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

[tommy100]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The RF and Household will protect Andrew, up until the point the wider RF and HM get dragged into it. Then the decision may well be made (rather like in Spain) that letting Andy go down for it will save the rest of the RF and the Sovereign.

 

[Lilyflo]

Jesus take the wheel.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...steins-naked-pool-parties-massages-claims/amp

The BRF is not going to be able to control this . Get. In. Front. Of. This. Mess, Ma'am.

That article in Vanity Fair was published in 2011. It's not news that an Epstein employee made a sworn testimony saying Prince Andrew "attended naked pool parties and was treated to massages by a harem of adolescent girls."

These stories will continue to resurface while the fallout from Epstein's latest arrest & death continues to be reported. Prince Andrew can expect a bumpy ride as all the previous knowledge is raked over & shared across the Internet. He might also expect worse if there is anything new to be uncovered & published.

 

[sndral]

Jesus take the wheel.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...steins-naked-pool-parties-massages-claims/amp

The BRF is not going to be able to control this . Get. In. Front. Of. This. Mess, Ma'am.

I remember from articles a couple of years ago Epstein’s employee saying that Andrew had participated in the naked pool parties with under age girls and had massages, so this is not new news. If this employee was telling the truth, then there are more potential witnesses out there.
According to the article w/ the video of Andrew at Epstein’s front door post conviction, the lawyer for several of Epstein’s victims hired a private investigater to follow/investigate/document his activities for several years, this video is from that source, I assume there are more videos, although whether any include footage of Andrew is unknown. What is extremely troubling is that when the video was taken Epstein was a registered sex offender, yet we see the young girl with him in his NY apartment while Andrew is there. If your choice is to remain ‘loyal’ to your convicted sex offender friend, shouldn’t you draw the line at staying in his home with him while he’s also hosting under age looking females?
I’ve always wondered why Andrew never remarried, I’m beginning to think he never remarried because he enjoys his playboy lifestyle too much.
Andrew lost his trade envoy role for several reasons one of which was Epstein but it wasn’t the only reason https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-12663378
I was a bit shocked that after the unsavory details of Epstein emerged and the obvious PR issues with Andrew appearing to enjoy the company of very young women, the replacement role they found for Andrew was ‘Pitch at the palace’ where Andrew brings together young people and powerful/moneyed rich people -it seemed tone deaf to me, wouldn’t it have been better to find something else?

 

[alvinking]

Given the current climate and the storm that seems to be brewing, maybe just maybe Princess Eugenie's podcast about sexual slavery does not seem to be such a good idea

 

[Lilyflo]

Prince Andrew urged to tell all he knows about Jeffrey Epstein
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ed-to-tell-all-he-knows-about-jeffrey-epstein

Prince Andrew should give sworn testimony on “everything he knows” about his friend Jeffrey Epstein after saying he was appalled by the disgraced financier’s sex crimes, lawyers for some of Epstein’s victims have said.
(...)
“I look forward to coordinating a formal deposition where he will be given the opportunity to tell us everything he knows,” Brad Edwards, a lawyer for Giuffre, told the Guardian on Monday. “We would like to do this as soon as possible, at his convenience, and again we are very appreciative of his willingness to help.”
(...)
Edwards said on Monday that Andrew’s latest remarks “give the impression that he will do his part to ensure the victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes are able to get answers and justice”. He added: “I would like to personally help him provide these victims his assistance.”

 

[Ista]

Prince Andrew urged to tell all he knows about Jeffrey Epstein
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ed-to-tell-all-he-knows-about-jeffrey-epstein

Prince Andrew should give sworn testimony on “everything he knows” about his friend Jeffrey Epstein after saying he was appalled by the disgraced financier’s sex crimes, lawyers for some of Epstein’s victims have said.
(...)
“I look forward to coordinating a formal deposition where he will be given the opportunity to tell us everything he knows,” Brad Edwards, a lawyer for Giuffre, told the Guardian on Monday. “We would like to do this as soon as possible, at his convenience, and again we are very appreciative of his willingness to help.”
(...)
Edwards said on Monday that Andrew’s latest remarks “give the impression that he will do his part to ensure the victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes are able to get answers and justice”. He added: “I would like to personally help him provide these victims his assistance.”

