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

[Mirabel]

As for Sarah, yes she did receive a loan from Epstein, about 14,000 pounds for her most pressing debts. She was drowning in a sea of debt at the time and apparently he helped her restructure her finances. Sarah was noted as being flown to Epstein's island as a passenger and stayed there at one time as well.

Later on when the scandal broke she said she regretted taking the loan. It's not known if she paid it back though. Apparently Epstein threatened to sue her at one point because she referred to him as 'a Paedo' in a conversation.

[/url]

Of course she wouldn't pay it back!
It follows her usual pattern- access to Andrew in exchange for $$$$.
And Andrew holds up his side of the deal by allowing himself to be seen in the company of trash like Epstein.

Really I think this interview only made matters worse. The best thing Andrew could do now is go to his Swiss chalet and lie low for several years.

 

[King of the Jungle]

Such an interview is open to interpretation.
Andrew should have made a statement to the police and perhaps sued any people whom he thought were telling lies about him. A serious legal reaction and preparedness to give a truthful account to authorities, to me, would have been more accountable.
And I am aghast that Andrew has not shown utter disgust in the sort of behaviour of which Jeffrey Epstein is accused. Does he believe the young women were there of their own free will?
Another fellow has counter sued one woman. I wish to see a full investigation and disclocures on the record.
I want to see how Epstein aperated.

 

[rominet09]

I have not seen and Don't think I'll have the Opportunity to see the interview, but I read comments of the British papers on line and they are desastrous ! From what I read it was a very lame defense.

 

[Heavs]

Every single word of it was about him and how "I didn't give a monkey's because look the shiny money and power!" At Least. That's always going to go down like a lead balloon even if it's true.

At the very least someone should have advised him to show disgust with Epstein's paedophile trafficking, which has been proven - especially if he was hoping to convince people he knew nothing about it. That's the whole damn reason he did the interview because "forced sex with underaged/teenaged girls close in age to your daughters" is something he didn't want following him around.

The person who said this upthread is right. You only do this type of interview if you are prepared to say what you did and didn't know and own that and/or scream your innocence from the roof tops. The answers he gave were unconvincing, vague and arrogant.

He'd have been better off keeping silent because there were a lot more people willing to brush it under the rug then.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Andrew and Sarah really are a pair aren't they? There's no contrition here I'm afraid only regret that they may now have to suffer for their transgressions.

I am convinced that Andrew and Sarah will "suffer" very little in practical terms. Their public reputations were both already so badly damaged even before this mess. What difference does yet another black mark make?

Beatrice and Eugenie however are another story entirely. The blameless York daughters will inevitably suffer for the misdeeds of their parents. They always do.

And it's really very sad.

 

[WillVictoria]

I am convinced that Andrew and Sarah will "suffer" very little in practical terms. Their public reputations were both already so badly damaged even before this mess. What difference does yet another black mark make?

Beatrice and Eugenie however are another story entirely. The blameless York daughters will inevitably suffer for the misdeeds of their parents. They always do.

And it's really very sad.

While Andrew and Sarah's reputations are already at the floor, this might be the straw that breaks the camel's back with regards to Andrew's work. I doubt many charities want him as their patron and, even if the Queen refuses to cut him loose out of motherly obligation, I wouldn't be surprised if Charles decides Andrew's services are no longer needed and offers to rehome his charities (at the charities request) with another member of the BRF (likely the Cambridges or Sussexes).

As for Bea and Eugenie, I think this puts a firm end to the question of if Bea gets a public wedding. Simply put, no network will want to play Andrew walking his daughter down the aisle. This also likely has negative repercussions for Eugenie's work with slavery, as while she can't pick her parents unless she fully denounces her father I already am seeing pushback on her being an advocate for the people who her father (allegedly) helped exploit.

 

[Ista]

From the Sunday Times, byline Tim Shipman and Roya Nikkah:

"The Duke of York’s spin doctor left his job at Buckingham Palace two weeks ago after advising Prince Andrew not to go ahead with the Newsnight interview on the grounds that it could backfire.

One palace source said last night’s BBC interview would “go down as one of the single worst PR moves in recent history”.

Jason Stein was hired in September to begin reviving Andrew’s reputation, which had been harmed by his links to Jeffrey Epstein.

In his first meeting, Stein advised the duke not to accept the interview request. But the spin doctor, who had been a special adviser to Amber Rudd until she resigned from the cabinet, left by mutual consent after just four weeks. He clashed with Amanda Thirsk, the duke’s private secretary, who was pushing hard for Andrew to do the interview."

