It was aspirational then, but after 50 years of working to create the Unitary Executive it is now fact.

Only if we let it be fact. Surely there’s a line.

That line was crossed when we re-elected Mr. January 6th.

At least he seemingly pretended afterwards not to have meant to order "go kill him".

The knights who murdered the archbishop weren't so lucky... my direct ancestor fled to Ireland afterwards (as family legend has it).

The German people of the 1930s would like to have a word...

True in most countries. The president or more generally the chief of the executive often has legal immunity. It makes sense because that are the law, at least in part.

In democracies there a usually some protection against abuse of that power (ex: impeachment).

The UK has sovereign immunity.

The monarch is literally above the law. They cannot be arrested, questioned, tried, or punished for any reason.

Of course it would raise eyebrows if King Charles went on a shooting spree. But what happens behind closed doors is none of the public's business.

Reality: If His Maj just doesn't look fit for purpose, then he can be suspended. Or forced off the throne entirely:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regency_Act_1811#Care_of_King_...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdication_of_Edward_VIII

You're conflating a president (highest executive) with a monarch. Perhaps on purpose given current goings on, but a key distinction between monarchies and democracies is explicitly that all people in the country are subject to the same laws and there is no sovereign immunity.

The Monarch also needs permission from the Mayor of the City of London to enter the city, so we do need to make a distinction between de jure and de facto law here.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Mayor_of_London

> It is sometimes asserted that the Lord Mayor may exclude the monarch from the City of London. This legend is based on the misinterpretation of the ceremony observed each time the sovereign enters the City at Temple Bar, when the Lord Mayor presents the City's Pearl Sword to the sovereign as a symbol of the latter's overlordship. The monarch does not, as is often purported, wait for the Lord Mayor's permission to enter the City. When the sovereign enters the City, a short ceremony usually takes place where the Lord Mayor presents a sword to the monarch, symbolically surrendering their authority. If the sovereign is attending a service at St Paul's Cathedral this ceremony would take place there rather than at the boundary of the City, simply for convenience.

"I'm not gonna do it, but I need the legal ability to murder innocent people"

We used to have the concept of the divine right of kings. The current arrangements are a step down from that. Your framing has it back to front.