The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 2010-2023

[tommy100]

Which, to be honest, probably suites Anne and the Wessex's fine ;-)

[soapstar]

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe

Okay, so Andrew is NOT a criminal, no matter what else you might think of him - UNLESS transporting her across state lines, i.e., a minor out of Florida is problematic (which it is, I think, and as it was done more than twice, it's a RICO under Federal law), but it looks like from the deal struck by Epstein, any "co-conspirator" is immune from suit in the U.S. (Taking her allegations as true, of course, and I'm not sure they are, or aren't)

I think 2015 will be a tough year for the BRF.

But how old were the girls that Andrew interacted with when he visited Epstein's Flordia mansion? I know that the palace denied the claims from from this particular witness, but I wonder about the other women.

What blows my mind is that after Epstein was released from prison, Andrew asked him to help with Fergie's debt. I just really don't understand what Andrew was thinking.

[Osipi]

It very well could have been that there were underage girls there under Epstein's employ that made themselves available (at the request of their boss) to service his guests. Perhaps there was booze flowing and recreational drugs to be had. Just because it was available, it doesn't necessarily mean that a guest is obliged to partake of what's offered. Andrew is pretty well known to not be a drinker so perhaps he knew there were drinks but the next day would be hard pressed to tell you what was being offered as it was something he preferred to pass on. Perhaps he passed on the girls and didn't give a thought to who they were and how old they were.

The sad thing is that no matter what Andrew did or didn't do, its been splashed all over the media and there will be precious few people that will bother to follow the story and read the small print. Right now what he needs most is his family's support and I do think that is exactly what he'll get.

One more thing. Do we know if Andrew has continued to socialize with Epstein since (I think) 2010 when this controversy first started? I don't recall reading anything within the past couple years concerning Epstein.

[soapstar]

He supposedly broke off contact with Epstein in early 2011.

The Duke of York has finally admitted that meeting the disgraced billionaire recently was ‘unwise’ and has ruled out further visits to the Florida mansion where Epstein sexually exploited underage girls.

Prince Andrew vows to end friendship with billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein | Daily Mail Online

Although according to a Vanity Fair article that was published in late 2011, it seems that he may have still had contact with Epstein.

A Buckingham Palace spokesman elaborated on this analysis of the prince’s personality. “The same kind of loyalty manifested itself last December, when the duke visited Epstein at his home in New York,” he told me. “Epstein was a friend of the duke’s for the best part of 20 years. It was the first time in four years that he’d seen Epstein. He now recognizes that the meeting in December was unwise.” A royal source added, “Don’t expect to see a photo of the two of them together.”

“Does that mean that Andrew has broken off all contact with Epstein?,” I asked.

“Hereinafter,” the source said, choosing his words with care, “we won’t see a photo.”

That seemed to leave open the possibility that Andrew intended to carry on his friendship with Epstein, but out of public view.

http://www.vanityfair.com/society/fe...-andrew-201108

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by soapstar

He supposedly broke off contact with Epstein in 2011.

With that in mind, I'm going to give Andrew the benefit of the doubt as to any kind of wrongdoings and that he's done the best that he could have possibly done which is sever all contact with the sleezebag no matter how brilliant the sleezebag is at financial matters.

It seems to be the going things these days to dredge up misdeeds from a time long, long ago for money and a few days of fame. In this respect I feel for Cosby too.

[VictoriaB]

Originally Posted by soraya

IMO,denying an offense when one wasn't present is only perjury and not good for one's credibility.

Perjury is making a false statement when on oath. Press releases are not given on oath and therefore not perjury no matter how inaccurate. If Andrew were to stand in the witness box and make a deliberately false statement, that would be perjury.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

[soapstar]

Originally Posted by Osipi

With that in mind, I'm going to give Andrew the benefit of the doubt as to any kind of wrongdoings and that he's done the best that he could have possibly done which is sever all contact with the sleezebag no matter how brilliant the sleezebag is at financial matters.

It seems to be the going things these days to dredge up misdeeds from a time long, long ago for money and a few days of fame. In this respect I feel for Cosby too.

Personally I can't give him too much credit. He didn't sever ties with Epstein until after being pressured. He was still friends after Epstein was convicted and even visited New York after Epstein was released from prison. Not to mention he got money for Fergie's debts.

It's quite possible that Andrew had no idea that the women he was getting massages from might be underage, but I do know that he stayed friends with this man after the fact. His continued friendship with Epstein has made me see Andrew in a whole new light.

[VictoriaB]

Originally Posted by Osipi

With that in mind, I'm going to give Andrew the benefit of the doubt as to any kind of wrongdoings and that he's done the best that he could have possibly done which is sever all contact with the sleezebag no matter how brilliant the sleezebag is at financial matters.



