Options for Sarah to recover from the 'Cash for Access' scandal


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mirabel said:
I think this is what bothers me most: that Sarah, by her own admission, thinks it's perfectly fine to rifle her daughters' trust funds.
She should be ashamed of herself.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that she stole the money from her daughter's trust funds rather than asked if she could borrow some when she needed some money?

I know if my parents needed money I would lend it - as I would assume would most people if they love and care about their parents.

As the trust funds are the only independent means of income the girls have this would be the only money they could use to help her. Usually with trust funds a person can only access the income and not the capital anyway.
 
I know some children who lent money to their parents and never got anything back, because the parents claimed, "well, we have invested so much into you until you were independent, so the money you gave us is only a small amount, you would be ungrateful to ask it back!"
 
Iluvbertie said:
I know if my parents needed money I would lend it - as I would assume would most people if they love and care about their parents.
Click to expand...


Yes, so would I, and gladly!
The difference is that I can't imagine ANY circumstances under which they would ask me for money, or accept it if offered. And as for living off my trust fund (if I had one, which I haven't) that would never even occur to them.
 
I would hope that no one is accusing Sarah of raiding her daughter's trust funds without providing evidence to support such a claim.

Beatrice and Eugenie appear to be very close and protective of their mother. So I would guess that they are supporting her of their own free will.
 
sliver_bic said:
I, once again, mention that no one had claimed her to be without good points. You, like a few others on this board, seem to want to gloss over the bad ones by defending her at every end rather than saying, 'you know what? There's no excuse for that".
Click to expand...

Well, I rather think that we come from two different perspectives. Of course she has 'bad points', as do we all. The burden of my song is that she is castigated too frequently on the basis of spurious scuttlebutt continually published in discredited, so-called newspapers. Two, in particular, have printed nonsense stories about Sarah, which I was confident were untrue. Cleverly, these rags employ expensive lawyers which enable them to skirt the libel laws whilst simultaneously managing to besmirch the Duchess' reputation by imputation and inference.

The upshot is that even those who might have been expected to reject Sarah have become more solid in her defence and now support her, believing her to be unfairly victimised. Many of them know just how she feels!

For my own part, I believe virtually nothing that the gutter-press might print, especially about any commoner who marries into a royal family. I always require more substantial opinion and/or evidence before I'm willing to believe in 6 impossible things before breakfast.
 
Zonk said:
I would hope that no one is accusing Sarah of raiding her daughter's trust funds without providing evidence to support such a claim.

Beatrice and Eugenie appear to be very close and protective of their mother. So I would guess that they are supporting her of their own free will.
Click to expand...

I never said she was simply helping herself without her daughters' permission; I doubt she could do that legally. I'm sure they are willing to use their money to support Sarah.

What I'm saying is that, imo, she should be ashamed to take money from her daughters, whether they are willing or not.
 
If that what Beatrice and Eugenie (two grown adults) have chosen to do. That's their business and Sarah's. I am sure that the powers that be (the Duke of York, the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh) probably know about it and most likely are watching on the sidelines to make sure that everything is above board.

If they are using money from the trust from the Queen Mother (the only person in the position to give money to the girls unless they have living trusts from other members of the BRF), I am sure she (the Queen Mother) put some safeguards up regarding the trust. Basically its not like they gave the ATM card to Sarah with the PIN number.
 
Zonk said:
If that what Beatrice and Eugenie (two grown adults) have chosen to do. That's their business and Sarah's. I am sure that the powers that be (the Duke of York, the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh) probably know about it and most likely are watching on the sidelines to make sure that everything is above board.

If they are using money from the trust from the Queen Mother (the only person in the position to give money to the girls unless they have living trusts from other members of the BRF), I am sure she (the Queen Mother) put some safeguards up regarding the trust. Basically its not like they gave the ATM card to Sarah with the PIN number.
Click to expand...


Part of Sarah's divorce settlement (the largest part actually) was put in trust for the girls, so they also have that Trust Fund.
 
