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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Andrew never saw or was aware of underaged girls coming and going while staying with Epstein.....:whistling:



2010 - New York






This video has been posted before, can anyone confirm who the woman is and her age? I assume it’s the blonde woman in the grey turtleneck we’re talking about.

In my opinion, she looks early 20s.
 
This video has been posted before, can anyone confirm who the woman is and her age? I assume it’s the blonde woman in the grey turtleneck we’re talking about.

In my opinion, she looks early 20s.

Her name is Susan Hamblin and she is currently an Interior Designer in the UK. She went to Parsons School of Constructed Environment in NY from 2015 to 2017 according to her bio. This video was filmed in December 2010 during Andrews visit to “break up” with Epstein. She look much younger than in her 20’s IMO. There is no current age listed to know for sure.
 
Her name is Susan Hamblin and she is currently an Interior Designer in the UK. She went to Parsons School of Constructed Environment in NY from 2015 to 2017 according to her bio. This video was filmed in December 2010 during Andrews visit to “break up” with Epstein. She look much younger than in her 20’s IMO. There is no current age listed to know for sure.



So if the schooling age in the US is the same as the UK, to presumably start an undergraduate course at Parsons, she would have been 18/19 depending on what side of the school year her birthday fell. That would put her at 13/14 in 2010. Which IMO she definitely doesn’t look that young.

This is a photo of Ms Hamblin in 2016 leaving the Epstein mansion;
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKGWsYVWwAAqm-f?format=jpg&name=900x900

She certainly looks 20ish to me.
 
Last edited:
So if the schooling age in the US is the same as the UK, to presumably start an undergraduate course at Parsons, she would have been 18/19 depending on what side of the school year her birthday fell. That would put her at 13/14 in 2010. Which IMO she definitely doesn’t look that young.

This is a photo of Ms Hamblin in 2016 leaving the Epstein mansion;

She certainly looks 20ish to me.

I believe she is a UK citizen. She looks older in the other pics on line of her, but they were taken later than 2010. In the video she definitely looks very young to me. There isn't any additional information as to how she knew Epstein or how long that alliance went on for. If she is from the UK, perhaps she met him through Maxwell and was brought to the US. Epstein was known for paying for schooling in trade for sex or recruitment (or both). Hard to say since she isn't one of the girls to come forward with info. No idea if she is of interest by authorities in the US. I think it's an overwhelming task to find and question all the girls that were part of Epstein's sordid world.
 
I do hope this controversy doesn't ruin the wedding day of HRH Princess Bea of York. I of course feel so bad for the victims I truly do but I do truly also hope that HRH Princess Bea's wedding day will be the Bridal Couple's Day To Shine and not ruined by this controversy when her father walks her down the aisle.
 
It will certainly be affected by Andrew's behaviour. She is nto likely ot have a public wedding, and that's on Andrew. Other young women have suffered in this situation....
 
It is indeed weird how the focus has been so much on Andrew and not on others. Of course there is a specific accusation against Andrew and the current focus on him is hugely enlarged by his own decision to do the interview; but still you would also expect a media storm around other 'rich and famous' than prince Andrew.


Yes, you're right. Virginia Giuffre has named several other prominent men she says she was forced to have sex with. I think there's a media storm around Andrew because (1) he's a member of the BRF and (2) he renewed media interest with his interview which raised even more questions.

In addition, several people who were photographed or videotaped coming & going from Epstein's New York mansion, even after is conviction, have been identified, some as recently as 2016 (it's obvious Andrew wasn't his only post-conviction visitor). The identified women have not come forward to say they were victims of sex trafficking or to explain their connection with Epstein.

I suspect its possible Epstein mixed trafficked women with other women who weren't trafficked and weren't even aware he was engaged in that kind of activity. It's also possible he was much more cautious following his conviction.
 
According to an article in today's Times both Scotland Yard and the Metropolitan Police are operating with the FBI in connection with the Epstein investigation.

The article also discusses why Scotland Yard and the Met decided not to pursue the 2015 complaint: "it was clear that any investigation into human trafficking would be largely focused on activities and relationships outside the UK. We concluded that the MPS was not the appropriate authority to conduct inquiries in these circumstances and, in November 2016, a decision was made that this matter would not proceed to a full criminal investigation.”

