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

[Osipi]

He's been asked to give information about Epstein to help with this case but all he's done so far is to release statements denying all knowledge of what went on and saying he didn't know him very well. That is a complete lie so unless things change of course it makes him look guilty.

I get what you're saying Sophie25 but if I can take the liberty, I'd rephrase your statement to read "as far as the public is concerned, all he's done so far is to release statements denying all knowledge of what went on."

That's the kicker. Not everything about Andrew's involvement with Epstein or his cooperation with the investigation or what course of action his lawyers are telling him to follow are going to be blasted as "breaking news". We may never know of the extent he helps with an investigation as its kept confidential and of course, with Andrew's lawyers, there's the attorney/client confidential clause.

We only see what is made public and even then, it may be exaggerated, biased, untrue and plain hearsay or gossip or even a red herring here and there. One thing we know is true and that is the Andrew was friends with Epstein that continued after his "sweetheart" deal of a slap on the wrist in 2008.

Another thing to remember too that a sex trafficking ring of underage girls was not the have all and be all of Epstein's life. He was a successful financier as his "day" job. Much like Bill Cosby was a very well respected actor and even earned the moniker "America's Dad" until his "dark" side was revealed and disgusted us all.

 

[JessRulz]

Several accusatory posts, and responses to them, have been removed. Several posts containing links to articles solely on Epstein's activities with no link to Prince Andrew have also been removed, as per previous moderator notices.

Quoting myself because typing the same thing out each day is getting tiring. Please note the message in red.

 

[rob2008]

Boris has pushed Andrew off the front page.

 

[MARG]

Well, you’re seeing part of the reason why Andrew has been resting easy all these in the face of these allegations. Some folks are willing to give Andrew the benefit of the doubt purely because he’s the sone of Queen Elizabeth II and are willing to shape another narrative for him. Making the excuse that Andrew suddenly became dumb and allowed Jeffery Epstein to manipulate him over these crimes are insulting the intelligence of everyone with a brain.

And the current President of the US? There are photos of them partying and yet no question mark over him or President Clinton. Are they being given the benefit of the doubt and the belief that their friendships were purely financially based?

The staggering number of the great and the good listed in his contacts do not indicate that they all fell somewhere between the line of pervert to paedophile. It is selective viewing to forget that Epstein moved with ease in the social circles of the elite, the 2%, wangling and finagling in his entrepreneurial style.

Basically, Epstein was an incredibly charismatic man and people were naturally drawn to him. Then again, so was Hitler!

 

[Mirabel]

And the current President of the US? There are photos of them partying and yet no question mark over him or President Clinton. Are they being given the benefit of the doubt and the belief that their friendships were purely financially based?

Not the same...those photos are old, whereas the pictures of Andrew are quite recent.
That said, I don't think much will happen to Andrew.
People say this scandal is not going away, but I think it is, because it always does.
New events occur, and people get bored and move on.

(Who was it who said that today's headline will line a birdcage tomorrow?)

 

[Leopoldine]

There is the possibility of organizations (of which Prince Andrew is a patron of) refusing his visits.

Even groups of which Andrew visits on behalf of HM, their patron, are likely to refuse and ask for a more acceptable figure in public life.

 

[sophie25]

Not the same...those photos are old, whereas the pictures of Andrew are quite recent.
That said, I don't think much will happen to Andrew.
People say this scandal is not going away, but I think it is, because it always does.
New events occur, and people get bored and move on.

(Who was it who said that today's headline will line a birdcage tomorrow?)

Not only that, none of the girls concerned have came out and said they were abused by Clinton or Trump (yet) whereas Andrew has been accused directly. I do think though that other big names will come out once Gislaine Maxwell and others are questioned and there may be new damaging allegations against Andrew as well. I do agree though that eventually this story will go away and nothing will happen to him but his reputation won't ever fully recover.

 

[Dman]

Now Prince Andrew saying he can’t remember Virginia Roberts (now, Giuffre):

https://twitter.com/x/status/1166921129623195648

This is the angle he’s going for. Now he’s saying the picture of the two of them, with Maxwell in the background, is fake. He’s really going to make us think we’re all stupid. Like we’ve been sipping the Cooking Sherry. That’s a Trump move. Next he’ll say, “that wasn’t me at the door of Epstein’s residence in the video!”

 

[winifred]

Not only that, none of the girls concerned have came out and said they were abused by Clinton or Trump (yet) whereas Andrew has been accused directly.

Accused of what? Virginia said she was forced by Epstein to have sex with Andrew 3 times (he's denied ever having sex with her), but she has never accused Andrew of rape or said that he knew she was being forced to have sex.

Nobody has accused him of being involved in Epstein's sex trafficking activities.

One woman said he groped her breast but she has laid no charge against him.

And no new evidence has been put forward since the 2010/2011 reports.

Being appallingly stupid isn't a crime.

 

[Denville]

There are plenty of things that aren't crimes but which are wrong...

 

[Dman]

Giuffre’s lawyer speak out-

 

[Osipi]

Sometimes I really have to think that Bill stated it best in Hamlet. "The lady (Andrew) doth protests too much, methinks."