I am not holding my breath, but it's a nice tactic from Brad Edwards. I'm sure he has no expectation that Andrew will suddenly be helpful, but it highlights the ridiculousness of BP's statement.

 

[tommy100]

The DM isn't letting it go, some actual half decent investigative journalism going on

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ve-Duke-Yorks-Epstein-girl-key-locations.html

Pressure was mounting on Prince Andrew last night to answer questions about his paedophile friend Jeffrey Epstein.

Young victims of Epstein begged the Duke of York to help them get justice as the prince was offered the opportunity to give sworn testimony on 'everything he knows'.

After the duke declared himself 'appalled' at reports of the US financier's sex abuse of teenage girls, he was offered the chance to stand by his word and help their cases.

Today it can be revealed that flight logs, obtained by the Daily Mail, show that one of Epstein's victims, 'sex-slave' Virginia Roberts, was flown to London, New York and the Caribbean in 2001.

She has claimed that as a 17-year-old she met the duke in all three places and, in each case, research by the Mail suggests the duke was in the same vicinity at the same time.

 

[Lilyflo]

For anyone wondering about dates of events and how often Prince Andrew socialised with Epstein, the Daily Mail has published a timeline.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...e-Andrews-toxic-fixation-Jeffrey-Epstein.html

 

[COUNTESS]

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. Andrew has made some lame excuses and I'm sure he thought this would go away some time ago. But for him and others, alas not. It is foolish to think this was just a friendship or a business acquaintance. The BRF has had it problems before, but it is not being investigated in Britain and they have no control. Actually, what may be revealed, if anything from this side of the world, Andrew means nothing.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

During his youthful Randy Andy years I remember reading that despite his movie star looks, Royal status and first rate education, HRH was dumber than a box of hammers.

I put it all down to spiteful gossip.

And now this...how could a middle aged man who is also the father of DAUGHTERS...young women he obviously dotes on...put himself in company like Epstein's if not for arrogance and idiocy on a grand scale??

The reason for his apparently unbreakable bond with Sarah becomes clearer by the day. Only a woman who got caught red handed trying to collect cash for access to her former husband can truly appreciate the depths he has sunk to now.

 

[Osipi]

And now this...how could a middle aged man who is also the father of DAUGHTERS...young women he obviously dotes on...put himself in company like Epstein's if not for arrogance and idiocy on a grand scale??

Since all this discussion started up again, a memory keeps floating through my mind that I've read somewhere and its a statement made by someone that Andrew was dating at the time. May have been Koo Stark. It shows that Andrew was right up there on par with Princess Margaret as far as always assuring that nobody *ever* forgot just who they are. The scenario is Andrew and his "date" approaching an entrance and Andrew stating something like "I go first. I'm the prince". Its just part and parcel of who Andrew is.

Along comes Epstein and regardless of whether or not there were young, nubile girls swarming all over the place, Andrew knew he was in good company with a lot of high profile people of vast wealth and influence and movers and shakers and that seems right up Andrew's alley of where he believed he belonged. He's a prince after all. Perhaps a lot can be attributed to being the "spare" and the second son that was never going to be top banana but we've seen a lot of this from Andrew and the company he's kept over the years.

The girls, themselves, could have been fixtures for Andrew much like a huge plate of strawberries on a buffet table and there for his enjoyment but he really didn't care much for strawberries in the first place. Or maybe he sampled one or two or three but it wasn't the main draw for him in his relationship with Epstein. Its possible that Andrew wasn't about to give up his friendship with Epstein for the main reason being that Epstein had clout. Epstein had the ability to draw to him the top dogs of the world. Epstein had it all, it seemed, and that's something that appealed to Andrew immensely.

These are just thoughts I've had. I think there is far more to this story that we've just not been able to see or understand yet. A person's ego is a very powerful driving force and can put blinders on a person enough so they don't see the warning signs posted along the way.

 

[rmay286]

I think this seems pretty true of both Andrew and Sarah, and the company they keep. They have had plenty of unsavory friends and acquaintances in the past and the one thing all these people seemed to have in common is money or connections to people with money and/or influence. While I don't think someone is guilty by association, I hope this is an occasion for Andrew to truly consider who he associates with and pick his friends more wisely.

