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

[Moonmaiden23]

My goodness..I am just now hearing about this latest mess believe it or not.

The DoE seems to really loathe Sarah. I wonder if he will boycott Beatrice and Eugenie's weddings when the time comes(assuming he is still alive) in order to avoid her?

It's all so dysfunctional and sad.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I wonder whether the Duke of Edinburgh knows worse information about Sarah than we know? People who get involved with Sarah seem to get into trouble.

The DoE seems to really loathe Sarah.

 

[sliver_bic]

The DoE seems to really loathe Sarah. I wonder if he will boycott Beatrice and Eugenie's weddings when the time comes(assuming he is still alive) in order to avoid her?

I doubt he'd do this to his granddaughters. He'd probably be sat opposite her and seated way before to avoid problems. The reception afterward? Now that might be where you might not find him.

I wonder whether the Duke of Edinburgh knows worse information about Sarah than we know? People who get involved with Sarah seem to get into trouble.

They've got to know mostly everything. I believe, like most everything else, it's kept private. Can Andrew, who lives on his mother's dime, really, just jet off to NYC without an itinerary being given to the Queen? If he isn't dumb enough to walk around in public with Epstein, we might be talking about something completely different. This applies to Sarah as well since it seems she really doesn't' do much without him being involved in some way.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Mermaid you read my mind. He seems to harbor particular venom toward her, he has not forgiven her after all these years..and she is mother to two of his grandchildren!

It's all so sad.

 

[Zonk]

Let's get back on topic.

This topic of this thread has nothing to do with the York Princessess, their wedding and/or Prince Phillip's attendance.

 

[scooter]

Andrew has a history of accepting money from shady charecters. Just think of his sale of Sunninghill to the Khazaki business man for 3Million pounds MORE THAN THE ASK, which has subsequently never been lived in and is now crumbling. www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4407240.ece photos at www.guardian.co.uk/money/gallery/2009/mar/01/property-monarchy

 

[Katrianna]

Andrew receiver 15 million pounds for Sunninghill, which was 3 million more than the asking price. I wondered why he had to go begging money from rich yet shady friends to settle Fergie's debts. I read that when he was going to move to Rose Lodge, he and Sarah wanted the place refurbished and redecorated and that cost around 8.5 to 8.7 million pounds. He still has plenty of money than just what the Queen pays him.
I've wondered if Andrew still has more money off shore that he's received from his contacts in the Middle East and Central Asia and wanted to avoid taxes. Just speculation on my part.

 

[scooter]

Andrew receiver 15 million pounds for Sunninghill, which was 3 million more than the asking price. I wondered why he had to go begging money from rich yet shady friends to settle Fergie's debts.

May I ask for a link where you are basing this information? Andrew is a grown man who seems to have no problem making deals that will not bear the scrutiny of daylight. Why are you placing the blame on Sarah? She did not sell the house to the Khazakis

 

[sliver_bic]

May I ask for a link where you are basing this information? Andrew is a grown man who seems to have no problem making deals that will not bear the scrutiny of daylight. Why are you placing the blame on Sarah? She did not sell the house to the Khazakis

That post didn't place blame on Sarah, it put it thoroughly on Andrew's doorstep.

 

[Madame Royale]

I very very rarely speak poorly of a royal, infact I really don't like too, but I will say that out of the entire family, Andrew is not one I'm inclined to think of with very much respect.

From what has been reported over the years and the footage I've watched be it through interviews, on the news or even documentaries, he seems to me an entirely arrogant inadvidual. He doesn't present a particularly personable impression and actually appears smitten by 'who' he is.

Naturally, he may be very different in person, but somehow I doubt it.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

The recent events brings A&S back to the front cover. This week's BUNTE title is "greedy & embarrassing" - hits the nail on the head.
BUNTE – Das Heft Nr. 12, 2011: Inhaltsverzeichnis - BUNTE

 

[Katrianna]

May I ask for a link where you are basing this information? Andrew is a grown man who seems to have no problem making deals that will not bear the scrutiny of daylight. Why are you placing the blame on Sarah? She did not sell the house to the Khazakis

I got my info from the Mail, Telegraph and the BBC. I didn't blame Sarah, please read my post again before making accusations.

 

[sliver_bic]

After a slow down it's coming back.

Why did Prince Andrew visit Gaddafi in Libya with ‘shady’ Tory

 

[Mermaid1962]

The Japanese catastrophe was in the papers earlier in the week. Now that the nuclear situation looks more hopeful, that subject was dropped. Then the big news was the invasion of Libya by the coalition. Now it's back to Andrew again. In my opinion, there's no scandal here, and I don't think that Andrew personally profited from the negotiations that he allegedly carried out on behalf of the government. I don't see what Rowland has to do with the trip to Libya except that he travelled with Andrew; but he covered his own costs. It's a way of working the whole story about Sarah's debt and "help" she's received. That could indeed be "shady", but it has nothing to do with Libya. That the UK's government saw fit to trade a terrorist for an oil contract could leave a bad taste in a person's mouth; but in this case I think that Andrew was simply doing his job.

