Crown Princess Mette-Marit's connection with Jeffrey Epstein

[fortimo]

I think she should stop manipulating her family. It's not by chance that Haakon mentioned Marius in the first place. And it's not by chance that Ingrid-Alexandra's private comment was made public. It's terrible to see everyone dancing to her tune. Even the whole royal house...

 

[Erin9]

You know- there’s a part of me that wonders what the actual point of releasing all the Epstein files is. I thought it was to prove (or not) that no one is sitting on evidence of behavior that should be prosecuted. Maybe I’m mistaken.

So far- all I’m getting out of this are people’s flaws by either: continuing to associate with Epstein after his first conviction or revealing other character flaws that really don’t have much to do with him. (Or in some cases do depending on who we’re talking about.) Be it- MM’s opinion on the Lux wedding or Sarah talking (crudely) about Eugenie’s weekend plans. I kind of find this uncomfortable. How is this really everyone’s business?

Yes- a lot of people are coming out looking bad. No argument. But why does all this personal correspondence “need” to be public? To shame them? I wonder.

On another note- did Epstein do anything but email people, traffic people and attend social events? He sure did seem to email excessively. Maybe there was blackmail material there.

 

[suztav]

I know that Haakon and MM have been very close friends with Frederick and Mary. I wonder if the dynamics of that friendship will change. Mary has a stellar and well-earned reputation.

 

[Moran]

You know- there’s a part of me that wonders what the actual point of releasing all the Epstein files is. I thought it was to prove (or not) that no one is sitting on evidence of behavior that should be prosecuted. Maybe I’m mistaken.

So far- all I’m getting out of this are people’s flaws by either: continuing to associate with Epstein after his first conviction or revealing other character flaws that really don’t have much to do with him. (Or in some cases do depending on who we’re talking about.) Be it- MM’s opinion on the Lux wedding or Sarah talking (crudely) about Eugenie’s weekend plans. I kind of find this uncomfortable. How is this really everyone’s business?

Yes- a lot of people are coming out looking bad. No argument. But why does all this personal correspondence “need” to be public? To shame them? I wonder.

On another note- did Epstein do anything but email people, traffic people and attend social events? He sure did seem to email excessively. Maybe there was blackmail material there.

I suspect that behind some of those contacts - not all but very few - there are codes and secrets (behind the payments) that are privy to a selected few. WHAT was that money used for? I mean, we see the contacts themselves but I suspect that some of the people involved don't want the actual dealings to be revealed. More blackmail material, I suppose.

I didn't know that Gislaine Maxwell was the daughter of the man called "the Tsar of Bulgaria" - Robert Maxwell, someone our lifelong dictator Todor Zhivkov, called with the kind-of-endearing Tato - close to Daddy in Bulgarian - had a good cooperation while we were taught that the evil West spends all its time trying to do us dirty. Todor Zhivkov and some of those who kept or strengthened their power after the fall of Communism in 1989.

The sex trafficking is just the tip of the iceberg. And I think it was always brought up as THE thing on purpose. I mean, Epstein thought it was time for the Russian ruble to replace the dollar as the world currency...

 

[hereditarytitles]

You know- there’s a part of me that wonders what the actual point of releasing all the Epstein files is. I thought it was to prove (or not) that no one is sitting on evidence of behavior that should be prosecuted. Maybe I’m mistaken.

So far- all I’m getting out of this are people’s flaws by either: continuing to associate with Epstein after his first conviction or revealing other character flaws that really don’t have much to do with him. (Or in some cases do depending on who we’re talking about.) Be it- MM’s opinion on the Lux wedding or Sarah talking (crudely) about Eugenie’s weekend plans. I kind of find this uncomfortable. How is this really everyone’s business?

Yes- a lot of people are coming out looking bad. No argument. But why does all this personal correspondence “need” to be public? To shame them? I wonder.

