It all began with a solitary photograph, perhaps the most impactful ever taken of a member of the monarchy.
Present was the Duke of York, standing closely beside a young woman, while a companion beamed conspiratorially in the background.
Without that photograph, captured at a social event in 2001, who would have believed the assertions of a adolescent who declared she was moved across the ocean and obliged to have cursory intimate contact with a individual of the monarchy?
A curious, revealing move by someone who had publicly stated to have no heard of her, claimed he could not have had sex with her, and yet handed over a substantial sum of family money to resolve a protracted court action.
Considering this, conversations of the royal family acting decisively to cut Andrew off are wide of the mark. This scandal has persisted for the majority of 15 years since that image, and another image of Andrew walking amiably with a disgraced financier came to light.
Journeys were listed in royal annual reports: chopper flights from the estate to a country club and back again in time for dining, private flights instead of scheduled services, all for the comfort of "the frequent flyer".
Then there was the entitlement which expected respect when he appeared in a room or the profound awareness about his royal titles used on his correspondence in letters to his associates.
He could get away with it while his parent, who strangely pampered him, was still surviving. The monarch did at least strip him of official roles and ceremonial ranks in the wake of his ill-fated and, we now know, mendacious public statement six years ago.
It was only in the last fortnight that events sped up, following the release of biographical works giving more grim details of his actions and that of his associates.
Additional revelations have again exposed Andrew's thinking that he could avoid deceiving about his contact with a convicted criminal.
Society (and the journalists) were far more perceptive of the royal family. There was nobody of any consequence to support him, a outcome of all those years of presumption.
The more astute monarchical figures realized that. The one imperative is to hand down the monarchy, if not as heretofore at least whole and untarnished.
For generations the last 190 years trying to overcome the image of previous monarchs, proving they are beneficial, dutiful and reactive to their people.
Andrew was putting all that in peril in an age when submission and privacy is no longer enough.
Eventually, the notoriously indecisive monarch was pressured further. There was no alternative. The palace had relinquished authority of the story.
Now it is the removal of titles and the continued and lifetime social disgrace that will pain Andrew most severely.
He continues to be a counsellor of state, theoretically able to act for the monarch, and he is still in the lineage to the monarchy, but not any of these will truly happen.
Will people he comes across still show respect to him? Will they still make mistakes and call him Prince? Will they even say Sir,
Naturally, he is not retiring to suburbia, but to the sovereign's extensive property at Sandringham.
At that location, he will be furnished by the monarch with one of the grace and favour houses and given some type of personal stipend.
This differs from his previous residence, where he paid a minimal rent for more than 20 years, and the area is a bit remote, but even so it may not be sufficiently removed.
Matters remain unresolved. There are still documents in the possession of American legislators to be revealed.
Perhaps for the present the institutional damage to the crown is restricted. The narrative from the institution was plainly that the removal of designations was what the king, and especially other senior monarchical figures, desired.
The cessation of deception that Andrew was doing it voluntarily. And, remarkably, the short announcement showed plainly that the monarchy were aligning with the victim's account of incidents.
Additionally, for the initial instance they finally showed consideration for the victims: "The censures are judged required, despite the truth that he continues to deny the accusations against him."
Ultimately it is presumption, self-interest and inactivity that will undermine the institution. In his stupidity, self-gratification and greed, Andrew gives the impression never to have grasped that reality.
A seasoned gaming analyst with over a decade of experience in reviewing online casinos and developing winning strategies for players worldwide.