2010 after Epstein was released from prison on child sex charges.

Andrew was photographed with Jeffrey Epstein in New York’s Central Park in 2011. Andrew declined to explain how he obtained Ms. Giuffre’s nine-digit U.S. social security number.

Twelve weeks later the pedophile emailed the financier saying they were “in this together” and nauseatingly expressed a desire to “play some more soon.”

The revelations, which emerged ahead of the publication of Ms Giuffre’s memoir tomorrow, were considered a ‘turning point’ for the Palace and prompted the King to take such decisive action.

‘When the end came it was relatively quick, swift and brutal,’ a source said. ‘Andrew might not have been able to read the room, but the Palace could.’

Another source added that although the announcement was a ‘flawed outcome’, it was seen as the best option under the circumstances.

Various sources say that Andrew, who remained a prince by birth, denied the seriousness of his situation until the end and ‘clearly had a strong belief in his own innocence’.

It remains to be seen where the latest developments will reunite him with his nearest and dearest.

He won’t be joining the Royal Family at Christmas, but it’s hard to say whether he’ll ever be seen in public with them again, especially when it comes to family funerals or services marking important religious events such as Easter.

Given that the King is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, which upholds the Christian morality of forgiveness of sinners, it would have been difficult for Charles to ban his brother from the church.

However, if the situation arises, it is hoped that Andrew will find more ‘less obvious’ ways than his scene-stealing final appearance at the funeral of the Duchess of Kent, where all the strangeness of family relationships was on display.

Suggestions that Prince William might take an even tougher stance in the future, including banning him from his uncle’s coronation, were described as ‘hypothetical’ yesterday.

“He is in line with his father in terms of the measures being taken,” a source close to the future king said.

There have been concerns among the extended family about Andrew’s personal health and well-being in recent years.

Reports suggest he is a ‘shell’ of the man he used to be, and these concerns may partly explain why the prince was allowed to publish his own remarks and statement on Friday.

It is also understood that the Palace plans to consider adding Andrew’s biography as a member of the Royal Family to the official website in the coming days. In light of recent developments, it is unclear whether its rating will be further downgraded or deleted entirely.