The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 2010-2023

[Cris M]

I see some armchair judges are here pretending they know more than the American Justice and that they can judge the Duke of York without proof.

Too bad they are irrelevant.

[tommy100]

I don't think most people on here are saying these claims are true. I (and I'm sure many others) doubt Andrew did actually have sex with a minor but what alot of people (me included) are judging Andrew on is his continued friendship with Epstein after Epstein was arrested for sex related crimes and listed a sex offender. That is a proven fact so fair to judge Andrew on.

[Winnie]

Originally Posted by tommy100

I don't think most people on here are saying these claims are true. I (and I'm sure many others) doubt Andrew did actually have sex with a minor but what alot of people (me included) are judging Andrew on is his continued friendship with Epstein after Epstein was arrested for sex related crimes and listed a sex offender. That is a proven fact so fair to judge Andrew on.

I agree with your statement, but maybe Andrew felt he had to "stand" by Epstein since he was the one who got Fergie out of a bit of financial trouble, correct? I'm sure that was Andrew's position. Not really a smart one. Remember, if you lay down with dogs [which a sex offender certainly is] you will come up with flees. I personally can't believe he stooped low enough to have sex with underage, but I do think he is immoral enough to have a close friendship with a sex offender just because the man is so wealthy. I am sure if Epstein lost all his money, Andrew would not be around. JMO

[tommy100]

Absolutely - I think its all about the money and lifestyle. If Epstein had lots all his money when we was arrested I doubt Andrew would have continued meeting him.

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by tommy100

I don't think most people on here are saying these claims are true. I (and I'm sure many others) doubt Andrew did actually have sex with a minor but what alot of people (me included) are judging Andrew on is his continued friendship with Epstein after Epstein was arrested for sex related crimes and listed a sex offender. That is a proven fact so fair to judge Andrew on.

Exactly, this has nothing to do with 'armchair judgement'.

[Ana Von Cleves]

The British Royals Message Board: Re: An article from the Irish Independent

Mr. Guy Stair Sainty has posted another compelling essay over on the British Royals message board that I think everyone here would be interested in.

You know I am very condemning of those who have been actually convicted of this sort of thing. I think Mr Polanski needs to be in jail and was filled with disgust at those who signed that petition.

Perhaps PA doesn't believe he did it, but just copped a plea to make it all go away. Perhaps JE went to great lengths to hide what he was up to from some of his guests. Never the less, I agree with those who think PA was very foolish not to cut all ties. He has more to consider than himself and his friends.

Why ever would Andrew allow a smiling, posed photo of himself to be made with a young girl that he had touched inappropriately? That is one of the many reasons I don't believe the girl. I think it is all down to, she and the lawyers know that payouts were made, her days of being attractive to sugar daddies are over and she needs money. Everyone smells a payday. There's always the book deal if she can't squeeze Epstein. And I know that was all very catty of me.

[Ridderzaal]

"I never had seal relationships with that woman". We all know how true that statement was.
Of course Andrew will deny it, as will the palace.

[Ish]

Originally Posted by Ana Von Cleves

You know I am very condemning of those who have been actually convicted of this sort of thing. I think Mr Polanski needs to be in jail and was filled with disgust at those who signed that petition.

The thing with Roman Polanski (and I apologize for going off topic) is that he made a deal. He was charged with 6 things, including the unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. Initially he plead guilty, but the prosecutor made a deal with him in which if he plead guilty to the unlawful sex with a minor the other charges would be dismissed, he would undergo 90 days of psychiatric care, and would serve 42 days of jail time then be released on probation. However, it became clear that the judge was going to renege on the deal, giving him further jail time and possibly deporting him.

A good chunk of the people who defend him do so not because they support what he did or think he didn't do it, but because they disagree with how the judge decided to make an example of Polanski and was going to renege on the deal that had been made. Even Polanski's victim has spoken against the judge, saying that he used her and the case for his own personal gain.

[casualfan]

For the purposes of this forum, and royalty-watching in general, the credibility of the woman is largely irrelevant IMO. Because the legal process will include a lot more fact-finding, theoretically, that is the best forum for determining credibility and legitimacy.

But what IS relevant here is the visibility and impact of these allegations for the Andrew and the BRF.

So, just like it's been for countless public figures before him, the credibility of the alleged victim is secondary. People will focus much more of the fog of war, not the details of proof. Rightly or wrongly, many people will think "where there's smoke, there's fire."

