The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 2010-2023

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Eden

Andrew is guilty by association. How can a father of two daughters not question why young girls are hired to travel the world to give 'massages' to friends and colleagues of Epstein? If a friend of mine had such an arrangement I would question it. Whether he slept with this or other young girls is irrelevant, he is guilty of complacency, guilty of shutting his mouth and agreeing to this type of 'massage'!!
As for the parents of these young girls, where were they! For crying out loud when grown men want to take my young daughters overseas to provide massages!! I would be concerned! At 17 years old my daughter is not qualified enough to be considered for such a job AND what would groups of men want with my 17 year old daughter?
Too much of look-the-other-way and pretend nothing is happening. Andrew should be ashamed, having sex with her or any other girl or not, he is a guilty man! How on earth can you not know?!


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

Andrew is very self-indulgent, imo.
The problem is that his actions reflect badly on his family.

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

Andrew is very self-indulgent, imo.
The problem is that his actions reflect badly on his family.

I don't know why this is seen to be the case. Why should Andrew's bad decisions taint his family?

[Eden]

Originally Posted by Roslyn

I don't know why this is seen to be the case. Why should Andrew's bad decisions taint his family?

They taint his family if they are aware of his actions and try to hide the truth.
Rather than make an effort to profess his innocence, there should be an acknowledgement of his poor judgement in being friends with Epstein.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by angela

I feel so sorry for the Queen, she is almost 90 years old and must be weary with the troubles that her favourite son and his ex-wife keep bringing to her door.

What evidence do you have that Andrew is the Queen's favo(u)rite son ?

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by Eden

They taint his family if they are aware of his actions and try to hide the truth.
Rather than make an effort to profess his innocence, there should be an acknowledgement of his poor judgement in being friends with Epstein.

I am assuming that his daughters had no idea what he was up to and they are the only ones I care about in this context. They should not be tainted because of their father's indiscretions.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Eden

They taint his family if they are aware of his actions and try to hide the truth.
Rather than make an effort to profess his innocence, there should be an acknowledgement of his poor judgement in being friends with Epstein.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

The Palace has not denied that Andrew was friends with Mr. Epstein. They've denied he had sex with Mrs. Roberts. So far, I haven't seen any evidence that Mrs Roberts is telling the truth. If she is indeed making it up, it is right for the Palace to issue a denial.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Roslyn

I am assuming that his daughters had no idea what he was up to and they are the only ones I care about in this context. They should not be tainted because of their father's indiscretions.

I don't see why they would be.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

What evidence do you have that Andrew is the Queen's favo(u)rite son ?

I've read the same thing, many times.
Andrew is often referred to as the Queen's favorite child in the press.
(Although I very much doubt that she has ever said so aloud!)

[royalistbert]

I feel sorry for The Queen. Yet again her children let her down.

[Molly2101]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

I've read the same thing, many times.
Andrew is often referred to as the Queen's favorite child in the press.
(Although I very much doubt that she has ever said so aloud!)

I have read that in the press - they state he is her favourite child as he was a "make up" child....obviously everything you read in the press is taken with a pinch of salt. It's like how they say Anne is Philip's favourite child and Edward is his favourite son, but of course there are and never will be any reliable sources a.k.a the Queen nor Philip will ever state who their favourite child is.

I have tried to avoid reading anything about Andrew and this situation as it's pretty outrageous if it is all true. I would feel the same if it was any man or woman who has been accused of having non-consensual intercourse with anyone underage. It's not any worse just because he is the Queen's son or "celebrity". It's terrible no matter what the background is.

Of course it could all be made up completely but we will never really know, and if it has been made up then it's a particularly cruel way to essentially destroy someone's life.

[royalistbert]

I doubt he is her favourite child anymore. The amount of stress he has put on her.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by royalistbert

I doubt he is her favourite child anymore. The amount of stress he has put on her.

It's interesting to see how people have forgotten his service to his country in the Falklands War and afterwards throughout his naval career.

[Molly2101]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

It's interesting to see how people have forgotten his service to his country in the Falklands War and afterwards throughout his naval career.

No one is discrediting his naval career or his service, but it's understandable that people find it hard to respect a man who is accused to forcing someone, whether she was under age or not, to sleep with them.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Molly2101

No one is discrediting his naval career or his service, but it's understandable that people find it hard to respect a man who is accused to forcing someone, whether she was under age or not, to sleep with them.

The key word in your post is "accused". What happened to "innocent until proven guilty" ?

As for his past association with Mr Epstein, the Duke has already apologized for it and recognized it was a mistake.

[GracieGiraffe]

I don't believe that this taints the family at all - the Queen, Charles, William, Harry (really, they are the main players here). Of course, for some out there, it will taint the entire family, but overall, no.

The only problem would be if BP issued any denials that later prove to be false. That would taint BP's credibility for a long time.

[KittyAtlanta]

Andrew, Andrew, Andrew...what's next? I'm feeling that this is a set-up. Don't know why, just a feeling.

Where was this underaged girl's father when she was hired as a "messenger?" They want money...and they might get a payoff as a nuisance claim.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe

I don't believe that this taints the family at all - the Queen, Charles, William, Harry (really, they are the main players here). Of course, for some out there, it will taint the entire family, but overall, no.

The only problem would be if BP issued any denials that later prove to be false. That would taint BP's credibility for a long time.

I agree. That's why they wouldn't issue such an emphatic denial if they weren't sure the accusations were false.

Of course, if Mrs Roberts' claims do turn out to be true, they can always blame it on Prince Andrew's lying to them, as Mr Clinton's aides did following the Lewinsky affair.

[tommy100]

I don't think the rest of the family have been tainted, this doesn't make me think less of the rest of the family.

Unless of course HM decides to give Andrew a new honour like she did last time.

But whilst its bad for the 'firm' to be in the papers for the wrong reasons its just a reflection on Andrew and his stupidity and not the rest of the family.

[soraya]

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe

I don't believe that this taints the family at all - the Queen, Charles, William, Harry (really, they are the main players here). Of course, for some out there, it will taint the entire family, but overall, no.

The only problem would be if BP issued any denials that later prove to be false. That would taint BP's credibility for a long time.

I don't know if the accusations are true or false but I think that Buckingham palace shouldn't have issued any denial.The only one who should do it is the person who is accused or his lawyer no one else.
No other partie should have intervened unless he/she was present when the offense supposedly happen.
IMO,denying an offense when one wasn't present is only perjury and not good for one's credibility.I think,whoever is counselling the Windsors is doing it amateurishly.
I agree with those who think that Andrew is guilty of not distancing himself from a sex-offender .But I am surprised that no advisors in BP have seen that this was bad for the royal family's reputation.

For the moment,the only ones I feel sorry for are Beatrice and Eugenie.

[Jacknch]

Announcements and clarifications from Buckingham Palace have always been good enough for me, far above and beyond speculation and rumours from the media at home and abroad.

Regarding Epstein, I always had this naive idea in my head somehow that friends and associates of members of the royal family were vetted by Government agencies and advice given if anything were found to be amiss or controversial. It seems, however, that Prince Andrew is or was able to make friends and become associates with anyone.

This is an unfortunate situation for Andrew on a number of levels. He appears to have been the scapegoat for the last few years in the media anyway, and they tend to leave Anne and the Wessex's well alone these days.