 

[hel]

The BBC has published the interview on YouTube:

 

[Osipi]

Thanks much for the link, hel. I plan on watching it a bit later on. Right now hubby's got me into watching a happy, sappy and even sometimes crappy Hallmark holiday movie.

Oooops.. commercial's over! BBL

 

[Dman]

Okay my friends,

I’ve watched the full interview and, my God, that was the most disturbing and disastrous interview I’ve ever seen Prince Andrew make.

Firstly, I believe, if Prince Andrew would’ve taken these questions under oath...he would’ve been charged with lying under oath. I mean, dear God, that man lied his butt off. How in the hell can Prince Andrew can remember a lot of things, but when it come to remembering anything to do with, Virginia Roberts Giuffre or any of the young girls in Epstein’s house and Maxwell’s house, his brain and eyes were suddenly on vacation?

He admitted to being at all of Epstein’s residences and at Maxwell’s house, but he didn’t see any explicit sexual activities. These people houses were decorated with sexual photos and sexual products and sexual activities where happening in these houses. He didn’t see any of it? Virginia Roberts Giuffre gave great details about their allegedly sexual encounters and Epstein took a picture of Andrew and Virginia and Maxwell was in the background, but Andrew can’t remember Virginia and and he don’t know how he ended up in that picture with his arms around Virginia? There’s a video of Prince Andrew at Epstein’s residence and he’s opening the door for a young lady and another young girl is seen leaving and entering from that same door and Andrew didn’t see any of it?

C’mon, folks! If Prince Andrew, The Duke of York, is telling the truth, then my name is Billy Idol.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Beatrice and Eugenie however are another story entirely. The blameless York daughters will inevitably suffer for the misdeeds of their parents. They always do.

[...] This also likely has negative repercussions for Eugenie's work with slavery, as while she can't pick her parents unless she fully denounces her father I already am seeing pushback on her being an advocate for the people who her father (allegedly) helped exploit.

In contrast to the Duke of York, there is no evidence of any kind that Princess Eugenie (or Princess Beatrice) had any knowledge of, let alone abetted, the proven or alleged deeds of her father and/or Jeffrey Epstein.

 

[WillVictoria]

In contrast to the Duke of York, there is no evidence of any kind that Princess Eugenie (or Princess Beatrice) had any knowledge of, let alone abetted, the proven or alleged deeds of her father and/or Jeffrey Epstein.

I agree, but that doesn't mean the court of public opinion cares.

 

[Ista]

I've watched the entire interview, and the thing that is striking to me--actually, "stunning" is a better word--is that at no point did Andrew explicitly express empathy for any of the girls who were abused and exploited. He used the word "unbecoming" to describe Jeffrey Epstein's behavior. The lack of empathy, the lack of acknowledgement that Epstein's behavior was monstrous, and that he himself showed a horrendous lack of judgment in associating with Epstein, is appalling. At one point, asked if he regretted his association, Andrew said that no, the benefits he had received from his association, and the access Epstein provided to various people, caused him to not regret it.

It was an astonishing interview, but the most astonishing things about it were the consistent self focus, the lack of empathy for the trafficked girls, and the lack of consciousness as to the very unflattering way he was portraying himself.

Excuse me, I feel the strong need to go take a shower.

 

[tommy100]

I'm not surprised his PR man left after Andrew ignored his advice. Amanda Thirsk has been Andrew's long time Private Secretary and hardly has a track record of any decent advice IMO, not surprised she was daft enough to advise him to do this. She has presided over mistake after mistake by Andrew with rubbish support form her (though he is of course responsible for his own actions) Interesting when you think in last 5 years or so every senior royal has had a new Private Secretary (The Queen, Charles, William, Kate, Edward/Sophie and Anne) except Andrew.


There was literally no point doing this interview, most of what was said in his defence was already known by the media; his "friends" has already talked to media about the photo supposedly possibly being fake, he had already denied sleeping with Virginia. There really is no point doing an interview like this unless you are going to answer all outstanding questions and set record straight as such, this just raises question after question and at no point does he apologise or provide new evidence (well apart from fact he took Beatrice to Pizza Express). There was literally no point in doing this and all its served to do is reignite the media's interest in it.

Beatrice can kiss goodbye to a grand public Windsor wedding like Eugenie's. Its unfair but I can't see it happening (if necessary I think Charles and HM's aides will step in)

Best thing now for Andrew is to cancel engagements and go to ski lodge in Switzerland or wherever it is and allow himself to be forgotten for a year or two.