I really don't think either Andrew or Sarah are 'bad' people per se, but I think they hang around a lot of people who have bad intentions. Not to drag him into this discussion, but sometimes people forget that John Bryan was the financial advisor of both Andrew and Sarah; they both trusted him for some reason. I hope this Epstein experience really ends their pattern of gullible trusting behaviour or turning a blind eye to someone's faults.

The sad part is that Eugenie has been campaigning against human trafficking for a few years now, even starting her own anti-slavery collective. Andrew's association with Epstein could overshadow Eugenie's work and I hope Andrew realizes what an effect this has had.

 

[Lilyflo]

BBC Newsnight had a feature on the Epstein story & included a short interview with Michael Cole, a previous BBC royal correspondent (up to 1988). Cole says he liked Andrew when he knew him as a young man and commended his role as a brave navy pilot in the Falklands war. However, he emphasises how serious this situation is & strongly advises Andrew to co-operate with US investigators in order to tell what he knows & exonerate himself. It's worth watching the clip to hear all he says.

 

[Madame Verseau]

@Lilyflo - I saw the clip and yes Andrew needs to get in front of this before he drags down the BRF. Eugenie's podcast is ill timed; and if Beatrice were to become engaged a grand Windsor wedding is out of the question now.

Has the Court Circular changed since this blown up? Will there be shift in planned trips to avoid awkward questions from the press?

 

[Osipi]

I seriously don't believe anything will change as far as the workings of the monarchy. Events and trips are not planned overnight and take time and energy and often the planning is set into motion months before the event actually happens.

I think, actually, you're blowing this controversy into something a lot bigger and badder than it perhaps really is. Its not going to bring down the House of Windsor nor is it going to bleed into affecting the life and times of Andrew's daughters and their projects or even Beatrice's wedding and most assuredly, the monarchy does not operate to placate or in fear of what the press may print.

Just because there isn't anything out in the public domain right now as to what Andrew is actually thinking of doing or not doing doesn't mean that he's totally ignoring it all. I would imagine that he's got his own team of lawyers and attorneys advising him on what the best move to make will be. As of now, he's not even been accused of a crime.

Let's not send Andy to the gallows and plan to have him drawn and quartered until there is actually a real reason proven beyond reasonable doubt that he deserves it. The world loves a good scandal and the more the scandal is exaggerated and blown out of proportion, the harder it is to get to the facts of the matter. Public opinion does not serve up justice. The courts do.

 

[Gawin]

This is a very thoughtful post and I suspect it's true. But in IMO Andrew needs to explain his actions. If he let his friendship with Epstein cloud his better judgment he needs to man up and say so.

Simply stating he is "appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes" [boldface mine] doesn't explain their continued friendship following Epstein's 2008 conviction. Why didn't that appall him?

 

[O-H Anglophile]

This is a very thoughtful post and I suspect it's true. But in IMO Andrew needs to explain his actions. If he let his friendship with Epstein cloud his better judgment he needs to man up and say so.

Simply stating he is "appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes" [boldface mine] doesn't explain their continued friendship following Epstein's 2008 conviction. Why didn't that appall him?

I think the very light sentence Epstein received and the terms it included made it easier for many to think Epstein wasn’t that evil. People in Epstein’s circle get more time for stealing client’s money or insider trading, than he got for the crime he pled guilty to-solicitation for prostitution of a minor. He only served 13 months-with generous work release terms.

 

[Osipi]

This is a very thoughtful post and I suspect it's true. But in IMO Andrew needs to explain his actions. If he let his friendship with Epstein cloud his better judgment he needs to man up and say so.

Simply stating he is "appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes" [boldface mine] doesn't explain their continued friendship following Epstein's 2008 conviction. Why didn't that appall him?

Blinders applied with superglue? The "sweetheart" deal made it look like Jeffrey was just given a slap on the wrist and the sentence was basically all for show? The sentence was over and done with with no consequences to Epstein's business ventures as he was on a "work program" which allowed him to conduct business at his office as late at 10pm sometimes. Very cushy treatment and definitely not one befitting a criminal. The most heinous crimes of Epstein were actually shoved under the rug and to the world, it was life as usual once the sentence was completed. Perhaps Epstein's friends all saw that conviction as "oh well... he made a big mistake but he did the time"?