The more Andrew vehemently denies knowing Mrs. Guiffre or claims the photos are faked or anything that ha's come out and stated recently is just digging a deeper hole he'll have to try and climb out of.

Poor judgement and being stupid and feeling entitled aren't crimes and Andrew has *not* been accused of or being prosecuted for a crime but his character is really coming under heavy fire and he's trying to dodge the bullets with a flyswatter.

Keep digging, Andy.... you might get all the way to Portobello, Otago, New Zealand. (yes, I looked it up)

 

[Dman]

Sometimes I really have to think that Bill stated it best in Hamlet. "The lady (Andrew) doth protests too much, methinks."

The more Andrew vehemently denies knowing Mrs. Guiffre or claims the photos are faked or anything that ha's come out and stated recently is just digging a deeper hole he'll have to try and climb out of.

Poor judgement and being stupid and feeling entitled aren't crimes and Andrew has *not* been accused of or being prosecuted for a crime but his character is really coming under heavy fire and he's trying to dodge the bullets with a flyswatter.

Keep digging, Andy.... you might get all the way to Portobello, Otago, New Zealand. (yes, I looked it up)

Yep, he’s just digging a bigger hole for himself. Those who are advising him are just as stupid as he is. Since that picture was taken, Andrew has grown older and has gained weight, so of course his fingers look different from the photo. Giuffre also look different than she did in the photo. They’ve grown older. I mean, those behind those Buckingham Palaces gates really think we’re all just that dumb. That’s like Trump saying that wasn’t really him admitting to sexually assaulting women on the ‘Access Hollywood’ bus.

Royal commentator, Robert Jobson, looked like a fool defending Andrew’s new angle in a interview the other day. I guess he’s trying to maintain his nonexistent royal access.

Try again, Andrew.

 

[sophie25]

Yep, he’s just digging a bigger hole for himself. Those who are advising him are just as stupid as he is. Since that picture was taken, Andrew has grown older and has gained weight, so of course his fingers look different from the photo. Giuffre also look different than she did in the photo. They’ve grown older. I mean, those behind those Buckingham Palaces gates really think we’re all just that dumb. That’s like Trump saying that wasn’t really him admitting to sexually assaulting women on the ‘Access Hollywood’ bus.

Royal commentator, Robert Jobson, looked like a fool defending Andrew’s new angle in a interview the other day. I guess he’s trying to maintain his nonexistent royal access.

Try again, Andrew.

I seen the interview and it was totally cringeworthy. The interviewers didn't even challenge Jobson over the ridiculous things he was coming out with e.g. stating that Andrew only ever met Epstein twice in his life. To be fair though none of the royal commentators I have watched have been much better as they know what side their bread is buttered on career wise.

 

[victor1319]

Poor judgement and being stupid and feeling entitled aren't crimes...

Well, it depends: Has Andrew not worked for the government as some kind of trade representative?

If he were just some former "spare part" prince and not a former government representative, everything would be ok, but he was a man trusted with affairs for the greater good of the UK!

And this is not the first time, his morals are questioned: There was the "Kazakh Affair" too.

And all this combined does not make the United Kingdom look good, but like a "Banana Republic". Prince Andrew is a Prince of the UK: He enjoys some privileges, but they come with duties - not only the duty the behave well, but to represent the UK flawless and with a high standard of morals.

And his family is not a "normal" family, but the first family of the UK, partly with penal immunity, partly with constitutional jobs and so on...

 

[ACO]

Duncan Larcombe was on GMB saying Andrew was groomed and manipulated by Epstein. It is all disgusting how they bending over backwards to defend the stupidity of this prince. The fat finger defense on top of the “He has had sex with hundreds of women but all legal!”

You are not helping him.

 

[Dman]

I seen the interview and it was totally cringeworthy. The interviewers didn't even challenge Jobson over the ridiculous things he was coming out with e.g. stating that Andrew only ever met Epstein twice in his life. To be fair though none of the royal commentators I have watched have been much better as they know what side their bread is buttered on career wise.

I know. This is why Andrew sleeps easy at night. He’s not only protected by his royal status, lawyers and palace walls, but the royal rotas are also protecting him. They’re quick to throw the royal newcomer under the bus over petty stuff in a hot second, but they’re quick to sweep a REAL mind blowing scandal like this under the rug to help protect access to royal blood. Meanwhile, the victims remain struggling to get people to even believe what they’ve been through and they’re still struggling for legal justice. It’s all nuts.

 

[Denville]

Andrew was groomed?? That's a good one. And yes Andrew was a trade envoy for the UK but had to give up some years ago... He has not behaved well.. at all.

 

[Dman]

Andrew was groomed?? That's a good one. And yes Andrew was a trade envoy for the UK but had to give up some years ago... He has not behaved well.. at all.

The notion that (The Duke of York) was being “manipulated and groomed” is so ridiculous that’s its not even funny. That’s an excuse to protect him and lessen his accountability in the major matter. The next excuse will be that he have a twin and that’s who Giuffre was forced to have sex with three times.