"During his talks with Gaddafi, Prince Andrew is believed to have discussed the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. Megrahi was released from prison in Scotland in 2009 amid reports that Britain had won a lucrative oil deal for BP from Gaddafi in return."

Read more: Why did Prince Andrew visit Gaddafi in Libya with ¿shady¿ Tory? | Mail Online

 

[Al_bina]

Prince Andrew should go says former Foreign Office Minister | Mail Online

 

[Zonk]

The Duke of York should be questioned over his knowledge of billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, one the American financier's victims said today.

Virginia Roberts alleged that the Royal could give 'valuable' insight to the FBI investigation against Epstein, a convicted sex offender.

The Wall Street financier was jailed for 18 months in 2008 for soliciting a minor for prostitution.



Read more: Prince Andrew should be questioned because he 'knows the truth' about billionaire U.S. paedophile, claims victim | Mail Online

 

[kakieanne]

It's not looking good. But my guess is that Andrew will not be called to testify because of diplomatic immunity. It will probably all be swept under the carpet and in time forgotten.

 

[rmay286]

Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm” | VF Daily | Vanity Fair

This article claims that Sarah received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Epstein - much more than originally reported.

 

[Dymphna]

Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm” | VF Daily | Vanity Fair

This article claims that Sarah received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Epstein - much more than originally reported.

Wow. Quite a damning article. It sounds as though Andrew is as troubled in some ways as Sarah is. Very sad.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Nothing new in this article to what was made public back in March/April.

 

[Tyger]

According to this article she states that thanks to P. Andrew she is now debt free. I can't help but contrast that with her vanity fair article a couple of years ago (the one w/ the dominatrix photo) where she stated she helped P. Andrew out financially.

I've cleared my debts (yet again) says Fergie... and it's thanks to Andrew, my knight on a white charger | Mail Online

The current issue of Vanity Fair has a very unflattering portrait of Prince Andrew, with side comments about Sarah, equalling unflattering. It pre-dates by a week the fall of Prince Andrew from his position as Trade Envoy. (The link below is not to the full article - just a snippet).

Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm”
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/da...ein-and-his-tenuous-position-in-the-firm.html

 

[Kataryn]

The current issue of Vanity Fair has a very unflattering portrait of Prince Andrew, with side comments about Sarah, equalling unflattering. It pre-dates by a week the fall of Prince Andrew from his position as Trade Envoy. (The link below is not to the full article - just a snippet).

Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm”
Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm” | VF Daily | Vanity Fair

Here's the article in full:

The Trouble with Andrew | Society | Vanity Fair

Unfortunately there is much information given that is false - so I don't know if you can really trust the rest...

 

[Tyger]

Here's the article in full:

The Trouble with Andrew | Society | Vanity Fair

Unfortunately there is much information given that is false - so I don't know if you can really trust the rest...

I have enormous respect for the journalism work of Vanity Fair - yet I have to say I was surprised at the tone of this article. It has a really nasty edge - I wondered about it. Now you say there are inaccuracies - what are they? Can you say?

 

[Kataryn]

I have enormous respect for the journalism work of Vanity Fair - yet I have to say I was surprised at the tone of this article. It has a really nasty edge - I wondered about it. Now you say there are inaccuracies - what are they? Can you say?

- Sarah is said to have received nothing after her divorce while Diana went away with millions.
- Camilla is said to be really wanting to be the first "commoner" queen and Charles indulges her - I only heard information to the contrary, that Charles is keen for her to be queen, but it doesn't matter to her.
- If the "Way Ahead group" only dealt with "such paramount issues as primogeniture, the feudal rule by which the Crown passes to the eldest male heir.", there wouldn't be much to deal with, as the line is fixed and potential changes can only come from the government. Ok, there will be Royal input, but I guess the position of the RF is fixed, there is no need to discuss that two times a year. Plus they write that last Christmas was the first time Prince William was invited to the sessions of the group: then when was Harry invited? Earlier than William?
- "What’s more, Philip tried to bully Andrew into kicking Fergie out of her residence at Royal Lodge—a demand that placed Andrew in the awkward position of having to choose between his overbearing father and his over-the-top ex-wife. He chose her." Is that so? I really doubt that info!
- The timing of Andrew's investiture as GCVO was different - it was published officially before the story about Epstein broke, just the actual investiture ceremony was afterwards. Edward received his promotion around the same time, so it is not proven that the queen wanted Andrew to be untouchable under her protection as the article claimed. And the fact that Edward received the same honour at around the same time shows that it was not using her "most potent instrument" to protect her "favorite son".
- "When Beatrice was 17, she fell in love with a disreputable American by the name of Paolo Liuzzo. (snip paragraph) Beatrice was heartbroken when the relationship ended and she had to return to Goldsmiths, which is part of the University of London.". Beatrice was not at Goldsmiths, when she split with that guy. all the time she studied at Goldsmiths, she had Dave Clark for her boyfriend.

etc. See what I mean?

