The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 2010-2023

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

Standard Sunday papers, let’s re-hash something we already knew so it looks like new news and get everyone outraged when in fact it’s not.

Before anyone jumps on me, I’m not denying that Andrew being associated with Epstein was anything other than wrong. But ASFAIK being stupid isn’t a crime.

stupid? I'd say very wrong. He knew that Epstein was grooming and procuring girls and he continued to associate with him. Condoning his activities and approaching him, I gather for money to Help Fergie...

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by Denville

stupid? I'd say very wrong. He knew that Epstein was grooming and procuring girls and he continued to associate with him. Condoning his activities and approaching him, I gather for money to Help Fergie...

Other than the photograph of Andrew and Epstein which appeared to be taken outside, what other evidence is there that Andrew continued to meet him after the accusations first came to light.

[ACO]

How about the video of him in his home released yesterday? He was convicted and served jailed years prior. The odd excuses for Andrew’s continued friendship with this pedophile is bizarre. There are serious questions to how this man continued a relationship with him knowing his disgusting past.

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by ACO

How about the video of him in his home released yesterday? He was convicted and served jailed years prior. The odd excuses for Andrew’s continued friendship with this pedophile is bizarre. There are serious questions to how this man continued a relationship with him knowing his disgusting past.

Is there clear evidence of when this was filmed.

[carlota]

this all happened before the 'me too' movement which makes me suspect many people thought epstein (with his connections, his money, his reputation) would never be condenmed. after me too, there was a change in the situation with respect to sexual abuse in the high spheres of society and many 'reputable' people went down as a result. it was highly unthinkable in the times when andrew and epstein had a friendship/relation.

i wonder what will happen with all this. will andrew get convicted in a way or another? will he have to testify?

[HighGoalHighDreams]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

Other than the photograph of Andrew and Epstein which appeared to be taken outside, what other evidence is there that Andrew continued to meet him after the accusations first came to light.

What evidence, other than a photograph of two people together, are you hoping to see that two people were together?

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by HighGoalHighDreams

What evidence, other than a photograph of two people together, are you hoping to see that two people were together?

I should have obviously made myself clearer. I was referring to the date. Is there clear evidence that they continued to meet after the first case came to light

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

Is there clear evidence of when this was filmed.

The video is apparently from 2010. Seems to be verified. No one disputing it. That would make it two years after he was conflicted the first time.

[Lilyflo]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

I should have obviously made myself clearer. I was referring to the date. Is there clear evidence that they continued to meet after the first case came to light

Yes, Epstein was convicted of sex offences in 2008 & Andrew was photographed with Epstein in New York in December 2010. Buckingham Palace has since issued a statement saying that Prince Andrew hadn't visited Epstein's home or met up with him since December 2010. So the story that Andrew stayed at Epstein's house in December 2010 holds up.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

Other than the photograph of Andrew and Epstein which appeared to be taken outside, what other evidence is there that Andrew continued to meet him after the accusations first came to light.

How many photos do you need?

[tommy100]

In reality the video shows nothing new, we knew Andrew visited Epstein in Dec 2010 and this video just shows us that on tape rather than just the picture we saw of them walking in the park. The only new thing that I've got from this is confirmation that Andrew stayed at Epstein's house rather than just visiting.

The video looks bad but doesn't show anything new but personally I could never imagine being friends with, never mind staying at the home of, a convicted sex offender (the really bad thing is that this was after Epstein had been in prison for trying to procure under 18s for prostitution). Plus, of course the DM wants to make the point that Andrew looked a bit sheepish closing the door and was saying bye to a youngish looking lady, that leaves plenty for its readers to make their own speculations about.

The video makes the point that Andrew was very close to Epstein, closer perhaps that we thought at first, closer than just attending the same parties and being social acquaintances. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are more videos, pictures or evidence of Andrew's links with Epstein that the media will slowly drip feed out. No wonder Andrew's hiding in Spain.

[HighGoalHighDreams]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

I should have obviously made myself clearer. I was referring to the date. Is there clear evidence that they continued to meet after the first case came to light

Thank you for clarifying, that makes sense. Yes, Buckingham Palace confirmed that the photo in question was taken after the first case in question while apologizing for Andrew's poor judgement in being with Epstein and claiming that the photograph was taken during the one time they met after the first case claim to light. I am having trouble locating the statement now for your reference because of course, with all of the new information, my search results are yielding hundreds of stories from the past week rather than stories from several years ago; but even a thorough search of this thread, or some deeper internet searches, will provide that original story and statement if it is of particular interest to you.

