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

[hernameispekka]

Right, and this is why conspiracy theories flourish. I could be wrong in this particular case, but it seems as though the rich and powerful are sometimes at a disadvantage. Not only are they accused of horrendous things, which people tend to believe without knowing them (because the wealthy and powerful are always evil), but it's assumed that they will use that wealth and power to cover up their misdeeds. The conspiracy-minded thinks is that if there's no evidence, it has been covered up--when in fact, there could be no evidence because there's no misdeed to begin with.

Exactly. And the reason those theories shows up is because exactly that happens time and time again. Those hiding evidence hurt everyone innocent (especially the rich) the same as every girl lying about rape worsens the condition for those who actually was raped.... Arghh, this world.....

 

[GracieGiraffe]

No one knows what's going on right now. An investigation could be underway as we speak. Whether or not the media is picking up on it is another matter. The two don't go hand-in-glove. Just saying.

Unfortunately, this is true. The fact that the press did not cover at least Esptein's curious golden parachute is outrageous.

 

[royal rob]

Well the rich can afford to fight with a team of lawyers the poor haven't got that help.
I really hope the truth comes out but I really don't think it will happen


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Mermaid1962]

Koo Stark weighs in. The Prince Andrew she describes sounds like a nice, normal man.Koo Stark reveals the truth about Prince Andrew: After 32 years' silence, Prince's ex-lover gives account of affair to defend him from 'sex slave' claims | Daily Mail Online

 

[Roslyn]

Oh dear! What is it with Andrews ex'es? Nothing they can say has any bearing on what he might or might not have done with respect to Roberts or Epstein. All he has been accused of by Roberts is having sex with him. How on earth can either Sarah or Koo know whether he did or not? They weren't there and, like a lot of people, he has lots of different facets and would not necessarily reveal all of them to his ex-girlfriend or wife. We still don't know whether or not Andrew wrote submissions in support of a lenient sentence for Epstein, though we might find that out.

 

[sndral]

Oh that'll help - a defense from an ex-gf he dated 30 years ago who's illegitimate child is his godchild.
The bit about the parrot in the ceiling @ BP, and when she first met Prince Charles was amusing, tho'.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I liked the comment from Charles when she got the curtsey wrong at Balmoral - shows that he really does have a caring side.


I have always felt that this is who Andrew should have married. He met Sarah on the rebound but if he had married Koo I suspect they would still be together - don't know why but I do think she has that something to have survived the marrying in issues with the BRF.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Yes, I agree. Koo has been discreet over the years. Even though she was in a "soft-porn" scene, it doesn't mean that she was as wild as Sarah was. She turned down a lot of money that she could have made telling about her time with Andrew. In this article, she doesn't really give away any "royal secrets."

 

[royal rob]

I'm I the only one who finds that strange.
She tells us all about their private life all those years ago, things that she should keep between the two of them. None of which has anything to do with what's happening in his life now
I find it very very strange and wonder why she did it ????



Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Oh that'll help - a defense from an ex-gf he dated 30 years ago who's illegitimate child is his godchild.

I thought it was telling for the good-natured character of this born prince of the blood royal being a godfather indeed for a child which you describe as "illegitimate".

I'm I the only one who finds that strange.
She tells us all about their private life all those years ago, things that she should keep between the two of them. None of which has anything to do with what's happening in his life now
I find it very very strange and wonder why she did it ????



Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Because she did not recognize her darling in all what has been written and said over him, because she wants to defend the godfather of her child, because the media has been stalking her to say something? Who knows?

In fact Ms Stark said very little but the Mail is milking it out like they have a scoop or something.

 

[royal rob]

Her darling ! It was 30 years ago ! I can't help thinking she has been asked to say it. But in saying that IMO I don't think it will change anything


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Osipi]

I basically saw the article as a long term friend going to bat and standing up for someone she's known for ages and telling the world her perception of what Andrew's character is like. No more. No less. If anything, when things go wrong in one's life, there's a certain comfort just in knowing your friends are in your corner.

It also tells me something else. If a man is able to keep and maintain a long standing friendship with two women he had intimate and close relationships with, it doesn't sound to me like a man that would "use" a woman for his own purposes.

 

[royal rob]

I basically saw the article as a long term friend going to bat and standing up for someone she's known for ages and telling the world her perception of what Andrew's character is like. No more. No less. If anything, when things go wrong in one's life, there's a certain comfort just in knowing your friends are in your corner.



It also tells me something else. If a man is able to keep and maintain a long standing friendship with two women he had intimate and close relationships with, it doesn't sound to me like a man that would "use" a woman for his own purposes.

