The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 2010-2023

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by titiromi

One would think Andrew had an armada of specialists working for the royal family to prepare him for the interview and that all the answers would have been the subject of considerable reflection beforehand especially if the queen and Prince Charles gave their go to the interview.

It is indeed puzzling. Supposedly the interview came after six months of negotiations between the BBC and the royal household. Andrew and his advisors had plenty of time to think it through, prepare, and rehearse.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by titiromi

One would think Andrew had an armada of specialists working for the royal family to prepare him for the interview and that all the answers would have been the subject of considerable reflection beforehand especially if the queen and Prince Charles gave their go to the interview.

He probably did have a wide array of people he could have gone to and prepared to face the interview. It wouldn't be surprising if, for the most part, that he was advised not to do the interview but once declaring he would go ahead with it (his final decision only), all kinds of advice and suggestions and assistance were offered but Andrew refused having the "I got this" attitude.

Another thing this kind of sprung into my head thinking along these lines is that Andrew most likely rarely, if ever, has written his own speeches for events and engagements he's attended. Many royal speeches are not written by the royals themselves and with Andrew and his responses from the interview, I don't think he's overly competent putting his thoughts into words.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau

Andrew is off the royal guest list for the reception of NATO leaders

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ind...296.html%3famp

Harry, Meghan, Sophie and William are not attending for various reasons. The irony of Trump coming considering his ties to Epstien. The BRF better brace itself for another car crash interview because Trump will most likely be asked about Andrew.

Well Hillary was out there bragging that she'd met Archie and Bill Clinton was just as tied to Epstein as Trump. Not that I have any love for Trump but it's going to be hard to avoid people who had contact with Epstein because they all seemed to. I can see how Trump can get out of being asked questions by the FBI because he's president but Bill Clinton isn't anymore. Even Bill Gates was hanging out with Epstein. And the daughter of the former prime minister of Australia.

[texankitcat]

Originally Posted by Gawin

If the Queen and Prince Charles approved the interview they both showed very poor judgment.

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.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

Well Hillary was out there bragging that she'd met Archie and Bill Clinton was just as tied to Epstein as Trump. Not that I have any love for Trump but it's going to be hard to avoid people who had contact with Epstein because they all seemed to. I can see how Trump can get out of being asked questions by the FBI because he's president but Bill Clinton isn't anymore. Even Bill Gates was hanging out with Epstein. And the daughter of the former prime minister of Australia.

This is really what gives credence to the statement made by Alan Dershowitz that "“In those days, if you didn’t know Trump and you didn’t know Epstein, you were a nobody,” as in the 20th century, a status symbol for a woman was to own and wear mink and the Joneses were to be kept up with. Seems Epstein and Trump were the "It" guys among movers and shakers. Little did most of them realize what lurked beneath all the glitter and gold.

[Betsypaige]

I haven't heard a thing about Charles approving the interview, and what I've heard of the Queen in that regard is that she wasn't fully aware of all the details/what the interview was going to consist of, etc. - most likely because Andrew didn't volunteer that info, or he mislead her.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by texankitcat

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.

No, it hasn't been confirmed, just stated in an article tommy100 referred to. I doubt we'll ever know the full details behind this disaster.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by Gawin

No, it hasn't been confirmed, just stated in an article tommy100 referred to. I doubt we'll ever know the full details behind this disaster.

The story has changed but the recent story is that everyone tried to talk Andrew out of the interview - even Sarah and Beatrice.

[O-H Anglophile]

I've read several places that the person who encouraged Andrew to do the interview was his just sacked private secretary Amanda Thirsk. His PR person, Jason Stein advised him not to do the interview and quit a month ago.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/sarah-...me-accelerates

[texankitcat]

Originally Posted by Gawin

Thank you for your kind response. Hopefully the Epstein investigation will continue and eventually his victims will have some closure. I definitely think Andrew should cooperate with the FBI, not only to shed light on Epstein but on Ghislaine Maxwell as well. IMO she's the key that needs to be found.