Someone earlier on mentioned that Fergie paid off her mother's debts? I had never heard that before. If that is true I find that an interesting angle to the Fergie story.... :)

As for the back and forth about all the different Royal family members I think if you truly like someone the truth about them shouldn't be a bad thing, even if everything they did wasn't great. It seems at times if someone likes a certain royal they feel they must stop anyone from saying anything that's not glowing about them. It makes me wonder why it is taken so personally?

Sarah was interesting when they first married, things have not gone exactly well for her, she has messed up several times, and I can see how it bothers people when she seems to get chance after chance. We will never see Fergie out on the street and many other people in the world don't have that net below to catch them when they fall as she knows she has (even if her intentions are good to not mess up financially again).

I know a favorite thing to say here is: it is not our business (true unless somehow she owes them money, etc.). Then why have a royal forum though? Why post on it? Why even read it if it is no one's business? Nothing they do good or bad is technically anyone's business but they are public figures and so people are interested, have opinions, and biases, and will discuss them. Don't think the royals don't discuss, and gossip, about others. We all know they do, at least Fergie and SWessex have been caught on tape doing just that of course!:lol:

Certain other royals in Britain do the same as Sarah yet nobody can seem to see that for what it is. Fergie is so boisterous that I think she sometimes becomes a bit of a scapegoat for any bailed out royals because she is simply more well known (a bit notorious ;)).

I do wonder about her Budgie? helicopter books, how they did/do sell?
 
For the Budgie books, I read once that the latest one was selling extremely badly but I don't remember the very low figures.
 
Thanks Rominet09! Oh.... That's too bad because I thought it sounded cute for a kids book series. I guess she should have wrote about wizards! ;)

If I am remembering right Fergie was or has also learned to fly helicopters to have more in common with then husband Prince Andrew. That's a nice effort!
 
I wouldn't call the Budgie books a total flop, though I agree with Hissy that perhaps a book about wizards would have been a better sell.

Sarah wrote a total of 7 Budgie books, and the series was adapated for a short television program that ran for two seasons that appeared on ITV and Fox Kids. So that's not bad. Again its not like Harry Potter or Sesame Street but she got futher than a lot of other authors.
 
There was some difficulty about those Budgie books, though, namely numerous charges of plagiarism.
Although Sarah denied copying anything, those books bore what was called an amazing similarity to Baldwin's Hector the Helicopter books!
 
Thanks Zonk for that added info :). I didn't realize that the Budgie books had been made into a tv show, so that is quite good for her.

Hi Mirabel! Uh-oh, I didn't know there was complaints of plagiarism, hopefully those are not true. Fergie does have the background of Prince Andrew being a helicopter pilot to show why she would choose that at least. I will have to find out more about that. Thanks for the info.

I recall some years back that Princess Michael of Kent was also accused of plagiarism. She has kept writing though.

There is also a huge lawsuit currently against JK Rowling concerning the Harry Potter books by the estate of an author who is now deceased. I have to say the cover of one of this man's books shows the characters looking identical to the later published Potter books. Whether it's true, or not, the estate likely has little chance against all Rowling's millions so I hope that's not true because that would be too cruel for this man's family.
 
I remember the plagiarism complaints against Sarah, but I don't believe anything ever came out of that. At least, I had never read anything about further actions against her.
 
There were two sets of plagiarism accusations (in the U.S. the word "complaint" can imply legal action - I'm not sure there was legal action, just trying to be clear).

One set of accusations regarded the books in 2007, and then the TV show in 2009:

Sarah, Duchess of York is accused of plagiarism - Telegraph

Sarah denied the charges, and I can't see that any case has been brought. Of course, the woman who says her ideas were "nicked" for the TV show seems somewhat low-key, even gracious, about it.
 
Sarah has come up with her own option for recovering the scandal: Blame the editors of the video clip. She was misquoted, apparently.;) I'm speechless.:shock:

"In her latest interview, Fergie insists that she was not being disloyal to Prince Andrew when secret video of her negotiating a cash sum for access to her ex-husband came to light last year.She says that a businessman, who turned out to be a imposter from British newspaper News of the World, wanted to invest in her company so she suggested that he meet her family."