So it worked on you then
But not me
A prince as a friend would always come in handy


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Roslyn]

I'm I the only one who finds that strange.
She tells us all about their private life all those years ago, things that she should keep between the two of them. None of which has anything to do with what's happening in his life now
I find it very very strange and wonder why she did it ????

I know! After all these years of keeping quiet about their relationship, she suddenly blurts out all this irrelevant stuff we don't need or want to know. Why?

 

[Zonk]

It makes perfect sense to me.

As she stated in the article [its the Daily Mail so grain of salt]...Andrew can't defend himself, so she is speaking up on his behalf.

It doesn't matter if they dated 30 years, or frankly if he is the godfather of her daughter. I can't even believe that we are still making note on whether or not a child is born within the confines of wedlock in 2014. are we still using the term illegitimate to shame the mother and/or child

The fact remains is that he can't speak up for himself, they have remained friendly and on good terms, and she is sharing with the general public what she knows about Andrew the man. Basically the Andrew the accused is not the Andrew she knows.This is no different when family and friends come out in support of others accused of a crime.

At the end of the day it will make no difference to the general public [or many here for that manner] who have already decided on Andrew's guilt.

 

[Queen Camilla]

IMO, the most important thing in the article is Virginia's diary is her recollections of events written 8 years later.

I think Koo's intent was to show that the media can jump to conclusions and destroy a person's name and reputation. She pointed out how they did this to her. She made the connection to Andrew being named in a legal suit with her legal troubles with her ex boyfriend.

I also like that the RF is very informal with girlfriends. Koo was greeted as a member of the family by Prince Charles.

Koo could have given more information about the RF. She was there since February 1981 and she is still friendly with Andrew. She can write her book.

 

[royal rob]

The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy

IMO, the most important thing in the article is Virginia's diary is her recollections of events written 8 years later.

I think Koo's intent was to show that the media can jump to conclusions and destroy a person's name and reputation. She pointed out how they did this to her. She made the connection to Andrew being named in a legal suit with her legal troubles with her ex boyfriend.

I also like that the RF is very informal with girlfriends. Koo was greeted as a member of the family by Prince Charles.

Koo could have given more information about the RF. She was there since February 1981 and she is still friendly with Andrew. She can write her book.

I don't know why we should believe someone's recollections that are 30 years old but not someone's that are 8 years old. Anyhow that's just my opinion


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[wyevale]

what she knows about Andrew the man

Indeed she KNOWS the man, unlike those here who have passed judgement [and found guilty] a man who has not even been charged of any crime in any court.

'Kangaroo court' anyone ????

 

[Osipi]

I don't know why we should believe someone's recollections that are 30 years old but not someone's that are 8 years old. Anyhow that's just my opinion

I think the difference is that Robert's recollections that are 8 years old are based on a certain time frame as she remembers them. Koo Stark's recollections of the romantic side of her and Andrew's relationship tend to be more believable as they have remained close friends over the decades and they're still in contact with each other.

One claims to have had sex with Andrew. One has remained a friend of Andrew's after a romantic involvement. Big difference in my book.

 

[royal rob]

A lot of people think they know someone and what they would or wouldn't do. But can often be very very wrong as that has been proven time and time again
I'm not saying if that's true about Andrew but it could well be


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

And while I'm thinking about this Koo stark piece what has prince Charles being nice to her when she hit heads and thinking she was going to a petrol station for dinner with Andrew got to do with Andrews good character ? Why talk about her life 30 years ago now ? ??


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Osipi]

And while I'm thinking about this Koo stark piece what has prince Charles being nice to her when she hit heads and thinking she was going to a petrol station for dinner with Andrew got to do with Andrews good character ? Why talk about her life 30 years ago now ? ??

I would imagine she has because, as a lot of us do, when allegations are presented about a friend that goes against the grain of a long standing friendship and that friend doesn't have the option to defend himself, the first instinct is to speak up and stand behind what one believes to be the truth in the character makeup of said friend.

I thought Koo's recollections of her time as Andrew's girlfriend and the anecdotes during that time period were a way of accentuating just how close the relationship was at the time with only giving her own personal incidents (and I admit, I found them quite amusing myself) as insight. There was nothing in the article that I think the BRF would be aghast at and along with showing support years down the road for Andrew, it probably also gave him a chuckle to remember those times. It had no elements of the "tell all" tabloid yellow journalistic innuendo or finger pointing and for that its one article that the Daily Mail has published that I can respect. It wasn't a self seeking ambition to me nor was it done for money or publicity or any other reason than she was standing up for someone she cared for and still cares for.