 

[Heavs]

Last week his "friends" came out with quotes about "Randy Andy" sleeping with 100s of women but all of them totally consensual and overage. Now it's poor Andy again.

I think it's partly protecting their jobs and partly establishment "business as usual" stuff and partly fear - which I think is going on in this forum as well and which I completely understand, as for what it means if The Queen's son gets sent down as an at least an Ephebophile sex slave rapist. Hence the "yep loads of young women!" "All over the age of consent!" stuff.

It takes courage to accuse anyone with the law, in public. It takes a whole lot more to accuse someone like Prince Andrew for years so VG's story is at least worth thinking about that combined with everything else.

 

[Empress Merel]

Duncan Larcombe was on GMB saying Andrew was groomed and manipulated by Epstein. It is all disgusting how they bending over backwards to defend the stupidity of this prince. The fat finger defense on top of the “He has had sex with hundreds of women but all legal!”

You are not helping him.

It is truly the most bizarre media strategy I have seen in a long while. They're drawing more attention the photo! I guess stupiditity runs rampant through the palaces. If that is the narrative they want to convey to show that he is an innocent, it is a dire situation indeed. What a bunch of amateurs.

To quote the courageous Virginia: "He knows what he's done and he can attest to that. He knows exactly what he's done and I hope he comes clean about it."

 

[Denville]

The Palace are not good at PR.. I don't know exactly what Andrew got up to sexually but I do know that he needed to take Epsteins conviction seriously and dump him.

 

[Lilyflo]

It is truly the most bizarre media strategy I have seen in a long while. They're drawing more attention the photo! I guess stupiditity runs rampant through the palaces. If that is the narrative they want to convey to show that he is an innocent, it is a dire situation indeed. What a bunch of amateurs.

To quote the courageous Virginia: "He knows what he's done and he can attest to that. He knows exactly what he's done and I hope he comes clean about it."

I don't know all the details of that photo eg place & approx date?

You'd think if Andrew could prove he was elsewhere (easy when you have 24/7 bodyguards) he would?

 

[ACO]

This photo has been around for years, right? Why wasn’t he denying it then? Why is their second hand denials now? Also he realizes there are other pictures from that night showing both of them in those clothes? So ridiculous.

 

[Muhler]

I'm interested in the British legislation in this case.

I will not point my finger at Prince Andrew until (if) he is formally charged with anything, so let's go hypothetical.

What would happen to a higher ranking member of the BRF, if he is accused of having intercourse once or several times with a seventeen year old girl in a foreign country.

Assuming no money changed hands between the girl and the BRF member and there was no obvious "pimp" involved, then surely it isn't prostitution in the eyes of the law, in regards to the girl and the BRF member?

And is it even illegal to have intercourse with a seventeen year old girl according to British legislation?

Can a Briton be sentenced for something he did in a foreign country, that is not against British legislation, at a British court?

How are the chances a high ranking BRF member would extradited to face trial in a foreign country in such a case?

What is a typical sanction against a person who has intercourse with a seventeen year old girl, according to US legislation and court practice? Assuming of course that she wasn't physically raped.
And wouldn't it be easy to plead ignorance?
After all what is the physical difference between a seventeen year old girl and an eighteen year old girl?

 

[Frelinghighness]

The picture of him was in Maxwell's house in London. So, British crimes in Britain.
The laws are different for "age of consent" if the victim was trafficked.


In the US, the laws of consent are different in every state. In Florida, the age of consent is 18, however, girls 16 and 17 may consent as long as the male is not over the age of 23. Otherwise, it is statutory rape. In New York, consent is 17 for both sexes, but a close in age exemption for 16 year olds as long as the other is less than 4 years older. Below 16, rape.

BTW, the French authorities have opened up an inquiry with respect the model agency accused of supplying girls to Epstein

 

[Dman]

This photo has been around for years, right? Why wasn’t he denying it then? Why is their second hand denials now? Also he realizes there are other pictures from that night showing both of them in those clothes? So ridiculous.

It’s a desperate move. A Trump move. What you’re seeing isn’t what you’re really seeing. Your eyes are lying to you. I’m telling you, next they’ll come up with how the man you’re seeing at Epstein’s door in the video isn’t really Prince Andrew. They’ll say it’s doctored or it was Andrew’s lookalike.

 

[Elenath]

It’s a desperate move. A Trump move. What you’re seeing isn’t what you’re really seeing. Your eyes are lying to you. I’m telling you, next they’ll come up with how the man you’re seeing at Epstein’s door in the video isn’t really Prince Andrew. They’ll say it’s doctored or it was Andrew’s lookalike.

It’s all fake news. Everything seems to be these days so why not this. That or women all lie about these type of things. Just for attention or a massive amount of money. And these poor men are secretly innocent.

 

[Rudolph]

The Telegraph reports the FBI is examining the photo of Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts to verify its authenticity

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I guess what confuses me is that the Virginia Roberts/Prince Andrew photo has been out there for several years now. If HRH knew immediately that it was a fake or doctored photo, why no outrage until now?

***edit: Just noticed that ACO posed the same question above****