A similar article was published in today's Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ecision-to-drop-jeffrey-epstein-investigation
 
In hindsight absolutely, but is it confirmed that they both approved it? If so I have to wonder what the6 were told as to the full extent of the interview.

Who would have approved of the interview first: Queen Elizabeth II or Prince Charles?
 
It hasn't been confirmed, it has been said that the Queen was told but wasn't told exactly what would be discussed.
 
Who would have approved of the interview first: Queen Elizabeth II or Prince Charles?

I would imagine the Queen. Andrew said at the beginning of the interview that they (Newsnight & Andrew’s staff) had been trying to arrange this interview for about six months to discuss Andrew’s work, and that once they had set the date, he had decided to use the opportunity to discuss the Epstein scandal.

This struck me an odd introduction because why would Newsnight have been interested in a Palace fluff piece about Andrews work when he was at the center of such a huge scandal? It didn’t make sense. However, if this was truly the original intent of the interview, it establishes that the Queen may have approved the interview based on the original context to be about Andrews work....not the Epstein scandal.
 
The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy (2010-2019)

Didn’t one of Andrew’s staff, possibly a PA, come out and say she’d been planning this for over a year? I think I saw it in the DM so I know it’s not 100% reliable.
 
From today's Times:

"The Grenadier Guards were said to have been unhappy and embarrassed when the Palace proposed Prince Andrew become its honorary colonel on the retirement of the Duke of Edinburgh [in 2017], who had held the position since 1975.

Senior officers asked if another member of the royal family could take up the role, but were firmly told by Buckingham Palace that they must accept Prince Andrew."
 
Didn’t one of Andrew’s staff, possibly a PA, come out and say she’d been planning this for over a year? I think I saw it in the DM so I know it’s not 100% reliable.

I haven’t seen that, but there seems to be a lot of conflicting stories about who knew what and when. Considering Andrew made a point at the start of the interview to state that this took 6 months to set up, we can either take it at face value or lump it in with other inconsistencies that have come from that interview. It’s all a hot mess.
 
From today's Times:

"The Grenadier Guards were said to have been unhappy and embarrassed when the Palace proposed Prince Andrew become its honorary colonel on the retirement of the Duke of Edinburgh [in 2017], who had held the position since 1975.

Senior officers asked if another member of the royal family could take up the role, but were firmly told by Buckingham Palace that they must accept Prince Andrew."



Interesting because that’s the complete opposite tone that was expressed during the Trooping interviews in 2018.
 
TBF no one was ever going to day on camera pre Epstein that they didn’t want Andrew as honoury colonel. The difference now is Andrew has disgraced himself enough for it to be okay to say they never wanted him.
 
TBF no one was ever going to day on camera pre Epstein that they didn’t want Andrew as honoury colonel. The difference now is Andrew has disgraced himself enough for it to be okay to say they never wanted him.

The honorary position that Andrew took over from his father happened in 2017, I believe. At that time, Andrew's connections with Epstein were known about but had kind of faded into the background noise. There wasn't any hint of charges of sex trafficking and such until Epstein was arrested last summer and things escalated from there. Andrew did his mother proud at the last Trooping of the Color which was before Epstein's second arrest.

Now, with Andrew facing so much backlash from his interview, it doesn't surprise me that opinions of him have drastically changed. If only Andrew had kept quiet, this wouldn't be happening now IMO.
 
The honorary position that Andrew took over from his father happened in 2017, I believe. At that time, Andrew's connections with Epstein were known about but had kind of faded into the background noise. There wasn't any hint of charges of sex trafficking and such until Epstein was arrested last summer and things escalated from there. Andrew did his mother proud at the last Trooping of the Color which was before Epstein's second arrest.

Now, with Andrew facing so much backlash from his interview, it doesn't surprise me that opinions of him have drastically changed. If only Andrew had kept quiet, this wouldn't be happening now IMO.

What’s done in the dark will aways come to light. There was only so much time he could hide away from reality.

Interesting because that’s the complete opposite tone that was expressed during the Trooping interviews in 2018.