Oh I am quite sure of that! On the other hand I’m sure there are more than a few that would prefer she stays hidden.

[Leopoldine]

Originally Posted by titiromi

One would think Andrew had an armada of specialists working for the royal family to prepare him for the interview and that all the answers would have been the subject of considerable reflexion beforehand especially if the Queen and Prince Charles gave their go to the interview.

A simple research assistant, even a doofus like me, could have more helpful than Andrew's staff.

In August 2011, Edward Klein, a prominent NY media figure, wrote an article in Vanity Fair called "The Trouble With Andrew".

https://archive.vanityfair.com/artic...b-d2014fe20062


This was in the wake of the NY Post publishing the infamous Central Park photo.

A person who was not identified and who knows both men claimed to have had this exchange with Andrew:


“After Jeffrey was convicted, I phoned Andrew and told him, ‘You cannot have a relationship with Jeffrey. You can’t do these things.’ And he said, ‘Stop giving me a hard time. You’re such a puritan.’ From there, our conversation descended into a screaming match, and finally Andrew said, ‘Leave me alone. Jeffrey’s my friend. Being loyal to your friends is a virtue. And I’m going to be loyal to him."

I think Andrew knew exactly what was going on in Epstein's homes.

[Claire]

[QUOTE=Leopoldine;2270675]A“After Jeffrey was convicted, I phoned Andrew and told him, ‘You cannot have a relationship with Jeffrey. You can’t do these things.’ And he said, ‘Stop giving me a hard time. You’re such a puritan.’ From there, our conversation descended into a screaming match, and finally Andrew said, ‘Leave me alone. Jeffrey’s my friend. Being loyal to your friends is a virtue. And I’m going to be loyal to him."
[QUOTE]

I know that several of the members of the royal family have been told (read dictated to ) about whom they are allowed to be friends with - and who they need to cut ties with for appearance sake. This was especially true in the 1980 and 1990's. Andrew might simply have been acting out of rebelliousness. The way he ran his life was dictated to him when he was high enough in the line of succession to be considered important. Maybe this new freedom combined with arrogance was just too much for him.
I would like to note that I am in no way excusing his behavior here - but I do wonder if Andrew's loneness and isolation might also come into play here. He found a friend and was willing to look the other way for the sake of the friendship. Yes - if Sarah was receiving money it complicate the matter.

[princess carmen]

I don't think friendship had so much to do with it, Andrew said he didn't regret the connections he made through Epstein. I think money and connections were the key. If this is the kind of friend he wanted then that says a lot about him.

I have just read that the Senior military leaders have called for Andrew to be stripped of his honorary titles.

I have no idea it this is true it is the Mail.

[Curryong]

Andrew's Honorary service rankings in the three Armed Services.
From Wiki
appointments
Canada Canada
Canada Colonel-in-Chief of the Queen's York Rangers (1st American Regiment)[167]
Canada Colonel-in-Chief of the Royal Highland Fusiliers of Canada[167]
Canada Colonel-in-Chief of the Princess Louise Fusiliers[167]
Canada Colonel-in-Chief of the Canadian Airborne Regiment (disbanded)
New Zealand New Zealand
New Zealand Colonel-in-Chief of the Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment[167]
United Kingdom United Kingdom
1 February 1984: Personal Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty The Queen (AdC(P))[158]
United Kingdom Colonel of the Grenadier Guards[168]
United Kingdom Colonel-in-Chief of the 9th/12th Royal Lancers (Prince of Wales's)[167]
United Kingdom Colonel-in-Chief of the Royal Irish Regiment (27th (Inniskilling) 83rd and 87th and Ulster Defence Regiment)[167]
United Kingdom Colonel-in-Chief of the Small Arms School Corps[167]
United Kingdom Colonel-in-Chief of the Yorkshire Regiment (14th/15th, 19th and 33rd/76th Foot)[167]
United Kingdom Royal Colonel of the Royal Highland Fusiliers, 2nd Battalion Royal Regiment of Scotland[167]
United Kingdom Honorary Air Commodore, Royal Air Force Lossiemouth[167]
United Kingdom Commodore-in-Chief of the Fleet Air Arm[167]
United Kingdom Admiral of the Sea Cadet Corps[167]