 

[Tyger]

- Sarah is said to have received nothing after her divorce while Diana went away with millions.
- Camilla is said to be really wanting to be the first "commoner" queen and Charles indulges her - I only heard information to the contrary, that Charles is keen for her to be queen, but it doesn't matter to her.
- If the "Way Ahead group" only dealt with "such paramount issues as primogeniture, the feudal rule by which the Crown passes to the eldest male heir.", there wouldn't be much to deal with, as the line is fixed and potential changes can only come from the government. Ok, there will be Royal input, but I guess the position of the RF is fixed, there is no need to discuss that two times a year. Plus they write that last Christmas was the first time Prince William was invited to the sessions of the group: then when was Harry invited? Earlier than William?
- "What’s more, Philip tried to bully Andrew into kicking Fergie out of her residence at Royal Lodge—a demand that placed Andrew in the awkward position of having to choose between his overbearing father and his over-the-top ex-wife. He chose her." Is that so? I really doubt that info!
- The timing of Andrew's investiture as GCVO was different - it was published officially before the story about Epstein broke, just the actual investiture ceremony was afterwards. Edward received his promotion around the same time, so it is not proven that the queen wanted Andrew to be untouchable under her protection as the article claimed. And the fact that Edward received the same honour at around the same time shows that it was not using her "most potent instrument" to protect her "favorite son".
- "When Beatrice was 17, she fell in love with a disreputable American by the name of Paolo Liuzzo. (snip paragraph) Beatrice was heartbroken when the relationship ended and she had to return to Goldsmiths, which is part of the University of London.". Beatrice was not at Goldsmiths, when she split with that guy. all the time she studied at Goldsmiths, she had Dave Clark for her boyfriend.

etc. See what I mean?

Very sloppy. Agree. What could they be thinking? Or they don't have good fact checking on things Royal? Went to press with the story precipitously? It almost sounds like a gratuitous trashing and I would not have thought that of Vanity Fair.

And there's even an 'etc' in there? Hmmm.....what more is askew?

Question: Is William (and Harry) members of the 'Way Ahead Group'? Is there such a group? Being here on TRF has made me sensitive to the partisanship around Charles and William - did you get the impression from the little bit written about William and the WAG, that it was being suggested that there is polarization between Charles and William? I had the impression that it was being suggested that William was in active discord with his father.

From the article: Last Christmas she reportedly invited Prince William to sit in on his first meeting of the Way Ahead Group, preparing him for the day he becomes King.

Like his mother, Princess Diana, William has a knack for connecting with ordinary people, a quality his father conspicuously lacks. “William is a key player in the future monarchy,” said a source who has studied the matter closely. “He’s going to help direct how things will happen.

“What’s far more likely to happen,” said the royal-watcher Robert Jobson, “is that there will be a seamless change of power in the monarchy, a gradual shift away from the Queen. Charles’s influence will gain, as will William’s. During the last years of Elizabeth’s reign, Charles and William will be like shadow kings.”

What do you make of this slant in the article? It startled me.

Also, I was given to understand that Sarah refused money from the Queen at her divorce - is that so? Or did she have millions like Diana?

 

[Renata4711]

The Way Ahead Group really exists...
User:Hemlock Martinis/Way Ahead Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Zonk]

Please note that off topic posts about Prince Charles as it relates to his personality, and his interactions with people have been deleted as off topic.

All discussions regarding Prince Charles in THIS thread, should be in reference to Prince Andrew and the Jeffrey Epstein Controversy.

Thanks!

Zonk
British Forums Moderator

 

[Renata4711]

Is there anything left to say about the Epstein controversy ?

 

[Mermaid1962]

I think it's a done deal unless Andrew or Sarah are called in to testify or some reporter discovers an as-yet-unexploded bomb-shell.

Is there anything left to say about the Epstein controversy ?

 

[sliver_bic]

Until every case with Epstein is done it's not going to be over. There are still lawsuits pending and we don't now what Andrew was doing during his trips. All it takes is one woman to mention that the Prince was there when something inappropriate happened (Not necessarily seeing but just there) and Andrew will be right back in the heat of things.

I do wonder if the FBI would question him. I get the feeling that the British government, more than likely urged by the crown, would ask them to back off unless they got something that looked seriously damaging.