More from Times article
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...it-after-advising-against-interview-gvc59hmql

Jason Stein was hired in September to begin reviving Andrew’s reputation, which had been harmed by his links to Jeffrey Epstein.

In his first meeting, Stein advised the duke not to accept the interview request. But the spin doctor, who had been a special adviser to Amber Rudd until she resigned from the cabinet, left by mutual consent after just four weeks. He clashed with Amanda Thirsk, the duke’s private secretary, who was pushing hard for Andrew to do the interview.

Stein, who has told friends in Westminster that he likes Andrew and considers him “not a bad man”, had instead proposed that the duke conduct two lengthy print interviews to mark his 60th birthday in February, one in Britain and one in America. He also advised the prince to spend the time before that seeking to rebuild his public reputation by doing charitable works.

He proposed that Andrew, a Falklands War veteran, should front a Christmas campaign to get sports clubs to supply tickets to troops — a campaign for which he is already a benefactor — and to use the Duke of York’s app to give the developing world access to education expertise from Britain’s top universities.

Palace sources say Andrew decided to do the interview out of a sense of frustration that the public see him as a playboy prince, when he does not drink alcohol. The duke believes his only mistake in his friendship with Epstein was to return to the paedophile billionaire’s house in 2010 after he had served time in prison.

Andrew’s decision to do the interview caused consternation in other corners of the royal household. Sources have revealed that aides to the Queen, as well as the Prince of Wales, regarded the decision to go ahead with the programme with “incredulity and alarm”.

One source with connections at the top of the royal household said: “There is concern in Buckingham Palace and concern in Clarence House. Charles thinks it is highly misguided. The timing is awful, with a general election going on.

Earlier this year, members of Andrew’s team accused a senior figure in Prince William’s office of leaking stories about him to the press.

The accusations flew after the Mail on Sunday reported on September 8 that Andrew “flew into a furious rage” at a royal aide. His team confirmed that he “got very cross” but denied claims from a royal insider that he assaulted the aide.

 

[ACO]

I've watched the entire interview, and the thing that is striking to me--actually, "stunning" is a better word--is that at no point did Andrew explicitly express empathy for any of the girls who were abused and exploited. He used the word "unbecoming" to describe Jeffrey Epstein's behavior. The lack of empathy, the lack of acknowledgement that Epstein's behavior was monstrous, and that he himself showed a horrendous lack of judgment in associating with Epstein, is appalling. At one point, asked if he regretted his association, Andrew said that no, the benefits he had received from his association, and the access Epstein provided to various people, caused him to not regret it.

It was an astonishing interview, but the most astonishing things about it were the consistent self focus, the lack of empathy for the trafficked girls, and the lack of consciousness as to the very unflattering way he was portraying himself.

Excuse me, I feel the strong need to go take a shower.

This. The moment he cited the advantages of their disgusting friendship and how he has zero regrets.... that was pretty much the end of Prince Andrew of York. I mean how does one even take that statement?

He clearly does not care about what they did to those girls. The only thing he dislikes is that it is out in the open and he has to talk about it. Other than that it is like whatever to him and that is beyond disgusting.

He is a garbage human being. And if I see him riding in the car with the Queen tomorrow I might scream.

 

[Dman]

Look, Andrew did nothing in that interview but lie. Andrew, and everyone who gave this interview the okay, need their tails spanked. The whole things was terrible and I’m sure Virginia Roberts Giuffre and her legal team will be saying quite a few things about this interview.

I’m sure the whole royal family watched. Would I like to be a fly on their walls during that time.

 

[Osipi]

Palace sources say Andrew decided to do the interview out of a sense of frustration that the public see him as a playboy prince, when he does not drink alcohol. The duke believes his only mistake in his friendship with Epstein was to return to the paedophile billionaire’s house in 2010 after he had served time in prison.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...view-gvc59hmql

This part quoted from the Times article that tommy has posted really makes me question Andrew's thinking process if, indeed, this is why Andrew decided to go ahead with the interview. Since when does drinking alcohol come into play when one is looked at as a "playboy prince" in the first place? Its true that with some people, add alcohol and you have instant a**holes but bad morals and ethics and bad behavior do not, as a rule, come solely from a bottle.

I'm beginning to thing that Hereditary Princess has hit the nail square and hard on the head when she presented the term "sociopath" to describe Andrew's behavior that has become so apparent in this interview. The definition of a sociopath is "a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience."

