Is Queen Elizabeth to blame for the troubling behavior of Prince Andrew? Did her indulgence lead him to develop a sense of entitlement, steeped in arrogance, and unable to approach his privileged life with any semblance of humility, decency, or common sense?

It’s common for mothers to overlook the faults of their favored sons, sometimes coddling them to the point of unintentionally creating a monster.

Could this be the case with Prince Andrew? It’s a question worth pondering, as there must be some rationale behind his notorious behavior. What lies beneath his thick veneer of arrogance, and what drives his actions?

In his esteemed social circle, Andrew had the opportunity to befriend anyone, yet he gravitated towards a shadowy world filled with dubious billionaires, sex offenders, spies, and other unsavory characters.

In this morally questionable realm, he surrounded himself with cunning and manipulative individuals who flattered him into believing he was equally powerful and intelligent.

In truth, he was merely a pawn in their games, a man exploited by them, who in turn went on to exploit others for his own gratification.

I am legally obligated at this point to say that Prince Andrew denies the allegations that Virginia Giuffre made against him in her posthumous autobiography and elsewhere. Yet the grand old Duke of York, as we now don’t know him, has demonstrably lied and lied about so many things that who could possibly believe him now? Perhaps not even his own mother.

For here we are at the end of another torrid week of revelations and disgrace for Andrew – with rumours of more filth to come.

He must be dismayed – to say the least – that his popularity has plummeted even further since he renounced his royal titles. But did he really think that would solve the problem? The taxpaying British public are sick of this Andrew-shaped national embarrassment, this blot upon our flag and stain upon our international reputation.

Survey after survey reveals that people want Andrew officially stripped of his titles by Parliament and booted out of his grace-and-favour Royal Lodge, along with his ridiculous Freebiana of a wife.

Many mothers have blind spots when it comes to their favourite sons,writes Jan Moir

Day by day Andrew is slipping away from public view, sunk beneath the weight of his disgrace, now facing a police investigation and possible further humiliation.

Yet how did we get here? Even by the blackest standards of the monarchy’s black history, while trotting out on the black meadows of royal blackness, do black sheep come any blacker than Andrew?

They may have their faults, but neither his two brothers nor his sister come anywhere close to Prince Andrew on the royal ghastly-o-meter. Searching for his good qualities is like panning for gold in a sewer – try as you might, you are only ever going to end up with dung in your sieve.

Surely part of the problem must be that no matter what he did, Queen Elizabeth could see no wrong in her beloved Andrew. Most mothers have a favourite son, and he was undoubtedly hers – then, now and forevermore. Did her blind devotion to him fuel a lifetime of conceit and underachievement that has resulted in the most spectacular royal fall from grace since King Edward II was deposed and murdered in 1327?

Coddled by mater, largely ignored by pater, some might argue that Andrew is simply a victim of his birthright and of maternal indulgence.

Can that be possibly be true? Queen Elizabeth had such a strong sense of personal duty and a deep understanding of her obligations, responsibility and place in the world.

Her behaviour has always been impeccable. Yet surely it is a failing on her part – as both a mother and a monarch – that none of her admirable fortitude, not one drop of it, was ever absorbed by Andrew.

Of course, it didn’t help that he married Sarah Ferguson, a craven woman who turned out to be just as grasping, stupid, status-conscious and cash-hungry as himself.

In many ways, Andy and Fergie united became the scourge of the Windsors – a brace of disgrace whose behaviour has been a back-burner scandal for years. The pair of them deserve everything they get.

Meanwhile, they may have their faults but Edward and Charles aren’t like Andrew. Anne remains the saintly, hard-working daughter whose accomplishments many mothers are blind to, while praising the slender achievements of their weaker, pathetic sons.

Perhaps it is an instinctive and understandable urge in mothers to overly love their least lovable son.

Yet look where that impulse has left us here.

The behaviour of Prince Andrew has rocked the monarchy more than any headbanging republican ever could. And I hate to say it, but his ever-loving mother must take her share of the blame for that.