On another note- did Epstein do anything but email people, traffic people and attend social events? He sure did seem to email excessively. Maybe there was blackmail material there.

That's a good and valid question. I think it has to do with public interest. I found this article which may explain the matter.

"One of the hardest tasks of any government in a democracy is balancing the right to know against the need to know. Just because the public wants to know something doesn’t necessarily mean that they should. But without this access to information, how can voters make informed choices and the powerful be held to account? This debate is now central to the release and redaction of the Epstein files."
For the past decade or so the Epstein files have been used by Democrats and Republicans as a political stick with which to beat each other. In the meantime, speculation has run rife online with a global guessing game of what these files contain and who is or isn’t named in them.

Epstein files: who decides what information is released to the public?

The US government has to balance the need to know with the right to privacy. It’s a delicate balancing act.

theconversation.com

 

[taogg]

I know that Haakon and MM have been very close friends with Frederick and Mary. I wonder if the dynamics of that friendship will change. Mary has a stellar and well-earned reputation.

We don’t really know what went on behind closed doors, but if future official engagements are unavoidable (assuming MM still shows up at joint diplomatic events) I guess we won’t see them in those intimate, friendly moments. Like Frederick and Mary’s first visit as King and Queen to Sweden, where Victoria was openly affectionate with them—don’t think we’ll get that here.

 

[Viv]

​

​

But then the United States attorney’s office in Miami became involved. Last summer, Mr. Epstein got an ultimatum: plead guilty to a charge that would require him to register as a sex offender, or the government would charge him with sexual tourism, according to people who were briefed on the discussions.​

Financier Starts Sentence in Prostitution Case - The New York Times

archived 7 Apr 2018 03:22:27 UTC

archive.ph

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/business/01epstein.html

Notice how this article paints a very different picture than the Miami Herald report from 10 years later.

Thanks, Tatiana Maria! The nytimes article is behind a paywall, but I think I get the picture: If you googled JE in 2011, you would be informed about his conviction. It was there for all to see! MMs first mistake was that she googled him at a later stage. But then again: many people chose to be in JEs company and to accept his services long time after the conviction was made public. Who knows, maybe Google is not their friend?? Or maybe the company and services of a “charming” and generous billionaire are just so tempting to the effect that your judgement of character goes down the drain!

 

[Moran]

Thanks, Tatiana Maria! The nytimes article is behind a paywall, but I think I get the picture: If you googled JE in 2011, you would be informed about his conviction. It was there for all to see! MMs first mistake was that she googled him at a later stage. But then again: many people chose to be in JEs company and to accept his services long time after the conviction was made public. Who knows, maybe Google is not their friend?? Or maybe the company and services of a “charming” and generous billionaire are just so tempting to the effect that your judgement of character goes down the drain!

It's easy to think there wasn't anything wrong when everyone else was doing it! The thing with MM, though, is that it remains to be seen what she could gain from Epstein, if she was to overlook her better judgment and resort to "herd thinking", so to say. (I just can't remember what the English phrase it, TBH). She wasn't lacking for money and she was the Crown Princess of Norway. Far above him in every respect. She didn't need him - he needed her.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

What a crack of BS. - "This does not represent the person I want to be". Well, apparently it represents the person you really are.

I agree with you, JR76. I would feel more sympathy for MM if she would simply say something along the lines that..."I was living through a difficult period of great emotional and spiritual turbulence 15 years ago. I made choices in those long ago years that I would not make today. I feel the deepest anguish and regret and shame for the disappointment I have brought to my family, friends, and the people of Norway.

I will work to regain your trust if I am permitted to.

To the victims of Mr. Epstein and to the victims of trafficking worldwide, I am so deeply sorry."

For MM to simply apologize and claim ignorance at the depth of her friends depravity insults the intelligence of so many.

 

[Kristen]

As has been said, Epstein was a very popular and charismatic figure for years, and there are a lot of people who had some kind of contact with him. At this point we will probably never know for certain everyone who knew the truth about him, but people who continued contact after 2008, and especially those who seemed to have close, personal contact over the years--well, I'm suspicious of those people. Maybe unfairly, but I am.

