The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 1: 2010-2022

[Dman]

Yeah true.

[COUNTESS]

The problem with Andrew is not what he did or didn't. I don't know, nor does anyone else here. What he may have done and that is may have, which of course was wrong was lobby is a nice word, put pressure on some officials to look away from Epstein's crimes. The only reason there is a big HooHa over this other part of the scandal, is the BRF, are so aloof and "holy", not that that many believe that, Lord knows. It's the attitude, or he is The Prince Andrew. Do not touch them. He , poor fellow, is no better or worse than most.

[Curryong]

I don't think the BRF actively promote a 'holier than thou' image. They can't. There have been too many scandals over the years. The Queen is still deeply respected, however, and there is some disappointment that she's allowed Andrew to still go on his merry way throughout this latest mess.

Yes, I do think that if a person is innocent then they should say so and lay out the reasons for it. This isn't going to go away and Andrew could give a very short interview to the BBC. In it he could reiterate all his denials but also explain why he kept Epstein as a friend.

[US Royal Watcher]

Shouting your innocence doesn't make you innocent--it could just mean that you are guilty and a loud liar.

Regarding the question of whether he had sex with a 17-year old, there is probably no proof one way or another. It is always going to be his word against hers. He won't be able to win by loudly attacking a victim of sex trafficking.

There probably is some paper trail if he contacted the prosecutors on Epstein's behalf. If true, it wasn't illegal just seriously immoral. If it is true, he would be better off admitting it--actually, he should have done so when the story first broke. If it is not true, that should be apparent from the release of documents, if they are released.

No matter what, his reputation has taken a serious hit. I agree he should maintain a low profile but continue with charity work. The story will follow him but sooner or later, it won't be the main lead.

[royal rob]

I wonder if Andrew remembers every girl he has had sex with..


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Roslyn]

He apparently doesn't drink, so he should remember.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Zonk

If that is who they are alluding to...she like Koo Stark is also not a porn star.

No, but like Koo Stark, her reputation isn't pristine. Weren't there allegations that Andrew fathered a child with Everhart?

And then, of course, there was her relationship with Albert of Monaco...
all things considered, rather sleazy.

[royal rob]

Originally Posted by Roslyn

He apparently doesn't drink, so he should remember.

Guess it depends on the number. I just wondered if he looked at the photo and went " mmm let me think"


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by royal rob

Guess it depends on the number. I just wondered if he looked at the photo and went " mmm let me think"

I suppose it's possible he doesn't have a good memory for faces, or that a lot of the girls Epstein rounded up look alike.

[GracieGiraffe]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

The problem for Andrew is that he actually hasn't been charged with any crime and the legal proceedings aren't against him personally so he doesn't have a legal forum in which to take action at the moment. He isn't a defendant.

He's free to sue her for defamation, as she's now made out of court statements as well as what was said in the pleadings.

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe

He's free to sue her for defamation, as she's now made out of court statements as well as what was said in the pleadings.

What damage has all this done to Andrew's reputation? If he sued, he might end up with only nominal damages.

[Queen Camilla]

It seems people are attacking Prince Andrew as the perpetrator and are ignoring the real criminal Jeffrey Epstein who should be in prison under several jurisdictions.

According to some sites, Epstein transported girls as young as 12 from several foreign countries into the U.S. for purposes of sex yet he was never charged for these crimes.

The real story that keeps getting buried is that Jeffrey Epstein crimes were not punished and the investigation into why should be the focus.

The focus is being deliberately shifted away from Epstein and his crimes and placed on Prince Andrew.

Epstein wins again.

[rmay286]

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

The real story that keeps getting buried is that Jeffrey Epstein crimes were not punished and the investigation into why should be the focus.

The focus is being deliberately shifted away from Epstein and his crimes and placed on Prince Andrew.

Epstein wins again.

I agree. And I'm sure this is just how Epstein wants it.

[Curryong]

Yes, but Epstein's not a member of any royal family and we are on a royal forum. Andrew is, and it's his friendship with this sexual offender that is at the heart of the issue.