I'm not saying that Andrew is a sociopath but his behavior at this time makes one wonder. Add in the factors of arrogance and self entitlement to the picture and we come up with a painting of a man that has no sympathy or empathy for what those girls went through or even the right and wrong of the entire situation. No regrets on the friendship either because, as Andrew himself stated, it gave him personal gains. He didn't lie when he said he didn't "sleep" with Ms. Giuffre. There was no "sleeping" involved. Perhaps he didn't "see" what was around him and blatantly visible to everyone because he could not see beyond his own nose and what was in all of it for him? He can't remember meeting Ms. Giuffre because perhaps who she was as a person really didn't matter at the time? These are just thoughts that have run through my head thinking about Andrew and all of this mess.

The repercussions of all of this is going to be immense. Especially seeing how the British Royal Family as an institution has stood for duty and service to the people. When a member of the royal family cannot even "see" the people he comes in contact with as human beings, how is he to be respected as part of an institution that has the purpose of serving the people?

I sincerely hope that this decision by Andrew to do this interview (ranks up near the top of the list of Andrew's bad decisions) does not cause an overcast of shadows on Beatrice's wedding. She shouldn't have to have anything less than the wedding of her dreams regardless of who her father is and what her father has done or how he is perceived to be.

I've still not seen the interview in its entirety yet even though its up on YouTube. No closed captioning as of yet. Perhaps they're still working on them. At least I hope so. I seriously doubt though that anything I've not seen yet will change my perspective on Andrew and his character but I've yet to see *one* positive opinion come out in his favor over all this.

Andrew though is probably sleeping like a baby assured that he is still the "prince" and a legend in his own mind and of course, totally honorable and righteous. This is the part that worries me most.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

Andrew made things much worse with this interview. He had the utter gall to say, that he still, this day, has no regrets of being friends with Epstein, because of the connections he gained through Epstein and the tthings he learned through and from him. ***** Epstein's victims, Andrew got connections that benefit him, so... How out of touch, egoistic and idiotic is he for saying that?

 

[Leopoldine]

More calls (from various royal watchers) that he should retire from public life after this interview.

Sarah popping up talking about how great Andrew is (shoulder to the wind blah blah) isn't helping him either. It has been said Sarah took money from Epstein (a loan or something) does anyone know if this is accurate?

I haven't seen the interview yet but from all reports it doesn't sound like anything positive came from it.


LaRae

In the aftermath of Sarah's Fake Sheikh episode, Andrew and his team were settling Sarah's debts (in the UK) with her creditors for .25 on the pound. Two creditors, one of them her former personal assistant, a young man named Johnny O'Sullivan, would not take only 25% of what they were owed. In Johnny's case, he was owed back pay in the mid five figures.

Epstein was engaged to pay Johnny more money. With Epstein handling this particular debt in NY, it would presumably not become common knowledge with other creditors.

It blew up when Epstein tried to play hardball with Johnny over the terms of the payments.

Incidentally, the cash in the computer case that Sarah got from The Fake Sheikh was supposedly for Johnny.

The Duke of York lost me when he described himself as "too honorable" to dismiss Jeffrey Epstein over the telephone, and then described his multi-day sojourn at Jeffrey's townhouse as "convenient". I wonder if he suffers from his ex-wife's assumptions about people --- that they are dumb and worship royal titles so they will not talk back when you, the Royal, say your piece.

Getting in a mention of his Falklands war experience (in his inane explanation of why he doesn't sweat) does a disservice to any honorable war vet. I used to admire Andrew very much. I'm his age. No one our age went into the military in 1978.

Instead of this interview, he should have just sunk below the parapet for a few years and undertaken humble work, like John Profumo.

 

[Madame Verseau]

This interview. I just can't.

The Duke of York admitted he met up with Ghislaine Maxwell months ago this year

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nths-ago-despite-cutting-contact-Epstein.html

He had to have known what has been accused of her. And he threw her under the bus saying her legal problems are not his concern. Blaming Maxwell for Epstein being invited to Sandringham as a plus one. Andy claimed other members of the Royal Family met Epstein at Sandringham including Charles.

Using Beatrice as an alibi for the first alleged assault? This and the Maxwell claimed just made Andrew a bigger person of interest with authorities. Beatrice can be called in to corroborate Daddy's account. She can kiss her dreams of a splashy wedding goodbye.

Now the Christmas church walk at Sandringham this year is now the Walk of Shame for the BRF. Way to go Your Royal Low-ness.

 

[Marengo]

The interview was not a very smart move indeed. The prince seemed to lack empathy, compassion and self reflection. He is guilty of being a bad judge of character, picking the wrong kind of friends. He is perhaps guilty of being self-centered, isolated from reality, stubborn, lacking empathy etc. But does all that prove that he is guilty of rape? I think it is far to early to assume that that is the case.