I can only say that I am thoroughly disgusted with MM and Haakon. Poor judgment seems to run rampant through this family. I hope Ingrid has much better discernment.

 

[llj]

Thank you! Now, my question is whether the 2005+ investigation and 2008 sentence was made public with JEs name and all? Or was it anonymized? The timeline says that he was granted “ immunity”, whatever that entails, he was a billionaire after all! When did the US media first get wind of this?

I was aware of Epstein from his 2008 case. I'd consider myself a more than average informed American and I read/listen to the news daily.

 

[Somebody]

It was something Epstein wrote himself that made MM google him. In the email that she responds to he refers to an island, so it seems to be about his private island where lots of underaged women provided sexual services to his guests.

See this post by TM earlier this week:

Full context of the "Googled u" exchange between Jeffrey Epstein and Crown Princess Mette-Marit, October 23-24, 2011 (though what either of them is talking about remains a mystery to me):

Age Verification | United States Department of Justice

www.justice.gov

Jeffrey Epstein:

"the translation of the possiblity of an island , is awful. I spent two hours. can't do more. . I'll point outmany examples when we next meet."​

H.K.H. Kronprinsessen:

"Ha ha god you work fast!

I love it

But then again im not overly focused on details.
I'm more the emotional picture kind of gal
Try read with your gut not your intellect
Might get better

Googled u after last email

Agree didn't look too good : )

Thanks for the video

Such a beautiful woman
If one could only hope to become like that at old age

See u later

Mm"​

Jeffrey Epstein:

"it would be like trying to read with my eyes closed. http://www.amazon.com/Lectures-
Literature-Vladimir-Nabokov/dp/0156027755"​

 

[yukari]

New statement from Crown Princess Mette-Marit:

Uttalelse om Epstein-saken

Kongehuset har i dag formidlet følgende i anledning Epstein-saken.…

www.kongehuset.no

Det Norske Kongehuset on Instagram: "Les mer på kongehuset.no"

51K likes, 0 comments - detnorskekongehus on February 6, 2026: "Les mer på kongehuset.no".

www.instagram.com

Another apology. Maybe she'd some tears when reading it? Promise to be better as she'd take the next role as Queen in the future?

Well, sorry I'm a pessimist. Seems like leopard does never change its spots. But fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

 

[hereditarytitles]

It was something Epstein wrote himself that made MM google him. In the email that she responds to he refers to an island, so it seems to be about his private island where lots of underaged women provided sexual services to his guests.

See this post by TM earlier this week:

They seem to be talking about books. I assume the talk is about the book "The possibility of an Island" by French author Michel Houellebecq. That would explain why he says that the translation into English is awful.

The Possibility of an Island - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Somebody]

Thanks, that helps put things in perspective! However, she states that she google ‘u’. So, there was still some kind of connection to Epstein himself.

 

[hereditarytitles]

Perhaps Epstein told her that he had problems with the law, or had been convicted, and she googled him, because she then says that it doesn't look good (for him). But that's just a guess.

 

[carlota]

What an odd, cringy statement by Haakon. They need better comms teams? He sounded like he thought they were the victims in all this. Odd also were statements such as "She's not allowed to" (what does he mean? They don’t let her? Or he doesn’t let her as she’s unwell?), having to take care of Marius cited first, or "She takes care of me too" (as he is her husband, and given all this headache, I would hope that is the case!)…



The official statement is too little too late in my opinion too. They basically said the same as in 2019, and by now everyone lost trust in them so they required something better than this. Who do they think will trust them a second time when they were shown to lie the first one?



I am reading she cut contact with JE in 2014, but how do we know this? Is it because the documents released don’t include further emails of them past 2014? Because 1. Not all documents of the case have been released yet. And 2. May it be that they still communicated past 2014, but the emails weren’t judged important to be added to the case? In any case, if she did cut contact, I am very curious as to why she did. Did she finally realize?