If he hadn't been Epstein's friend he wouldn't be in the mess he is in, full stop and we wouldn't be discussing him.

From this (he was introduced to him by Fergie) has come all the speculation about Andrew's relationship with this young girl, how much did he know about his friend's activities, what has Ms Maxwell to do with Andrew and a dozen other things.

[Queen Camilla]

The woman was not a young girl. By her own admission she was 17.

By her own admission, she was paid to have sex with men. The is called a prostitute.

[royal rob]

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

It seems people are attacking Prince Andrew as the perpetrator and are ignoring the real criminal Jeffrey Epstein who should be in prison under several jurisdictions.

According to some sites, Epstein transported girls as young as 12 from several foreign countries into the U.S. for purposes of sex yet he was never charged for these crimes.

The real story that keeps getting buried is that Jeffrey Epstein crimes were not punished and the investigation into why should be the focus.

The focus is being deliberately shifted away from Epstein and his crimes and placed on Prince Andrew.

Epstein wins again.

Yes but Andrew reportly helped him get a very short sentence and was still friends with him afterwards and he gave Fergie money so Andrew is not the pure innocent in this dirty business


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Queen Camilla I suggest you read the past few pages and read the court documents to understand


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

The woman was not a young girl. By her own admission she was 17.

By her own admission, she was paid to have sex with men. The is called a prostitute.

The legal part of this has been really well covered by some very well informed people in this thread well worth a read


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Queen Camilla]

Bill Clinton was just as much, if not more, of Epstein’s friend than Prince Andrew. It was Bill Clinton who probably got the ‘sweetheart’ deal for Epstein. Prince Andrew probably has very little clout in the U.S.

(I read all 54 pages including all the attachments.)

I understand completely so I return the suggestion.

[royal rob]

I only meant to help you as it seemed you asking the same questions.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by Queen Camilla

The real story that keeps getting buried is that Jeffrey Epstein crimes were not punished and the investigation into why should be the focus.

The focus is being deliberately shifted away from Epstein and his crimes and placed on Prince Andrew.

Epstein wins again.

Epstein hasn't won anything yet, in fact he could be sweating profusely after learning that Judge Marra is inclined to release all those thousands of pages of submissions, etc., which were before the U.S. Attorney.

The focus in the Jane Doe cases is on Epstein; Andrew is only named as someone who has knowledge of certain facts as a witness. Or at least that's the case currently running. There is also a lot of interest in what he may have written in support of Epstein, and there is also interest because he has denied, through BP and now personally by adopting what BP said, the allegations Jane Doe 3 has now made about him under oath.

The Jane Does want the plea bargain with Epstein set aside because they want the serious, Federal, charges proceeded with against him. Their claim is based on the fact that they were not given notice of the plea bargain negotiations with Epstein and the fact of the agreement being entered into. As soon as Jane Doe 1 found out about the agreement, she commenced the proceedings against the US Attorney.

[Queen Camilla]

Roslyn,
The media is ignoring Epstein and focusing on Prince Andrew. She and her attorneys have gone public about Andrew. They did not leave the complaint as a private court filing. Her attorneys have sent a letter to Andrew demanding he reply under oath.

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

The refused letter;
@RE_DailyMail: The Fed-Exed letter that Buckingham Palace refused to accept #PrinceAndrew #JeffreyEpstein http://t.co/NIfrAD74jM

Andrew’s attorney should:
1. Get a copy of Virginia Roberts’ birth certificate.
2. Get copies of Virginia’s and her father’s employment records from Donald Trump.
3. Get copies of Virginia’s and her father tax records.
4. Get a copy of her school records.

A. What is her actual age?
B. What date of birth is listed on her employment records with Donald Trump?
C. Did she actually work as a masseuse for Donald Trump and if so, when?
D. What does her father’s tax records show about his dependents?
E. Was her income reported to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)?
(Even if she worked as a masseuse for Donald Trump or a prostitute for Jeffrey Epstein she had income that was taxable and should have been reported to the IRS either under her father’s tax return or her own.)

Her i’s better be dotted and her t’s crossed.

A good attorney would pounce on any discrepancies.