With this recent arrest of Epstein, that which Epstein really hoped would remain buried and forgotten came to the forefront once again and this time there would be no "sweetheart" deal and no rugs around to push things underneath and absolutely no chance of a "work program" or even being let out on bond. Nothing was going to save Epstein this time around so he took the coward's way out and left the mess for others to take the blame for.

Did Andrew know the extent of Epstein's perverted lifestyle? We don't know. I also do believe that Andrew should cooperate and tell what he does know simply because that's what a honorable man would do. Maybe he will. We just have to wait and see what develops. There's a lot of powerful names out there in connection with Jeffrey Epstein and for the victims' sake, I do hope they come forward with the facts and there is closure for those victims.

 

[tommy100]

The use of the word recent is to make it seem as if the reports are only just coming out and as if Andrew wouldn't have heard such reports after Epstein was first convicted.

Beatrice will get a Windsor wedding if that is what she wants because the Queen will treat all her grandchildren the same. However, whether it would be such a public affair as Eugenie's really depends on how the next few weeks work out for Andrew and if the RF can get a handle on it.

 

[Gawin]

I think the very light sentence Epstein received and the terms it included made it easier for many to think Epstein wasn’t that evil. People in Epstein’s circle get more time for stealing client’s money or insider trading, than he got for the crime he pled guilty to-solicitation for prostitution of a minor. He only served 13 months-with generous work release terms.

If that's the case then *Andrew* needs to say so. He needs to explain his actions.

 

[Madame Verseau]

Andrew might talk to the cops

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...peak-police-jeffrey-epstein-investigation/amp

If he goes to the FBI he will be lawyered up to the eyeballs. I doubt his statements would be made public.

 

[Erin9]

I think the very light sentence Epstein received and the terms it included made it easier for many to think Epstein wasn’t that evil. People in Epstein’s circle get more time for stealing client’s money or insider trading, than he got for the crime he pled guilty to-solicitation for prostitution of a minor. He only served 13 months-with generous work release terms.

Maybe.

But- People in their circle also get deals no one else would get because of their money and connections. It shouldn’t have been any real surprise the reality was worse. They should know better than anybody just what money buys. He got a sweetheart deal. That was clear at the time. He plead guilty to the least of what he could have and got an absurd sentence.

 

[Denville]

If that's the case then *Andrew* needs to say so. He needs to explain his actions.

I dont see how he can... He knew what Epstein did.. that he procured young girls.. that some of them were under age.. that Epstein lived a life that was all about sexual shenanigans. What can he say? He went on associating with this man when common prudence would have advised that he should drop him..

 

[Ista]

I am inclined to believe that any explanation Andrew could offer would be more likely to, at a minimum, raise more questions than it would to exonerate him. I suspect that is exactly the conundrum he's facing.

 

[Erin9]

I am inclined to believe that any explanation Andrew could offer would be more likely to, at a minimum, raise more questions than it would to exonerate him. I suspect that is exactly the conundrum he's facing.

You’re probably right.

 

[Gawin]

I dont see how he can... He knew what Epstein did.. that he procured young girls.. that some of them were under age.. that Epstein lived a life that was all about sexual shenanigans. What can he say? He went on associating with this man when common prudence would have advised that he should drop him..

But we don't know how much Andrew knew. We're just making assumptions. As for making a statement, even his foolish, feckless ex-wife admitted she made a mistake. Andrew hasn't even done that much.

I don't think Andrew's completely stupid. He knows how to a draw a line, he just needs someone to show him where.

 

[Osipi]

I dont see how he can... He knew what Epstein did.. that he procured young girls.. that some of them were under age.. that Epstein lived a life that was all about sexual shenanigans. What can he say? He went on associating with this man when common prudence would have advised that he should drop him..