Fergie flashes her toes in photo shoot as she reveals that Prince Andrew is her 'soul mate' | Mail Online
 
Is there anyone, anywhere, after all this time, that thinks that's believable?
 
kakieanne said:
Is there anyone, anywhere, after all this time, that thinks that's believable?
Click to expand...

The point isn't if it's believable. As long as the media is willing to keep reporting it's better to keep talking.

No such thing as bad publicity is the way she's going. I mean it's essentially all bad publicity but she's in the spotlight, someone's gonna pay for her to appear, to talk. The worst thing that could happen to Sarah is to be ignored, so even if it's just to get abuse from readers, she's going to keep appearing.
 
:sad: Sarah is just doing herself no favours right now. I thought she used to be pretty good at taking responsibility for her past mistakes, but it's like she can't own up to the present ones.

It was telling that Dr. Phil (in the segment shown during the Oprah interview) told Sarah that she was in denial about the cash-for-access scandal and Sarah denied it vehemently...said she was not in denial about anything, ever...and refused to talk about the cash for access sting because she didn't want the show to be "all about that." Um, Sarah - that sting is part of the reason your reputation is in the gutter right now.

It's funny too: Sarah gets so emotional when she talks about her marriage failure or how her parents or the media criticized her, but then when she talked to Dr. Phil about the NOTW sting she was just angry. I see a disconnect there...Sarah will go on and on about how she believed she was a "bad person" because of what her parents told her, but then when faced with the reality that she has done something ethically wrong, she will blame the media or optics or "I did it all because I had low self-esteem."

sliver_bic said:
The point isn't if it's believable. As long as the media is willing to keep reporting it's better to keep talking.

No such thing as bad publicity is the way she's going. I mean it's essentially all bad publicity but she's in the spotlight, someone's gonna pay for her to appear, to talk. The worst thing that could happen to Sarah is to be ignored, so even if it's just to get abuse from readers, she's going to keep appearing.
Click to expand...

I know! - it's all bad publicity and it shows how low Sarah has already fallen that she doesn't recognize this. She used to tell tearfully of how the media mocked her - but now she is actually setting herself up to be mocked, by using her mistakes as a platform for publicity. I know a lot of you complained for a long time that Sarah did nothing but talk about herself/promote herself, but I didn't have as much of a problem with it then, because it was usually in the context of an interview about something else...eg. Weight Watchers or the Young Victoria. But now Sarah is just feeding off the publicity from her own bad decisions. I agreed (that doesn't happen often!) with this comment on the Daily Mail:

Somebody in the UK must take action as this woman is single handily wrecking the British Royal family’s reputation in the USA and the English speaking word...Also, the more stressed and in debt she becomes the more likely she is to ‘reveal’ more secrets about the Royals, and for a price no doubt she’d even make a few up to sell her memories. She always was a loose gun, but even for her this is getting out of control.
Click to expand...

Not that I think Sarah really has many scandalous memories to "sell", but I agree with the "even for her this is getting out of control" part.
​
 
Last edited:
sliver_bic said:
The point isn't if it's believable. As long as the media is willing to keep reporting it's better to keep talking.

No such thing as bad publicity is the way she's going. I mean it's essentially all bad publicity but she's in the spotlight, someone's gonna pay for her to appear, to talk. The worst thing that could happen to Sarah is to be ignored, so even if it's just to get abuse from readers, she's going to keep appearing.
Click to expand...

Agreed. She is becoming more & more of a bad joke. Since the daughters are now grown if Andrew was smart :ermm: he would publicly cut ties with her. Making it clear that other than the girls he is done with her. Otherwise she could potientally bring him down for good. But that's just logical thinking not emotions.
 
Experience makes me think that this denial will be a great filler on Sarah's new show. I can see the previews now, with her wiping away tears and proclaiming that she is ready *nods strongly* to take responsibility for herself.

It's not pretty, Sarah, and it's not working.
 
I must say that parts of the interview sounded like blasphemy to my ears - and I am just a believer in God but not attached to any Christian church. But there only very few churches who recognize that vows spoken at the altar on a wedding service include infidelity - and the CoE is not one of them. So when she said: ""I love him. He's my soulmate. It's actually what we said in front of God at the altar: We honor and respect each other until death do us part. The only thing is, he has girlfriends and I have boyfriends." that's so blasphemic, as the part of honouring the other by being truthful and by showing respect to the other is so important. She did nothing but bring shame on him and now calls this "love" and honouring him.

