Digested week: At least poor old Andrew’s still a prince – and has his garden | Emma Brockes

Monday

Amidst the endless Prince Andrew news this week, there’s a stray line It caught my eye in the Daily Mail. US super-lawyer David Boies, who represents Virginia Giuffre and whose previous clients have included Bill Gates, Elizabeth Holmes and Harvey Weinstein, told the Mail on Monday: “I think Prince Andrew has suffered enough at this point, but the Met police owe Epstein’s victims an accounting.”

I mean, two things stand out. So has he suffered enough? And if accurately reported, is the attorney for Jeffrey Epstein’s most prominent victim, who died by suicide in April, the person who would direct our sympathies toward his alleged abuser?

By the first issue, Prince Andrew is so thoroughly persona non grata that he is effectively under house arrest – but the house in question has 30 rooms and the garden, including Windsor Great Park, stretches to around 2,000 hectares (5,000 acres), which seems to ease the pain somewhat. While it is true that he lost one of his titles, he is still a prince after all. Even the pain of being trapped in a (very large) house with Sarah Ferguson – punishment enough for the most serious of crimes, of course – is of course mitigated by the fact that the couple moved in together before this all blew up again.

Poor old Andrew though. He writes in the Telegraph under the following headline:Am I the only one who feels sorry for Prince Andrew?“A lone hacker in the comment world is pondering the injustice of condemning a man whose only proven fault was staying in touch with his friend after he was jailed and then lying about it, and who also paid more than £12 million to settle a charge of sexual assault standing next to him in a photo to a woman he said he had never met, even though she was there. “If a friend of mine goes to prison, I might as well stay loyal to him,” wrote the Prince’s defender and of course he is right. What’s the value of a friendship if it only uses words like “pedophile”, “abuse of a minor” and “14 years old”?

Tuesday

Keira Knightley’s children’s book came out this week and there’s only one question on her mind; Where does Maurice Sendak fall on the continuum between David Walliams and Helicopter Budgie? Years ago, I had a conversation with Eric Carle, the brilliant author of Hungry Caterpillar, among other classics, and Carle expressed his frustration with people who thought they could “knock out a children’s book.”

He even said: “I joke that in a novel you start with a 35-word idea and work your way up to 35,000 words. In a children’s book you have a 35,000-word idea and you whittle it down to 35. That’s an exaggeration, but that’s what happens with picture books.”

“It’s probably safe to say that The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, and One and Only Sparkella by Channing Tatum (yes, the action hero) didn’t start out as a 35,000-word idea, but I have to say that Knightley’s self-illustrated I Love You the Same book looks really impressive.

Wednesday

On Wednesday, we learned that Burcu Yesilyurt, who was trying to get on a bus in Richmond without spilling her coffee, was surrounded by a Swat team – okay, three council enforcement officers – who fined her £150 for dumping the coffee residue down the drain rather than into the bin.

Well; It was hard to find a better example of the cooperative application of petty, meaningless rules that is one of the fundamental tenets of this country’s national life, and news of Ms. Yesilyurt’s plight spread around the world. While everyone in Britain knows the exact tone of voice in which the council clerk informs Ms Yesilyurt that she has “breached Section 33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990”, the New York Times has quoted an expert on “urban drainage” as saying that he doesn’t think flushing coffee down the drain is a particular problem. Later, the Times of India did a follow-up study, as did the Canadians.

All of this must be extremely worrying for the City of Richmond’s communications team; The team promptly made a U-turn by midweek, not only rescinding the penalty but also announcing a review of “our recommendations regarding the disposal of liquids in a public place.” Justice for Richmond One!

Thursday

I briefly considered applying for the £180,000-a-year tutoring job – a job that advertised for a person from a “socially appropriate background” to get a one-year-old into Eton or Harrow, which was widely praised by every media outlet in the country this week – and I bet you did too. A seemingly suspicious-looking job listing on a private tutoring company’s website described the ideal candidate as someone who could help his toddler “become an English gentleman” and accustom him to “an immersive British cultural environment.”

No one knows the identity of the family in question, and even the president of the tutoring company said they had to sign a confidentiality agreement before being given their last name. This all sounds to me less like the actions of an actual group of parents looking for a teacher and more like a demonstration to prove one thing or another about our current way of life. The red flags are many, but here’s the big one: Someone in a position to spend nearly $200,000 to tutor a baby would, of course, also have the ability to do a quick Google search to determine the market price.

Friday

Marie Kondo has a new book out and it’s about how to pack, which is a great topic and I would totally buy that book. Her top tips for checked luggage include: decanting hair products and moisturizers into smaller bottles; using packing cubes to keep the suitcase organized; and making note of the last things you packed, didn’t wear, or used. Like all the great ideas and other life advice that come my way that I would love to think about, I am never, ever put into action.