I know that Haakon and MM have been very close friends with Frederick and Mary. I wonder if the dynamics of that friendship will change. Mary has a stellar and well-earned reputation.

I did wonder this too. MM seemed close to a range of royals – she seems to have a likeable personality and seemed to have gotten along with many in the past. I wonder what will happen to those relationships in the future.

When she and Haakon lived in London, they were especially close to Kyril and Rosario Nadal. Mette‑Marit and Rosario were tight enough that they even went to a concert together once with Gwyneth Paltrow and Kate Hudson. That whole London period also put Haakon and Mette‑Marit in regular contact with Edward and Sophie.

Haakon and Mette‑Marit are longtime friends of Prince Constantijn and Princess Laurentien ,close enough that Constantijn chose Haakon as a godfather to his daughter. I suspect they were part of a group with Prince Friso and Princess Mabel, who are/were close to Kyril and Rosario. I remember MM visibly saddened at Friso's funeral if I am not mistaken.

In 2005 when Máxima, Laurentien, and their families stayed with Haakon and Mette‑Marit. There were those famous photos of Máxima, Laurentien, and Mette‑Marit in swimsuits and skirts, Máxima in a cowboy hat. Mette‑Marit and Máxima were also photographed leaving the Groene Draeck, Beatrix’s private boat. And Máxima is godmother to Sverre Magnus. Mette-Marit and Crown Prince Haakon, King Willem-Alexander and Queen Maxima of The Netherlands were on boat "Vulkana" during their private visit to Tromsø, Norway.

Haakon and Mette‑Marit once brought Victoria of Sweden along on a skiing holiday, and in 2021 the Swedish court even released a photo from Gotland showing Victoria, Daniel, and their kids hosting Haakon, Mette‑Marit, and Ingrid Alexandra for a quiet weekend together.

She’s also been friendly with Marie‑Chantal, Infanta Cristina (possibly via Rosario?), Mary of Denmark (Frederik was Haakon's best man at his wedding so I imagine the 4 are close), and even Beatrice Borromeo. And she’s been godmother to several royal children over the years including Marie‑Chantal’s youngest son, Odysseas.

Even Guillaume of Luxembourg used to have closeness with them possibly because of his early relationship with Pia Haraldsen.

 

[Mirabel]

You know- there’s a part of me that wonders what the actual point of releasing all the Epstein files is.

Yes- a lot of people are coming out looking bad. No argument. But why does all this personal correspondence “need” to be public? To shame them? I wonder.

I've been thinking so as well.
So far, no one seems vulnerable to criminal prosecution. And Epstein is beyond any punishment.
All of these revelations seem to serve no real purpose other than to throw mud around.
What is the purpose?

 

[Somebody]

I did wonder this too. MM seemed close to a range of royals – she seems to have a likeable personality and seemed to have gotten along with many in the past. I wonder what will happen to those relationships in the future.
(...)
Haakon and Mette‑Marit are longtime friends of Prince Constantijn and Princess Laurentien ,close enough that Constantijn chose Haakon as a godfather to his daughter. I suspect they were part of a group with Prince Friso and Princess Mabel, who are/were close to Kyril and Rosario. I remember MM visibly saddened at Friso's funeral if I am not mistaken.
(...)

While I agree that Haakon and Mette-Marit clearly are close to several royals including the Dutch royals, in the bolded part you are mistaken. MM was not present at Friso's funeral; king Harald -as Friso's godfather- was the only foreign royal present.

Another close relation seems to be Jaime and Viktoria; we first learned about the now princess Viktoria at a royal party in Norway (for their 40th birthdays) - shortly after they got engaged, married and had their first child.

 

[Muhler]

I've been thinking so as well.
So far, no one seems vulnerable to criminal prosecution. And Epstein is beyond any punishment.
All of these revelations seem to serve no real purpose other than to throw mud around.
What is the purpose?