I find it an interesting turn of events how the Duke is now 'guilty' in the eyes of public opinion while the many, many other friends of the monster Epstein -many of whom must be in high(er) places in the United States & who must have done even worse things than the Duke has been accused of- are getting away untarnished while the man himself was conveniently found dead.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

For the record, i agree that Andrew is greedy, arrogant, not very bright, and almost completely lacking in empathy or self-awareness.

But I do not believe what happened between himself and Ms. Giuffre fits the legal or moral definition of "rape"..not if it went down exactly as she described it.

Unlike a couple of other very high profile playmates of Epstein, the Duke of York is not a rapist imho.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Andrews PR man who was hired to help The Duke after his disastrous year, quit 2 weeks ago after telling The Duke not to do the interview.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1195986351604293632

I’m amazed at the stupidity of this interview, I’m also astounded the palace allowed it to go ahead. Why wouldn’t they distance themselves from this train wreck?

 

[Elenath]

For the record, i think Andrew is greedy, arrogant, not very bright, and almost completely lacking in empathy.

But I do not believe what happened between himself and Ms. Giuffre fits the legal or moral definition of "rape"..not if it went down exactly as she described it.

Unlike a couple of other very high profile playmates of Epstein, the Duke of York is not a rapist imho.

That depends, one of those occasions took place in London and, while I'm not a legal expert, in a lot of jurisdictions there is a distinction made when the "prostitute" involved is underaged. Meaning that if she had not been a prostitute, sex between her and Andrew would have been legal. But often sex with an underaged prostitute is. Force is hard to proof after all these years. Even the sex trafficking is hard to proof. A lot of it boils down what Andrew knew at the time. Which is why he keeps saying he can't remember.

 

[tommy100]

Andrews PR man who was hired to help The Duke after his disastrous year, quit 2 weeks ago after telling The Duke not to do the interview.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1195986351604293632

I’m amazed at the stupidity of this interview, I’m also astounded the palace allowed it to go ahead. Why wouldn’t they distance themselves from this train wreck?

In the Times article I linked further up the thread it was stated that while the PR man advised not to do the interview, Andrew's Private Secretary Amanda Thirsk advised him to. Given she has been his private secretary for over a decade during which he has had PR disaster after PR disaster I'm not sure why anyone would value her opinion on anything PR related. Another example of poor judgement from Andrew IMO.

 

[Muhler]

PR-wise this interview sure didn't help Prince Andrew IMO!

Nor in the foreign press.
The serious DK press has followed this with some interest and the front-page headline leading to this article pretty much sums up the DK view:
It reads: Pale Prince humiliated on TV.

https://www.bt.dk/royale/prins-andrew-afviser-sex-med-epsteins-sexslave-jeg-kan-ikke-svede

 

[Pranter]

Dickie Arbiter on Twitter rewtweeted pics posted by another person ...the pics show Andrew (two pics) in very close quarters with two women ...I guess this was to refute a claim or statement made by Andrew last night in the interview. I've seen enough quotes and short clips I'm not sure I can stomach watching the actual interview!

Feel badly for his girls. If he has any sense he will issue a public apology and announce he is retiring from public life. His charities can go to his girls (if they want to take them on) or other members of the BRF. Poor Beatrice, this will likely tamp down excitement for her wedding.


I can only imagine Charles must be fuming about this. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in Anne's house to hear her reaction!



LaRae

 

[Debbies]

I have noticed Prince Andrew's face and eyes when the interviewer mentioned literary agent John Brockman as a witness to a foot massage that he allegedly took. That was an interesting reaction and a stand-out for me. Anyone one else noticed that specific moment?
I have to say that the interviewer put John Brockman's witnessing in a deceptive way, as if he had voluntarily come forward to share it. That did not happen, as such account came from an year-old email correspondence shared by a Russian writer. John Brockman has not publicly confirmed or commented this as far as I know.

 

[Dman]

Confirmation:
The Duke of York’s PR advisor, Jason Stein, did resign over Prince Andrew’s decision to do this interview.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1196038084795781120

 

[Ista]

The overall impression I was left with after the interview, aside from my initial thoughts posted upthread, is that Andrew, with few exceptions, does not see the people who surround him in a service or subordinate mode as real live human beings. He "didn't want to seem grand," but over and over again, he made clear that people who he didn't see as worthy of his notice only exist as an unimportant background to his life. The underage girls who came and went in Epstein's properties may truly have not been noticed by Andrew, because they weren't important enough for him to notice. They weren't real people to him. That's one of the most damning revelations in the interview, in my opinion.