I presume this is what the tabloids are talking about. I'm sure most of these regiments, battalions etc want nothing more to do with Andrew. The trouble is I think that, at least with the Hon Colonelcies in the British Army, they are given by the Queen. Whether she would be willing to strip her son of everything except the Commodore rank he reached in his service years in the Royal Navy is pretty doubtful, IMO.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by princess carmen

I don't think friendship had so much to do with it, Andrew said he didn't regret the connections he made through Epstein. I think money and connections were the key. If this is the kind of friend he wanted then that says a lot about him.

It was a friendship yes but it was a friendship based on what Ep could do for Andrew.. as Andrew said.. he didn't regret it.. because of the connextions he made.. he liked Epstein because Epstein provided him and Sarah with financial assistance and connexions to other rich people who could alos help him. That's what he wanted. If Epstein had been a nice interesting man but not rich and connected, would Andrew have bothered to stay "friends" with him?

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Curryong

I presume this is what the tabloids are talking about. I'm sure most of these regiments, battalions etc want nothing more to do with Andrew. The trouble is I think that, at least with the Hon Colonelcies in the British Army, they are given by the Queen. Whether she would be willing to strip her son of everything except the Commodore rank he reached in his service years in the Royal Navy is pretty doubtful, IMO.

What about his honorary ranks in the Armed Forces of Commonwealth realms like Canada and New Zealand ? Would it be up to the respective Commonwealth realm Governor General to strip him of those ranks (possibly on the advice of the realm government) ?

Originally Posted by Denville

It was a friendship yes but it was a friendship based on what Ep could do for Andrew.. as Andrew said.. he didn't regret it.. because of the connextions he made.. he liked Epstein because Epstein provided him and Sarah with financial assistance and connexions to other rich people who could alos help him. That's what he wanted. If Epstein had been a nice interesting man but not rich and connected, would Andrew have bothered to stay "friends" with him?

What you said is most likely true, but, in a way, it could paradoxically be used in Andrew's defense. In other words, he socialized with Epstein for the financial assistance and connections he could provide, and not for the sexual favors he could get from Epstein's girls, which is actually his version of their relationship, isn't it ?


PS: I apologize for using US spelling ("socialize", "favor", "defense", "connections"), but I understand both US and UK spelling are accepted in these forums.

[Curryong]

Yes I believe it would be up to the GGs of the respective realms to act to strip Andrew of honorary ranks in their armed services. I don't think any of them would act without consulting Buckingham Palace, however.

[Mirabel]

I doubt Charles approved the interview; he was in another country at the time.
Besides, he is well-aware of the perils of those interviews designed to clear the air.

I think he now understands Philip's strictures to never, never, never talk about family matters to the press.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

What you said is most likely true, but, in a way, it could paradoxically be used in Andrew's defense. In other words, he socialized with Epstein for the financial assistance and connections he could provide, and not for the sexual favors he could get from Epstein's girls, which is actually his version of their relationship, isn't it ?

And also used against him. If he saw anything he would clearly turn a blind eye because he liked the perks provided and would help protect it to maintain.

Andrew made it perfectly clear he valued those benefits over all when he said he had no regrets.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by ACO

And also used against him. If he saw anything he would clearly turn a blind eye because he liked the perks provided and would help protect it to maintain.

Andrew made it perfectly clear he valued those benefits over all when he said he had no regrets.

Since Andrew was doing the interview to counter the accusations of sexual misbehaviour he was hardly going to say taht he was happy with the friendship because it got him girls. He denied knowing Virginia Guiffree or having sex with her.. so even he was hardly stupid enough to admit that one fo the perks of a firendshp with Epstein was that Ep had girls around who were there to amuse his friends.
He probably appreciated both perks of the friendship, the money and contacts wit moneyed people.. and the girls who were there