[GracieGiraffe]

Originally Posted by tommy100

I don't think most people on here are saying these claims are true. I (and I'm sure many others) doubt Andrew did actually have sex with a minor but what alot of people (me included) are judging Andrew on is his continued friendship with Epstein after Epstein was arrested for sex related crimes and listed a sex offender. That is a proven fact so fair to judge Andrew on.

I agree with this - how does anyone in such a public position continue a relationship with a convicted sex offender? It really takes a special combination of abject stupidity and arrogance.

I have already come to my own premature conclusion that the girl's allegations are a "he said, she said" that may never come to anything, and therefore are just besides the point in my mind. I have said so - this would be the most damning thing of all, but not what will damn him in the end.

Now, if we do ever see any evidence that Andrew petitioned the U.S. government for lenient treatment of this guy, that's going to be pretty huge.

BTW, I'm not sure how the British media is reporting on Jane Doe's lawyers, but from what I have seen they are two fairly respected men (one a former federal judge). I've seen many a shady lawyer drum up allegations, but reading through some court documents in this case online, I don't tend to think that's so.

[USAPolitics]

Originally Posted by angela

PA is in a photo with this girl, if he didn't have sex with her then wouldn't he at least have asked his friend who she was and why she was there? The obvious answer to that is that he had seen enough in Epstein's world not to have to ask. As I said before, how could a father of two young daughters himself spend time with such a creep? It's going to be practically impossible to prove that PA sexually abused this girl as it's always a difficult crime to prove or disprove but I have zero respect for him now anyway.

More possible for me to believe that Prince Andrew was just a high profile person taking a photo with a "fan" so to speak more than anything else. High profile people do it all the time.

[sthreats]

Sounds very much like Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. "I did not have sexual relations with that woman". I just never understand why men don't just tell the truth. I was there there were many young cute women and I had contact with them-A massage, lap dance whatever. I did not ask how old the girls were -I knew they were young but I really didn't care. I was just there enjoying myself.

I do believe that Epstein use these young girls for his own sexual pleasure as well as to curry favor and possibly blackmail his high-powered friends.

I think it was foolish for Prince Andrew not to cut all ties with Epstein after he was convicted in 2008


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community

[Duke of Marmalade]

People in the position like Prince Andrew will always be judged by the company they keep. He should have cut all ties before but obviously he has been unable / unwilling to identify shady charaters / hangers for various reasons.
its not that only eppstein benefitted from andrew in some way but the other way around too.

[Dman]

I don't know what Andrew did or didn't do, because I wasn't there. I just hope none of it is true though. He should have cut ties with Jeffery sooner.

[katmen]

in dubio pro reo, but against Andrew is that he is prone to have stupid moments in his life
he should quit public royal life altogether to save his and Royal family face, I am sorry but being royal has also disadvantages, that you are unable doing some things incl. sex with risky people

[Elenath]

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade

People in the position like Prince Andrew will always be judged by the company they keep. He should have cut all ties before but obviously he has been unable / unwilling to identify shady charaters / hangers for various reasons.
its not that only eppstein benefitted from andrew in some way but the other way around too.

Not only people like Andrew. If I had had contacts with someone like Eppstein and people at my work found out, I’d probably lose my job. And I have an ordinary job at a local court house. I wouldn’t even have to be directly involved.

[Rudolph]

Prince Andrew could face investigation over Virginia Roberts sex abuse claims - Telegraph

The Duke of York could face a Scotland Yard investigation into Virginia Roberts’s claims if she makes a formal complaint against him, police sources have confirmed.

Despite the fact that all criminal prosecutions are brought in the name of the Queen, members of the Royal family are not immune from the law. The Princess Royal became the first senior member of the Royal family to receive a criminal record when she was fined £500 in 2002 after admitting having a dog dangerously out of control.

The Duke of York has categorically denied having any sort of relationship with Miss Roberts, sexual or otherwise, and Miss Roberts has never made a criminal complaint against him.

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said of Miss Robert’s claims that she was “sexually abused” by the Duke: “We have not received any allegations at this stage. If we did receive a complaint we would investigate it.”

[Blog Real]

I think Andrew is innocent. It is best to choose their friends. This is a very delicate story.

[Tarlita]

The Mirror newspaper is saying that Epstein took photos of his guests sexual exploits. There may be photos of Andrew and this girl together.
I have no idea how accurate the Mirror usually is or if they are a sordid make up the story as they go along type. Can they be believed?

[wyevale]

No, Tarlita.. the mirror is a rag, of the WORST kind, and would have no qualms about making stuff up...