Andrew may have been very aware of Epstein's proclivities in always having a wide variety of young women around him and even be aware of Epstein's sexual preferences in minors but, if I'm not mistaken, the investigators that would be asking questions of Andrew would be about what he knew in relation to just *who* was aiding and abetting Epstein in procuring these girls and trafficking them. The FBI investigation is *not* going after the people that had sex with these girls.

In the cross hairs now that Epstein has died is Ghislaine Maxwell and its very possible that this is who Andrew will be answering questions about as they've known each other for years and the Feds are very interested in finding out just how much she aided and abetted Epstein in this unholy mess.

https://www.apnews.com/e339d24fd74c45d295a8554604d2f435

 

[Denville]

But we don't know how much Andrew knew. We're just making assumptions. As for making a statement, even his foolish, feckless ex-wife admitted she made a mistake. Andrew hasn't even done that much.

I don't think Andrew's completely stupid. He knows how to a draw a line, he just needs someone to show him where.

Fergie always talks too much. As for Andrew. he knew that Epstein had been convicted of a crime.. a particularly horrible one.. did he not? And he went on associating with him.

I am inclined to believe that any explanation Andrew could offer would be more likely to, at a minimum, raise more questions than it would to exonerate him. I suspect that is exactly the conundrum he's facing.

Precisely. He cant say anything that is going to make this go away or make hm look all right. THe only thing for him to do, is to give up royal life, and retire to a private life...

"Professionally" is completely different because the BRF carry out engagements at the request of the government or charities so the responsibility lies with those institutions.

"Privately" they might socialise with people convicted of crimes but it depends on the nature of the crime whether it would be acceptable to the British public. A registered sex offender would not be tolerated as a friend of the BRF. It's breathtaking that Prince Andrew assumed this was OK, that he could carry on socialising with post-conviction/prison Epstein while representing the Queen on official duties and acting as UK envoy for British business around the world.

True it seems very odd to say that the RF would have to "cut ties" iwht thousands of people if they had to avoid people convicted of crimes. They might at times have to meet people they would not choose to associate with, in the course of their work.. but this isn't work. And they might at times in private continue to be frends with someone who had been convicted of some kind of offence.. but only I would say very minor ones.. not people who are convicted of something so awful as procuring girls.. esp under age ones.

 

[Gawin]

Fergie always talks too much. As for Andrew. he knew that Epstein had been convicted of a crime.. a particularly horrible one.. did he not? And he went on associating with him.

But in this case Fergie said the right thing. Andrew hasn't.

You're exactly right, Andrew knew Epstein had been convicted of procuring a minor for prostitution and continued their friendship, which is troubling to say the least. And I suspect Andrew was warned - isn't the BRF surrounded by advisers - which makes his foolish behavior even more appalling. My comment (unclear though it was) was directed at how much Andrew actually knew and when - the names, the dates, the details, all of Epstein's out-of-court settlements, etc. We also don't know how Epstein managed to explain it all away to him.

IMO Andrew needs to issue a statement admitting his stupidity. So far he's stated he's appalled by this and deplores that, but he says nothing about his own behavior.

"I made a mistake, I should never have associated with Jeffery Epstein, I'm sorry."

 

[Lilyflo]

I am inclined to believe that any explanation Andrew could offer would be more likely to, at a minimum, raise more questions than it would to exonerate him. I suspect that is exactly the conundrum he's facing.

I agree. It's a tough one because the timeline provided by the Daily Mail shows how frequently Andrew was with Epstein (that we know of - there could be more occasions). If he is genuinely going to help US investigators, he needs to recall all the details of who/what/when because his testimony could be valuable evidence in building the cases of the victims seeking justice. I'm sure that's what Princess Eugenie's charity would want for those women who claim they were trafficked as sex slaves.

However, even if Andrew witnessed nothing he believed to be illegal, it's highly likely that some of what Andrew saw, heard & knew about was at least sordid & won't reflect well on him as a willing bystander (if not actual participant). For example, the photo of him in Thailand on a boat with topless young women - this happened when Andrew was a 40yr old father of young daughters. This might be OK for any other divorced man but he's HM the Queen's son & the context is partying with Jeffrey Epstein.

Above all, is the testimony he needs to give about his contact with Epstein after 2008. Now that we know how "appalled' he is, we're all ears.