There were some who were surprised he got the role. Some had expected it to be handed down to Harry. There were talk of it being handed down to Catherine as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The honorary position that Andrew took over from his father happened in 2017, I believe. At that time, Andrew's connections with Epstein were known about but had kind of faded into the background noise. There wasn't any hint of charges of sex trafficking and such until Epstein was arrested last summer and things escalated from there. Andrew did his mother proud at the last Trooping of the Color which was before Epstein's second arrest.

Now, with Andrew facing so much backlash from his interview, it doesn't surprise me that opinions of him have drastically changed. If only Andrew had kept quiet, this wouldn't be happening now IMO.

Ther was an article about Andrew in the Times the other day, which was pretty damning about his general demeanour..and it sounded like those who knew him/had to work with him.. were far from admiring him, over many years..
 
Interesting because that’s the complete opposite tone that was expressed during the Trooping interviews in 2018.
The article doesn't cite a source (other than "sources") so it could be wrong.
 
Wasnt Andrew involved in a previous scandal while head of a British Economic Association some 10+ years ago. He had to resign his appointment
 
He stepped down as a UK trade envoy, partly because of his connections with Jeffrey Epstein and partly because he was being linked with members of the Gaddafi family, but I don't think it's been mentioned since. We're in the middle of a very bitter and unpleasant General Election campaign, which is dominating the news, and no-one was giving Prince Andrew a second thought until he did that interview. I don't know what possessed him.
 
I would imagine the Queen. Andrew said at the beginning of the interview that they (Newsnight & Andrew’s staff) had been trying to arrange this interview for about six months to discuss Andrew’s work, and that once they had set the date, he had decided to use the opportunity to discuss the Epstein scandal.

This struck me an odd introduction because why would Newsnight have been interested in a Palace fluff piece about Andrews work when he was at the center of such a huge scandal? It didn’t make sense. However, if this was truly the original intent of the interview, it establishes that the Queen may have approved the interview based on the original context to be about Andrews work....not the Epstein scandal.

Would it be safe to declare that Queen Elizabeth II approved of the interview among mysterious conceptions?
 
The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy (2010-2019)

Wasnt Andrew involved in a previous scandal while head of a British Economic Association some 10+ years ago. He had to resign his appointment



The British Economic Association doesn’t exist hasn’t since 1902, and Prince Andrew has never been connected to its successor The Royal Economic Society.

You may be referring to his time as Special Representative for International Trade and Investment a role previously held by The Duke of Kent. Andrew resigned in 2011 during the Libyan Civil war due to his relationship with Dr. Saif al-Islam Gaddafi. The second son of Colonel Gaddafi. Dr Gaddafi also counted men such as Tony Blair and Prince Albert of Monaco amongst his friends.

However this has nothing to do with this thread.
 
Last edited:
Not sure where this goes... but oh boy

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7742249/EXPOSED-Prince-Andrews-deals-tax-haven-tycoons.html

Exposed:The damning details of Prince Andrew's deals with tax haven tycoons... so does THIS help explain how he funds his billionaire lifestyle?

*Duke of York plugged private Luxembourg-based bank on official trade missions
*The Prince allowed financier David Rowland to insert meetings into trade tours
*Andrew co-owned a business with Rowlands in a secretive Caribbean tax haven
*Was to be used to lure Prince's Royal contacts to invest in tax-free offshore fund
 
Whether or not this belongs here I'm not suer but it all stems from the Epstein sandal. the Mail on Sunday has gone to town on Andrew with an massive investigation into his finances and business links, published in it today edition:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7742249/EXPOSED-Prince-Andrews-deals-tax-haven-tycoons.html

Scandal-hit Prince Andrew is plunged deeper into crisis today by a devastating exposé of his business activities by The Mail on Sunday.

We can reveal how the Duke of York repeatedly exploited his taxpayer-funded role as Britain's trade envoy to work behind the scenes for his close friend, the controversial multi-millionaire financier David Rowland.

Bombshell emails reveal that while on official trade missions meant to promote UK business, Andrew was quietly plugging a private Luxembourg-based bank for the super-rich, owned by Rowland and his family.

In an astonishing conflict of interests, the Prince allowed the Rowlands to shoehorn meetings into his official trade tours so they could expand their bank and woo powerful and wealthy clients.

He also passed them private government documents they had no right to see. It can also be revealed that, at the time, Andrew co-owned a business with the Rowlands in a secretive Caribbean tax haven.