Chaos and distraction?

 

[Marengo]

Haakon, Martha Louise and Ari Behn went to a memorial service for Friso in Delft IIRC. Mette-Marit was not there.

As for the crown prince saying that his wife was not 'allowed' to say more. I interpreted that in the sense that he would not allow it, as he thinks his wife has too much on her plate and he is concerned for her well-being. The concern seems well founded. Whatever her previous choices, she [and the entire family] does have an awful lot of horrible things to deal with, you would not wish this for anybody.

 

[Somebody]

Haakon, Martha Louise and Ari Behn went to a memorial service for Friso in Delft IIRC. Mette-Marit was not there.

As for the crown prince saying that his wife was not 'allowed' to say more. I interpreted that in the sense that he would not allow it, as he thinks his wife has too much on her plate and he is concerned for her wellbeing.

That's also my interpretation. He said "I also tell her that she's not allowed to." So, I don't think there is any other prohibition than her husband's desire to protect his wife.

 

[Moran]

That's also my interpretation. He said "I also tell her that she's not allowed to." So, I don't think there is any other prohibition than her husband's desire to protect his wife.

If there was any other reason, he wouldn't have said her. Who could "forbid" MM anything, but the authorities of law or perhaps her own respect for the King's advice if he chose to give her one to stay away? Both make MM look like she did something very wrong and they hold on to the claim that it was all an innocent mistake they're trying to downplay. And of course, this far MM hasn't done anything illegal. Haakon was trying to convey familial concern, didn't choose the best wording, perhaps, but it was quite clear to me.

 

[fandesacs2003]

I have quickly been through some of the comments, as it is very long to properly read them all. I'm not extremely knowledgeable about the NRF but i do have an opinion about MM. Lets try to express it.

Mette-Marit comes from a completely dysfonctionnal and broken environment. She was (is ..) also herself problematic and with difficulty to adapt to rules.
She had in her life the chance (is it really one?) to meet the CP and future King of her country who fell in love with her. What did he find on her? Only him knows, but in his eyes she is catching. Ok.
Did she from her side fell in love with him? Only her has the answer, but this is not the point. From his side it is love, from her side might be love or an peculiar attraction for a rich life, forever security and plenty of clothes and jewelry. Up to now i don't find it a crime. Many marriages are driven by common interests but are successfull.
Now the point. She managed to be a modern Cinderella but even in the fairy tale the girl takes a Prince not a simple rich man.
MM was extremely happy to have a secure life and to wear Valentino gowns... but never realized the obligations coming together. She excused herself about previous mistakes, cried a little and got her wedding. Norway people were nice and gave her a chance.
Almost immediately after the wedding what did she do... left the country with her husband (both i think more than 30y old) for supposed studies in London...paid bu the Norvegian people. Too late in age for this and I presume fully doable in Oslo... where their obligations were..
Paparazzis very soon realised that her studies were mostly to walk around Prada and Chanel with her good friends Rosario (forgot the name ) and Marie-Chantal, both married to deposed Princes, so without obligations paid by their country.
So scandal in Norway and the couple returned back.
Then she started having an official tole. .... in few doses...
Figures at this time showed that she was the less working royal, among all (even the much older)
So the lady when she doesn't like something she just avoids....
I couldn't know what's the mistake with Marius I'm not a doctor and the impression I have is that she is a cherish mother. But apparently is not enough.
So she is 22-23 y married and she is bored. She had her bags, clothes and tiaras but she is in the wrong place... this world is not for her. She shows a lack of judgment, as when meeting a criminal, instead of running away she feels close to him and even asks him advice. Why? Because he is like her previous world, which she supposedly left when marrying.
What the hell a future queen needs to be invited to a criminal's villa? Is she poor and couldn't afford holidays?
Asking him advice about her son's (which one of the 2?) paper wall ... with naked women? Couldn't she ask a psychologs advice? Was he a specialist?
Complete lack of judgment and almost no understanding of her role. Writing all these in mails? I could forgive speaking... but writing? Is she aware who really she is ?
And last sad point... she complains to a man outside royal word of how the Luxembourg wedding was boring....does she have any idea about obligations? Not at all. Even if she was not CP and was simply having a 9-5 job.. wouldn't she have boring sessions? Ofc. But the lady is spoiled and used to do what she wishes.
At the end I'm sorry for her health and I wish her to recover.
Out of this, for me she is definitely to a wrong position and she should never be Queen.