It seems to be the going things these days to dredge up misdeeds from a time long, long ago for money and a few days of fame. In this respect I feel for Cosby too.

Yes he did sever contact but Andrew still met Epstein after he was convicted which was not wise in his position.

As for historical cases of abuse, if a crime was committed then I believe the perpetrators should be punished. It's up to the sentencing judge to take into consideration any mitigating factors.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by soapstar

But how old were the girls that Andrew interacted with when he visited Epstein's Flordia mansion? I know that the palace denied the claims from from this particular witness, but I wonder about the other women.

What blows my mind is that after Epstein was released from prison, Andrew asked him to help with Fergie's debt. I just really don't understand what Andrew was thinking.

The fact that Prince Andrew did admit to having had "massages" in the past while visiting Epstein's properties is more damaging IMHO than Mrs Roberts' allegations per se, which the Prince denies. I say so because, in context, we now know that those so-called "massages", at least in other occasions, involved underage women and some kind of sexual contact. It is difficult to imagine that Andrew's sessions would not follow the same pattern.

Having said that, no witnesses, except for Mrs Roberts, have come out with allegations specifically mentioning Prince Andrew and Mrs Roberts' claims, if I understand it correctly, do not seem to be related to the "massages" properly, but rather to separate incidents

[soraya]

Originally Posted by VictoriaB

Perjury is making a false statement when on oath. Press releases are not given on oath and therefore not perjury no matter how inaccurate. If Andrew were to stand in the witness box and make a deliberately false statement, that would be perjury.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

Sorry English isn't my first language
I find no other term ,may be "false testimony" but without the judicial connotation or "lies".

At the end of the day,BP declaration makes me speechless.Whoever has written it should be fired

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by soraya

Sorry English isn't my first language
I find no other term ,may be "false testimony" but without the judicial connotation or "lies".

At the end of the day,BP declaration makes me speechless.Whoever has written it should be fired

"Perjury" is actually a Latin word, like French "parjure" or Spanish"perjurio" for example. I believe the German equivalent would be "Meineid"("meineed" in Dutch), but I'm not really sure.

[Dman]

COMMENT: Prince Andrew and his past controversies are still challenging the royal family-
COMMENT: Prince Andrew and his controversies still plaguing the royal family | Royal | News | Daily Express

[Ceallach]

Palace deines she was introduced to the Queen.

'If Prince Andrew had sex with my daughter he should be prosecuted', says Virginia Roberts' father | Daily Mail Online

[Rudolph]

Prince Andrew's ex-wife Sarah Ferguson breaks silence on under-age sex allegations: 'He's the greatest man there is' - Mirror Online

[Princess of Durham]

Originally Posted by 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.

EXACTLY! IMO this is all about $$$ and to h*ll with the damage done to anyone else in the process. I think they have made a grave mistake by taking on Mr. Dershowitz. They are just throwing out accusations and waiting to see who will cave in first and hand over a bankroll.

[Dman]

But why randomly pick on Alan Dershowitz? They know he's a very serious, prominent and accomplished lawyer, who will fight back with everything he's got and not cave into pressure and give up some mulla just to settle things.

I don't know if any of these allegations are true, but if it is, I'm not sure these "Jane Doe's" will get any justice.

[ladongas]

...Andrew very foolishly allowed himself to be entertained in near proximity to a very louche and vulgar situation, probably more than once. At the very least... He couldn't have thought that what he was being exposed to was a becoming situation for the Queen's son. Unless there are photographs, we will never know for sure whether he was intimate with underaged girls. But I see little difference between witnessing an orgy and participating in it.

Too bad he and Sarah couldn't have been encouraged to stay married or to remarry in these past decades. I feel very sorry for his daughters, his ex-wife, and his birth family. Innocent or guilty, this is a horrible situation for all of them...

[ladongas]

And as to whether this girl's parents were attentive enough to her well-being... Even if they were terrible, careless parents, it doesn't mean that she should have been raped with impunity. Let's blame the rapist(s), not the victim's parents.

[tommy100]

I think its interesting that in 2011 he said that he would no longer visit Epstein's Florida mansion (no mention of Epstein's many other homes including that in New York) and that from now on (in 2011) there would be no more photos of them together- that doesn't exactly sound like' I'll never meet the man again' to me it sounds like - 'I'll never allow myself to be caught seeing Epstein again'.
Trust Sarah to come out with the most ridiculous over the top statement ever- "the best in the world" Really? She knows what side her bread is buttered.

[Princess of Durham]

In NO WAY am I blaming the victim, but AM questioning how all these parents of young women allowed their daughters to go off on these vacations/sojourns ... even IF nothing had happened, don't you think it's strange that parents would allow this? What I AM saying is whether it is questionable that the parents are in some way a party to all of this.