It was to be used to lure the Prince's wealthy Royal contacts to invest in a tax-free offshore fund. One email exchange reveals

that when Andrew was facing the sack from his envoy role because of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, Rowland's son and business lieutenant, Jonathan, suggested their commercial activities could continue 'under the radar'. Andrew responded: 'I like your thinking.'

The devastating revelations come as the Duke faces mounting questions about how he funds his opulent lifestyle. They follow in the wake of his car-crash TV interview about his links to Epstein, the financier and convicted sex offender who died in jail this summer while awaiting trial for trafficking underage girls.
Our investigation reveals for the first time how:
-Prince Andrew had a 40 per cent stake in a firm based in the British Virgin Islands called Inverness Asset Management that was in existence until March this year;
-A document reveals that 'contacts' of the company – including Royal families, heads of state, government institutions and wealthy individuals – would be targeted as potential investors in a separate investment fund to be based in the Cayman Islands and promising a tax-free income;
-Prince Andrew allowed Jonathan Rowland to accompany him on a taxpayer-funded trade mission to China which Mr Rowland then used to plug his family's bank. The Duke invited Rowland to choose which meetings he wanted to attend;
-Rowland inserted into Andrew's China schedule a meeting with Louis Cheung, the president of Ping An, the world's largest insurance company, worth an estimated £171 billion, and proposed that they could become business partners;
-In an astonishing breach of protocol, Andrew's aide, Amanda Thirsk, handed the Rowlands a Foreign Office diplomatic cable intended only for government officials that contained details of Andrew's one-to-one conversations with senior Chinese politicians;
On another occasion, Andrew demanded a private briefing memo from Treasury chiefs about the Icelandic financial crisis, then passed it to the Rowlands. Months earlier, they had bought part of a collapsed Icelandic bank in a £86 million deal;
-Andrew also took Jonathan Rowland on an official trade mission to Saudi Arabia where the pair met Prince Sultan bin Salman bin Abulaziz al Saud, the second son of the country's current monarch. Following that meeting, Mr Rowland told the Saudi royal, via an aide, that Andrew was considering becoming a partner in his family's bank and asked him if he would like a stake in it, too;
-In one exchange of emails with the Saudi Prince, Mr Rowland boasted that he acted as a middle man not just for Prince Andrew but for the British Royal Family;
During another taxpayer-funded trade trip, Prince Andrew lobbied the King of Bahrain about the Rowlands' plan to open an offshoot of their bank in the Middle Eastern country. He later telephoned an official to help get the potentially lucrative venture off the ground.
 
Although the information comes from the Daily Mail, I do think that the DM does get things right every now and then. Even a broken clock is right two times a day.

This, to me, highlights what Andrew said in his interview that he doesn't regret his relationship with Epstein because of the connections Epstein provided. Its not rocket science that with Epstein being a very successful financier, that he'd also be wily and shrewd enough to know how to "work the system" when it comes to financial investments. I'm not in any way literate in what's legal and illegal as far as financial wheeling and dealing and offshore havens to beat the tax system, and that's a totally different angle for Andrew to deal with.

If true that all of these wheeling and dealings for Andrew's *personal* interests were conducted under the radar disguised by Andrew's official work for the "Firm", this is showing a shady side of Andrew that used and abused his position within the "Firm" to benefit himself and his "friends". There have always been rumblings of Andrew using official trips for his own pleasure and lavish stays and hence the moniker "Air Miles Andy" but it should be proven that he was soliciting those that he met in his official capacity for personal financial gain, we're seeing someone that has no respect or concern or devotion to the family "Firm".

There are always going to be people in this world that live, eat and breathe by the thought "what's in it for me?". If the Queen and her "Firm" have come to realize that all these allegations in the DM are, in fact, true, Andrew will never again represent the BRF in *any* capacity and will have lost the biggest faction of his "connections" along with any shred of respect and decency he may still have had.

I was thinking we're going to need waders after Ms. Giuffre's interview airs because it was going to start getting deep in here but I'm changing that to full body armor as more is revealed, its going to be an all out deluge.

It may not be connected but the light bulb in my head flashed on a memory of long ago of Sarah's financial dealings in the British Virgin Islands. Remember the Panama Papers thing?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...ferguson-simon-cowell-and-heather-mills-amon/
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom