Royal commentator says Sarah Ferguson ‘shamefully took advantage’ of late Queen Elizabeth II

Former duchess Sarah Ferguson is coming under renewed fire over her apparent disregard of the late Queen Elizabeth II.

In the most recent disclosure of the Epstein files, Ms Ferguson’s close relationship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein was exposed.

From lunches to email exchanges, the friendship set off a wave of anger secondary to that which has followed Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor for years.

But now an expert royal commentator has revealed how the ex-duchess’ correspondence with Epstein consisted of the highest possible level of disrespect for the late Queen Elizabeth II.

Richard Fitzwilliams said Ms Ferguson’s connection to the disgraced financier was not known by the Queen, and that it served as a reminder that she has “no shame”.

“Betrayal is a truly horrible characteristic. To betray the person to whom one owes loyalty and the institution into which she was welcomed is shameful, but Sarah Ferguson knows no shame,” he told the Daily Mail.

“Queen Elizabeth II, a monarch whose rule will go down as one of the finest in our history, was kind to her. We now know that Ferguson’s grovelling emails to the deceased paedophile Jeffrey Epstein are proof of her culpability and greed.”

The Epstein files do indicate that the Queen was aware of Andrew’s connection to Epstein - throwing him her full support after a photo emerged of the two of them walking in New York’s Central Park in 2010.

David Stern, a royal aide, sent an email to Epstein in March 2011 with the following message: “Theme seems to be now: PA under scrutiny for dealing with Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan (but government approved!), he has full support of his Mum, only dealing with you was ‘unwise’.”

“The dealings to you are now predominately related F. and her financial trouble, always quoting her interview and her ‘lack of judgment’ and she will never deal with you again’.”

Mr Fitzwilliams said over the years, Andrew was very popular and much more liked by the public than his brother, now King Charles.

“Ferguson took advantage of this, after their wedding, trading on her ‘breath of fresh air’,” he said.

After the ex-duchess divorced from Andrew in 1996, the late Queen continued to support her, Mr Fitzwillilams said.

“The Queen was naturally frugal by nature. Ferguson’s extravagances reached bizarre heights time and again, and the Palace even issued a statement that they would no longer be paid.”

“After she divorced Andrew in 1996, she lied publicly about her generous divorce settlement, reports indicate that it was a package worth some £3million (AU$5.7 million), including a trust fund for her daughters Beatrice and Eugenie.

He explained that even though some of Ms Ferguson’s actions in the ‘90s and ‘00s made her a public “disgrace”, the Queen was still largely on her team.

“Yet the Queen had a soft spot for her, almost as though she was a mother figure trying to resurrect someone who was clearly utterly irresponsible.”

To Mr Fitzwilliams, the constant bouncing back from PR disasters that Ms Ferguson managed to pull off demonstrated her firm grasp on energy and resilience.

He explained that the Queen “famously disliked family confrontations” but noted that Prince Philip refused to appear in the same room as Ms Ferguson - though he did not specify a time frame for this.

That King Charles invited Ms Ferguson to Christmas in 2023 shows her “ability to return to favour against the odds”, Mr Fitzwilliams explained.

“The full extent of her betrayal of Queen Elizabeth’s good nature is not yet known with more to come out from the Epstein files.”