How many of us really can say that should something similar to us happened that friends from years ago could open up and stand up and do the same for us? I think if we can think of just one, we're blessed.

 

[Rudolph]

I'm not sure how much good an article like this does.. It just prolongs Andrews agony, keeps the sex slave allegations in the headlines and at the end of the day, I don't think Koo's opinion of Andrew is likely to sway public opinion one way or the other.

 

[Skippyboo]

To me it does poke some holes in Virginia Roberts story- like her diaries were written 8 yrs later and Andrew ordering drinks at the club and manhandling her. Andrew is well know for not drinking alcohol and I would think a British Prince would get noticed in a London club.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Oh dear! What is it with Andrews ex'es? Nothing they can say has any bearing on what he might or might not have done with respect to Roberts or Epstein. All he has been accused of by Roberts is having sex with him. How on earth can either Sarah or Koo know whether he did or not? They weren't there and, like a lot of people, he has lots of different facets and would not necessarily reveal all of them to his ex-girlfriend or wife. We still don't know whether or not Andrew wrote submissions in support of a lenient sentence for Epstein, though we might find that out.

Exactly, what does she know? She wasn't there. And why does she reveal a lot of stuff that has nothing to do with the case (meeting Charles etc)

 

[GracieGiraffe]

Oh dear! What is it with Andrews ex'es? Nothing they can say has any bearing on what he might or might not have done with respect to Roberts or Epstein. All he has been accused of by Roberts is having sex with him. How on earth can either Sarah or Koo know whether he did or not? They weren't there and, like a lot of people, he has lots of different facets and would not necessarily reveal all of them to his ex-girlfriend or wife. We still don't know whether or not Andrew wrote submissions in support of a lenient sentence for Epstein, though we might find that out.

She wrote it because the BRF is fighting in the court of public opinion - it's all about Andrew's image at this point and they are trying to rehabilitate it. The actual allegations will never be tried in a court of law - because Andrew refuses to bring a defamation suit.

Despite the old refrain "innocent until proven guilty," that's NOT the way it works in the court of public opinion.

And by public opinion, I don't mean posters here who are inclined to believe Roberts over Andrew- I mean the British public.

 

[ladongas]

Gosh, what a bunch of cynics!
I thought her memories and character defense of Andrew were rather sweet and charming. I can't believe a British Prince would be a clumsy galumphing dancer, particularly since he's a well-known non- drinker. And if he was seen behaving that way in Annabel's, the story would have been reported somewhere in the tabloids. I feel sorry for Miss Roberts, but I don't necessarily believe her.

 

[hernameispekka]

My take on this. I think she is doing it as a friend wanting to help. I don't see it cynically. But I don't think this will help in any way. Not do it worse, but keep it in the news which is the last thing he wants...

 

[AdmirerUS]

My take on this. I think she is doing it as a friend wanting to help. I don't see it cynically. But I don't think this will help in any way. Not do it worse, but keep it in the news which is the last thing he wants...

I rather agree. As I remember her she was a good egg, gorgeous, had a sense of humor, was a bit naive and celebrity struck. The press could not wait to eat her alive and as much as she knew it was an opportunity, they ate her alive. She certainly has aged beautifully! And still seems to be fairly well balanced, if a bit less naive and celebrity struck.

 

[sndral]

I liked the comment from Charles when she got the curtsey wrong at Balmoral - shows that he really does have a caring side.


I have always felt that this is who Andrew should have married. He met Sarah on the rebound but if he had married Koo I suspect they would still be together - don't know why but I do think she has that something to have survived the marrying in issues with the BRF.

Perhaps, although her subsequent marriage ended in divorce and her custody battle with her daughter's father became tabloid fodder. I wonder how the BRF would have dealt with her commitment to Buddhism, although perhaps she would not have followed that path if she and Andrew had married.
Her take that Andrew was a great BF 30 years ago and has remained a good friend doesn't really address the issues of his questionable friendships and financial dealings with shady characters, which to my mind are more troubling than the sensational Roberts claims. He has a position thanks to his birth, he undertakes certain activities for that same reason, is he using that position for his personal gain and in doing so or even in appearing to do so does he weaken the monarchy's position in the political climate of today?

 

[Curryong]

I agree that Koo probably spoke about Andrew to try and help an old friend. She may well have been pestered by tabs to say something.

They, especially the Daily Fail, would like this story to keep running and it has temporarily ground to a halt in the US. If it was going full blazes they wouldn't be interested in Koo Stark.

However, I also agree that it's not likely to help Andrew or the BRF, who just want this thing to die off quickly.