Omid Scobie leaves no one safe in his new royal reporting

No one, not even the King, has been spared in the author’s takedown tome

Prince Andrew

The one thing the royal family might all agree on is that the Duke of York, 63, is a problem. The shocking allegations of sexual misconduct caused a firestorm of controversy for The Firm. Omid Scobie writes that the King would “lay awake worrying about his brother” and how best to deal with the fallout. He also claims Prince William was the one “pushing to strip Andrew of his roles and status” without any hesitation. “Someone needed to be the firm hand in that situation and he felt the family was being too soft,” Omid writes, quoting a source close to William. “The whole thing was casting a long shadow over the entire institution… over all of them.”

King Charles

Omid’s new book was perhaps most critical of “flawed father” Charles, who the author claims caused doubt in the mind of late mother Queen Elizabeth II, who reportedly “lacked faith” in Charles’ ability to rule. The author even claimed that wider members of the family were disappointed by his failure to return the monarchy to its golden days. “There was a slight lack of faith in her son,” Omid writes, claiming his mother had “repeatedly complained about Charles’ extravagantly luxurious lifestyle” throughout her life. He also shared insider knowledge that the monarch, 75, insists on having his shoelaces ironed, only sleeps in 1000-thread-count bed linen and has an aid squeeze out exactly one inch (2.54cm) of toothpaste for brushing his teeth.

Queen Camilla

The former royal mistress has worked hard to reshape her image. However, it hasn’t stopped Omid from unearthing sordid details about the 76-year-old Queen’s past. The author describes “Ms Shand” as once being “raunchy and randy”, and the sort to “throw her knickers on the table”. He writes, “This reputation is one of the reasons why Queen Elizabeth II and The Firm rejected Camilla as a spouse for Charles, alongside the fact she was a ‘commoner’ and an ‘experienced woman’ (read: not a virgin).” He also details an account from a housekeeper who witnessed the once-clandestine affair between the King and Queen, writing that they would “find the house strewn with underwear after they’d been in residence”.

Princess Kate

According to Omid, the Princess of Wales was nicknamed “Katie Keen” because she allegedly was “keen to learn” in a bid to divert attention from her low number of royal engagements. The book unpacks his claims that Kate, 41, would not increase her workload until her three children were adults and, at one stage, describes her as “cold”. As for her relationship with Meghan, the author, 42, says the pair haven’t spoken since 2019, and that Kate “shudders and giggles” every time she hears her sister-in-law’s name. He also insists that the queen-to-be – who Omid says felt Harry’s wife was a “rival” – spent more of her time talking about Meghan than talking to her.

Duchess Meghan

Naturally, Omid, who the UK press have branded “Meghan’s mouthpiece”, was light on criticisms of his close friend. Interestingly, he explains in the book that Charles allegedly drove the “desperate” Sussexes to sign contracts with companies like Spotify and Netflix after they were cut off from official palace funding. The book also revisits claims of a “royal racist”, something Prince Harry himself has even denied, with Omid writing that Meghan once wrote to Charles with allegations that there were “concerns and conversations about how dark [Archie’s] skin might be when he’s born”. The book also claims there were two royals who shared those concerns.

The Edinburghs

Prince Edward and Sophie, Duchess of Edinburgh also come under fire in Endgame. Following Harry and Meghan’s interview with Oprah in 2020, Sophie, 58, joked, “Oprah who?” and, “What interview?” when asked for comment. Rather than recognising the duchess’ determination to carry on, Omid was not fond of Sophie’s take. “[Her] comments about the world’s most successful black woman and one of the biggest faces in entertainment made them seem stuffy or tin-eared at best and casually bigoted at worst,” he wrote. He also taunted the couple over their lack of “appeal”, maintaining newspaper editors shuddered at the idea of putting them on front covers.

Related stories