Kim’s frocky horror show

When did Halloween become such a fancy dress sex fest?

We all know that Kim Kardashian doesn’t need any excuse to climb aboard a mistress-of-the-dark outfit that makes her look like a trussed rib of werewolf ready to be served at a banshee banquet.

Even still, what the hell is she wearing here? I’m scared to look too closely at those welts, but it is a fright night horror show for sure. Halloween fanatics are cranking up the pumpkin spice by dressing up as sexy cats, sexy witches, teasy weasy Tinkerbells, crotchless kittens, spider mamas and even sexy skeletons. No jokes about bones, please.

I remember when Halloween was a dull affair of apple dooking and turnip lanterns. Now it’s something much more terrifying.

Chaos of inquiry into grooming gangs brings shame on Labour 

The grooming gangs inquiry slips further into chaos, perhaps indicative of this Government’s ongoing reluctance to confront the racial and ethnic sensitivities involved – especially from a community upon whom they depend for votes.

There also seems to be a lack of will to confront the truth and to bring proper justice to survivors that disgraces all involved.

Four of those survivors have quit the inquiry this week, accusing Jess Phillips MP of downplaying the racial and religious motivations ‘behind our abuse’. Yet another five survivors have said they will only stay on if Phillips stays too.

It is a fiasco. Asked if he had confidence in Ms Phillips to oversee the inquiry, Keir Starmer said: ‘Yes, of course, I do. Jess has been working on issues involving violence against women and girls for many, many years.’ And Health Secretary Wes Streeting also gave his backing, saying there is ‘no one better for that job’ than Ms Phillips.

Can that be true? Jess Phillips is supposed to be protecting these grooming victims but the only person she appears to be trying to save is herself. Her furious performance in the House this week was a disgrace, especially when she tried to blame ‘the survivor community’ for the mess.

Despite the condemnations, Streeting told BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour there was ‘no one in Parliament who has done more to tackle violence against women and girls than Jess’.

Is that true? I remember when she downplayed and dismissed the mass sex attacks in Cologne on New Year’s Eve in 2015 – said to be carried out by migrants – by comparing them to harassment of women during a typical night out in Birmingham. No big deal.

Which underlines the fact that as far as Labour and Jess Phillips are concerned, there will always be two-tier justice for those who suffer at the hands of others. Apparently, some victims are more worthy victims than others.

Silly tears over a tiara 

The Louvre heist – stop laughing at the back. One of the victims is poor Princess Gloria von Thurn und Taxis, whose wedding tiara was one of those stolen from the gallery in Paris this week.

Originally designed for the Empress Eugenie by Lemonnier, it was an heirloom to which she was deeply attached. ‘What a tragedy,’ wept her daughter this week.

Hankies out everyone! It is so sad – especially when Gloria sold it to the Louvre a few years after she got married. ‘I want more people to see it,’ she said at the time, stuffing the cash in her pinny. Who among us can put a price on sentimental value?

Robert Jenrick has outraged the Left by proposing a burka ban in this country. But seriously, why not? When it comes to bans, I’d generally like a ban against all bans – but am wildly in support of this one.

How could any feminist worth her safe space intersectional equal access digital divide not be? Burkas have no place in modern, Western society where hard-gained female freedoms are prized and honoured.

Every time I see a woman in London drifting down the street like a black ghost or trying to negotiate the perfume counter at Harrods under a cloying shroud it makes me feel both sad and angry that females are expected to live like this. Does this medieval sign of female repression and control represent anything except brutal, patriarchal hegemony? I think not.

Supporters say it is a personal choice; a positive sign of piety, religious devotion, modesty and cultural identity – but if it is such a wonderful sign of holiness, why don’t men wear it, too?

France, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Luxembourg and Norway have all banned burkas.

It is about time Britain followed suit against this cloak of oppression that is incompatible with our values – and our respect for women.