 

[Moran]

The problem with MM is that all those representative functions we accept as absolutely necessary are product of the modern concept of royalty - working royals. This isn't to say that queens of old didn't have many important functions (one of my most beloved books on English and British queens was written by Lisa Hilton) but in essence, one doesn't become queen because of being "worthy", she becomes one either by inheriting or, like MM, by the virtue of being married to the heir. In this vein, I can't see how a married MM cannot "be" queen and I'm not sure the concept of "worthy" applies at all. At the same time, I realize that days of old, I'etat c'est moi and so on are long gone and Norwegians are quite reasonable in expecting their future queen to represent them with honour.

I just don't know the answer.

 

[yukari]

The problem with MM is that all those representative functions we accept as absolutely necessary are product of the modern concept of royalty - working royals. This isn't to say that queens of old didn't have many important functions (one of my most beloved books on English and British queens was written by Lisa Hilton) but in essence, one doesn't become queen because of being "worthy", she becomes one either by inheriting or, like MM, by the virtue of being married to the heir. In this vein, I can't see how a married MM cannot "be" queen and I'm not sure the concept of "worthy" applies at all. At the same time, I realize that days of old, I'etat c'est moi and so on are long gone and Norwegians are quite reasonable in expecting their future queen to represent them with honour.

I just don't know the answer.

Because in the day of old, the vetting process of "being worthy" happened before the wedding and MM wouldn't even pass any parameters to be considered as "worthy" wife-candidate for the heir to the throne to begin with.

 

[Moran]

Because in the day of old, the vetting process of "being worthy" happened before the wedding and MM wouldn't even pass any parameters to be considered as "worthy" wife-candidate for the heir to the throne to begin with.

The thing is, she did become his wife, hence she's the future queen. Not "the future queen if she mends her ways".

 

[Silverpot]

Chaos and distraction?

Yes, distraction, definitely. Give people some small fry to gossip about and make them think it's important, to deflect from what's really going on. Not even a corrupt former Prime Minister, a former Minister for foreign affairs or two top diplomats in Norway have anything to do with the big stuff. The stuff we will never get to know.
How did Epstein amass such a fortune and how did he rise to such power? It certainly wasn't because he exchanged mail with Mette-Marit. Not even the corruption of the Norwegian political elite would've gotten him there.

 

[Diarist]

Yes, distraction, definitely. Give people some small fry to gossip about and make them think it's important, to deflect from what's really going on. Not even a corrupt former Prime Minister, a former Minister for foreign affairs or two top diplomats in Norway have anything to do with the big stuff. The stuff we will never get to know.
How did Epstein amass such a fortune and how did he rise to such power? It certainly wasn't because he exchanged mail with Mette-Marit. Not even the corruption of the Norwegian political elite would've gotten him there.

Absolutely!

I also wonder how Epstein found the time for all this? All these important men. When did Epstein find time to do his business? I have seen some speculation in the weekend papers that Epstein was a Russian spy... if true, then that could explain where he got his money from....

 

[hereditarytitles]

There are several newspaper articles that explain where Epstein's wealth came from. He apparently had a talent for making himself popular with the super-rich, which gave him the opportunity to work for these people and earn a lot of money himself. More infos can be found in this report.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Where-Did-Jeffrey-Epstein-Get-His-Money