Now, whether one chooses to believe that the one time they happened to meet during that time frame just happened to be photographed is up to one's own judgement.

[Rudolph]

The Duke of York last night reacted for the first time to the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal.

Speaking after new footage emerged of the 59-year-old royal staying in the disgraced financier’s flat in 2010, the Duke said he was “appalled” by recent reports.

In a statement released to The Daily Telegraph, a Buckingham Palace spokesman said: “The Duke of York has been appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged crimes. His Royal Highness deplores the exploitation of any human being and the suggestion he would condone, participate in or encourage any such behaviour is abhorrent.”

Read more: Duke of York "appalled" by Epstein sex allegations

[ACO]

He was so "appalled" he was hanging out with him 2 years after he was convicted for child prostitution and was a known sex offender? Whatever you say Duke.

[Troy Thompson]

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau

An opinion piece in DM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...ered-them.html

I have yet to see one that gives Andrew a full throated defense. The bad part is it can spill over to the BRF as a whole. If another poll comes out asking about Andrew and the BRF regarding the Epstein case will the institution be seen favorably overall? Should the House of Windsor worry that if found guilty in the court of public opinion there would be calls to end it all after the current queen's reign? For what I've seen in the history the royal family will do what needs to be done to protect the house. The Duke and Duchess of Windsor comes to mind. This horror is not on the same level as the Abdication Crisis but it is significant enough to cause long term damage if not dealt with properly.

The House of Windsor probably should worry. It's not rational to blame Andrew's association with Epstein and implication in accusations on monarchy (after all, Donald Trump (Jane Doe v. Epstein and Trump), Bill Richardson (Virginia Roberts Giuffre v. Ghislaine Maxwell), an unnamed foreign president (Virginia Roberts Giuffre v. Ghislaine Maxwell), unnamed foreign presidents in the plural (Jane Does v. United States), and George Mitchell have been accused of sexually assaulting minors who were provided to them by Epstein, and Bill Clinton was uncomfortably close to Epstein too), but people are rarely rational about these sorts of things. At any rate, if there is even the appearance that Buckingham Palace is protecting Andrew from the accusation that he assaulted Virginia Roberts Giuffre, that could be the beginning of the end of the British Monarchy.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Read more: Duke of York "appalled" by Epstein sex allegations

I was born in the day, but not yesterday. Try again, Andrew!

[Madame Verseau]

Someone must have told Andrew to say something because the stories are coming back to back. But really this statement did nothing to assuage concerns. I think they pushed Andrew because the Sun had a story about the FBI raid of Epstein's New Mexico ranch; in it there was a statement in court documents that Andrew was at that ranch. Andrew needs to volunteer to give testimony to the feds just to stop the PR bleeding.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau

Someone must have told Andrew to say something because the stories are coming back to back. But really this statement did nothing to assuage concerns. I think they pushed Andrew because the Sun had a story about the FBI raid of Epstein's New Mexico ranch; in it there was a statement in court documents that Andrew was at that ranch. Andrew needs to volunteer to give testimony to the feds just to stop the PR bleeding.

Right now, I imagine that Andrew has his own legal eagles advising him on just what actions to take or not take. These lawyers are probably some of the best that can be had and they're *not* going to be talking to the press or to the public and maintain client confidentiality to the nth degree.

With this in mind, I don't think Andrew is just shrugging all this off and may be very, very worried about what might come to light (if there is something to be worried about in the first place). If there's one thing that can torture a person no matter where he goes, its his own conscience.

We'll see what develops.

[tommy100]

Originally Posted by ACO

He was so "appalled" he was hanging out with him 2 years after he was convicted for child prostitution and was a known sex offender? Whatever you say Duke.

Yes, the words seem very hallow as we all know he has been forced into saying something because he got caught out rather than because he genuinely is appalled. If he was so appalled he wouldn't have carried on seeing Epstein, never mind stay at his house, after his first conviction.

Without knowing the exact details of everyones interactions with Epstein I'm pretty willing to give anyone pre his 1st conviction a pass and assume they didn't know what he did in private. But IMO anyone who continued to socialise with him after that first conviction has shown poor judgement and has no excuse.

[Madame Verseau]

Another opinion piece in DM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...y-Epstein.html

DM also has another story of Andrew and Epstein hanging out at Balmoral- while the queen was in residence. Throw in Epstein's invitation to the joint milestone birthdays of Andrew, Margaret, Anne and William and the BRF is being tainted by this mess.