Give me Charles and Camilla anytime - at least they repented their sin of adultary in front of the altar and have loved, honoured and cherished each other ever since. Sarah does not repent, she is IMHO not able to recognize that she sinned against God as he is believed in in the church on whose altar she took her wedding vows. And that's bad, very bad.

I have no problem with her commiting adultary and live after her own codex of "honour", but she shouldn't bring the sacrament of marriage and God into it. IMHO, of course.

​
 
Mermaid1962 said:
Fergie flashes her toes in photo shoot as she reveals that Prince Andrew is her 'soul mate' | Mail Online
Click to expand...

Here's another article I found that basically says the same thing, however the "I'm aware of my bad behavior and it won't happen again" Rings very false to me. IMO, she's bounced back and is going to do the same thing all over again.
Sarah Ferguson Admits: I’m aware of my bad behavior and it won’t happen again « Entertainment

However, seems she has a new book out. Wonder how that will do on the NYTimes bestseller list. As for Russo, she'll wait until the Library has a copy.
 
Somehow I find it difficult to believe that Andrew was not complicit in the "access for money" debacle. I guess time will tell ... or not.
 
Fergie, Fergie, Fergie! Sigh! Stop!!
 
Last edited:
sliver_bic said:
The point isn't if it's believable. As long as the media is willing to keep reporting it's better to keep talking.

No such thing as bad publicity is the way she's going. I mean it's essentially all bad publicity but she's in the spotlight, someone's gonna pay for her to appear, to talk. The worst thing that could happen to Sarah is to be ignored, so even if it's just to get abuse from readers, she's going to keep appearing.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. I was just so stunned when I read her comments.

How sad that someone who started out so refreshing and likeable should end up like this. :sad:
 
Princess of Durham said:
Somehow I find it difficult to believe that Andrew was not complicit in the "access for money" debacle. I guess time will tell ... or not.
Click to expand...

Well if he was and she took the fall for both of them, he would probably have felt obligated to stand by her and to pay off all her debts! :ohmy:
 
HRH Princess Sonya said:
Agreed. She is becoming more & more of a bad joke. Since the daughters are now grown if Andrew was smart :ermm: he would publicly cut ties with her. Making it clear that other than the girls he is done with her. Otherwise she could potientally bring him down for good. But that's just logical thinking not emotions.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I wonder what Prince Andrew really does think of what Sarah does. Does he ever tell her to rethink her actions? Or does he actually tell her to do whatever she wants...? Does he even pay attention to her interviews/programs? Probably not.

ETA: According to Sarah, this is what Andrew thought about the scandal. Oh dear...it really does get worse and worse:

"He felt very, very sorry for me," she told Harper's, claiming that the whole incident was a misunderstanding where she was actually the victim.

"He was so angry that I should have been trapped, 'cause he knows me," she said. "He knows I would never, ever put him in a position that would compromise him, ever!"
 
Last edited:
The point I would like to make is that none of this is surprising.
It appears Sarah was approached by Oprah within weeks of the scandal last year, and for whatever reasons agreed to do the show.
This might be because she had no other offers, it might have been the best of a bad lot, financially maybe Oprah made her an offer she couldn't refuse, or maybe she thought these professional and experts could actually her. Fast forward a year and she was always going to be making TV appearances and giving interviews to promote the show. I think that would have been very much part of the deal. She kept a low profile for months after the NOTW video, but now with the royal wedding and her TV show she's back in the spotlight. I think we can expect a few more interviews before the show airs, but I hope after the show is aired she will keep a lower profile. On the surface her comments re the string don't ring through at all, but already today I heard two IT experts on the radio and they were of the opinion that the video was altered with considerably.
(I didn't really understand the hi tech language they were using by way of explanation, but they were saying that part of her sentences were regularly chopped). If true, that begs the question why didn't Sarah speak up before now?...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom