The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 2: Sep 2022 -

[Moonmaiden23]

Well, British intelligence doesn't seem to care about messy Royals. Remember when Prince Michael assured undercover reporters posing as business executives that his close ties with Russia would be of benefit, and that he could introduce them to high-ranking figures within the Russian government in exchange for money?

The Royal family only have themselves to blame, seeing Andrew (and Fergie) walking with the rest of the family after the Christmas service in Sandringham was embarrassing. His family can stand behind him, but please refrain from doing so in public.

They weren't "standing behind" him. Andrew was walking to church on a public holy day as is the right of every free person not convicted of any crime.

Andrew has been stripped of everything, even the right to wear the uniform he earned for risking his life in active combat for his country. Something that ironically the men and women in the BRF who do wear the uniform have never done.

If the king has decided enough is enough where punishing his brother is concerned I don't blame him a bit.

 

[Susan D]

It will not look good for Prince Andrew to be photographed near to other members of the BRF for some time. He is all wrong for state life and government service.

All public servants need to distance themselves from Prince Andrew for some time.

 

[TLLK]

They weren't "standing behind" him. Andrew was walking to church on a public holy day as is the right of every free person not convicted of any crime.

Andrew has been stripped of everything, even the right to wear the uniform he earned for risking his life in active combat for his country. Something that ironically that the men and women in the BRF who do wear uniform have never done.

If the king has decided enough is enough where punishing his brother is concerned I don't blame him a bit.

Thank you for your post.

 

[Leopoldine]

So why didn't Virginia come forward with the orgy story in all her others interviews?

Not that I'm excusing any questionnable behaviors on Andrew's part ... but, it would seem as if this is quite a sensational bit of information that she would have disclosed to the public previously.

JMHO -- but, why the hell didn't she disclose any other names but just Andrew's name? Just to get $$?

Sorry ... JMHO

I read about the supposed PA orgy episode years ago. Jeffrey was in on it too. it wasn't clear if he was actively involved, but he was there. It was in VG's written accounts of her time with JE. Her recalling of that incident was part of a recreated diary that someone encouraged her to write. It was discredited of course by top litigators, but this was all before Andrew paid off her claim.

She described the incident by the pool in detail. No other men were around except JE and possible staff.

It will not look good for Prince Andrew to be photographed near to other members of the BRF for some time. He is all wrong for state life and government service.

All public servants need to distance themselves from Prince Andrew for some time.

I think The King may have some sympathy for his situation. KCIII had the resources and influence to distance himself from his Bishop Ball fiasco as well as Jimmy Savile's legacy and Van der Post's involvement with a young teen.

 

[Alisa]

If the king has decided enough is enough where punishing his brother is concerned I don't blame him a bit.

There may be where the problem is. If being Andrew being seen in the presence of senior members of the royal family is damaging, Charles has to stop thinking like brother and act more like King!

 

[Leopoldine]

Keep in mind this isn't going away anytime soon for Andrew. The Movie "Scoop" about Andrew's car crash interview with Emily Maitlis is supposed to come out this year.

Gillian Anderson as Emily, Rufus Sewell as Andrew, and Charity Wakefield as Princess Beatrice.

Rufus Sewell! He's a very attractive man. It could be worse for Andrew.

This may be too much of a general observation for this specific thread, but I think our Royals are getting better at weeding out criminals and charlatans who cozy up to them for political and/or monetary gain.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

It will not look good for Prince Andrew to be photographed near to other members of the BRF for some time. He is all wrong for state life and government service.

All public servants need to distance themselves from Prince Andrew for some time.

He isn't in government service or public life and he likely never will be again.

He has the right to be with his family on holidays. He isn't a convicted criminal.

Unless he skulks off to RL and drinks suicidal hemlock...which is what I sometimes suspect people want...he will be occasionally seen in public.

He is not harming anyone.

 

[victor1319]

He is not harming anyone.

Well, as long as we do not know the full story besides the one of Giuffre girl... I mean there could be victims and sexual abuse of minors is serious, traumatizing!

If - and we do not know - but if there are victims and they see Prince Andrew strutting around, unpunished, this is something.

So, he is perhaps "not harming anyone".

 

[HenRach Dominion]

For all of the Brits in this forum...how is the new-ish Epstein news going over with general public? Are they outraged? Indignant on HRH The Duke of York's behalf? Bored about the whole situation?

Yes, HRH The Duke of York has not been charged with anything. Yes, there is nothing wrong with him spending time with his family, even if he was convicted of his alleged crimes. Yes, many will argue that he should be treated as an innocent man because there has been no legal conviction. But do the majority of Britons feel this way, or are at least apathetic enough about the situation that what HRH The Duke of York does or doesn't do falls beneath their notice? If the answer to both is neither, then it is very important for the British Royal Family as an institution to consider how much they want their main members to be seen with HRH The Duke of York.

Sure, they can just say he's a beloved brother and uncle who hasn't been charged with anything, but if a vast majority of British people (or at least a vocal minority) believe that HRH The Duke of York is a sexual predator regardless of a lack of legal charges, then interacting with him publicly may come across as the BRF's complicity. Because much of the strength of the BRF comes from the goodwill of its constituents, they may think twice before they risk it.

To use a dramatic, more complex example: the Russian Imperial Family were beloved members of the British Royal Family, but due to their poor leadership the Russian people turned against them. George V wanted to give them asylum, but ultimately didn't because the British people empathized with the Russian people, and he feared that his own immediate family would be overthrown.

Although the BRF loves its family members, they're not afraid to cut them off to protect the institution.

 

[GondorHasNoPants]

For all of the Brits in this forum...how is the new-ish Epstein news going over with general public? Are they outraged? Indignant on HRH The Duke of York's behalf? Bored about the whole situation?

Everyone I work with thinks he is a 'pedo'. Case closed, judgement delivered, facts and nuance be damned.

A lot of them also think the BRF had Diana killed, and that William cheated on Kate with Rose Hanbury, so make of that what you will.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Sadly - in the UK like the US and even here in Australia the concept of 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law' no longer applies. Guilt is determined by the media and social media and even when a 'not guilty' verdict is delivered the media will still paint the person as guilty (e.g. the cricketer Ben Stokes who to many is still seen as guilty of assault even though found 'not guilty' in a court of law because the media only used part of the video of the events and the whole story wasn't made public until the trial).

I am convinced that no one should be named until AFTER they have had their day in court - but I believe in justice which is now an alien concept in the UK, US and Australia.

 

[Elenath]

Sadly - in the UK like the US and even here in Australia the concept of 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law' no longer applies.

Legally yes, but if someone I knew had been involved in something like this, I'd would definitely distance myself from that person. Even if there's no guilty verdict. This is too big a thing for me to ignore.

 

[Marengo]

Any person involved with PR in any field will know that perception is more important than reality. Sad perhaps, but a reality. Parading Andrew around for the coronation and later at christmas was an interesting choice. A big difference with the Spanish approach to the Infanta Cristina who -apart from funerals- was nowhere to be seen for many, many years and had her Ducal title removed, even though she did not do anything wrong herself. And the NOOS scandal was 'only' about money, not about sex slavery with minors. As a result the Spanish monarchy was able to distance itself from the scandal. I am not sure the approach by King Charles III towards his brother has been very wise.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Well, as long as we do not know the full story besides the one of Giuffre girl... I mean there could be victims and sexual abuse of minors is serious, traumatizing!

If - and we do not know - but if there are victims and they see Prince Andrew strutting around, unpunished, this is something.

So, he is perhaps "not harming anyone".

He is not "strutting around". He is simply going about his life. Outside of appearing at church or on his private property he is never seen.

And he HAS been punished. What more do people want? Having his face never be seen anywhere in public near his own family is as unfair as it it irrational.

And having read the information in the latest Epstein batch, what is there that was not already known?

What is the "game changer" here?

 

[Marengo]

Isn't the accussation that he participated in an orgy with minors new? A game changer perhaps not, but many will have felt before that the BRF should distance themselves more from the Prince.

-

Apparently Prince Andrew has been reported to the police by a republican group:

The Duke of York has been reported to the police by the campaign group Republic after allegations of sexual assault resurfaced in unsealed court documents.

Graham Smith, chief executive of Republic, urged the Metropolitan Police to reopen investigations and called on the King to make a public statement and take questions from the press on the matter.

and:

The force said in August 2022 that it was taking no further action over allegations made against Epstein and that any future probes into human trafficking by the sex offender were focused on activities outside the UK.

More here.

Not sure this is more than a publicity stunt.

 

[suztav]

He is not "strutting around". He is simply going about his life. Outside of appearing at church or on his private property he is never seen.

And he HAS been punished. What more do people want? Having his face never be seen anywhere in public near his own family is as unfair as it it irrational.

And having read the information in the latest Epstein batch, what is there that was not already known?

What is the "game changer" here?

I agree that he should be allowed to participate in family occasions. However, I am surprised that the Giuffre settlement doesn't seem to have included some type of clause that prohibits her from further comment regarding him. I understand that information will always come out from official documents, etc ... but ...

 

[Mirabel]

And he HAS been punished. What more do people want? Having his face never be seen anywhere in public near his own family is as unfair as it it irrational.

There's speculation that Andrew should at least be compelled to vacate Royal Lodge.

There's also a sense that Charles is something of a "soft touch" when it comes to family.

 

[xenobia]

This may be too much of a general observation for this specific thread, but I think our Royals are getting better at weeding out criminals and charlatans who cozy up to them for political and/or monetary gain.

I don't agree. Just look at the Princess Märtha Louise + Schaman Durek situation in Norway....

 

[Elly C]

For all of the Brits in this forum...how is the new-ish Epstein news going over with general public? Are they outraged? Indignant on HRH The Duke of York's behalf? Bored about the whole situation.

My perception is that these latest revelations have done nothing to alter public opinion. I wouldn’t go so far as to say people are bored about the situation, but there are so many other major stories that dominate our news, that this has barely registered. People made up their mind about Andrew when the first round of allegations emerged. I have never come across anyone who doubts his culpability but how far this extends is obviously something individuals do have varying opinions about.
We are very cynical about how people in privileged positions, whose conduct is called into question, are treated in comparison to the rest of us.
I think the general mood is that unsurprisingly, ‘he has got away with it’ and been allowed to live a relatively, untroubled life.
Does this reflect badly on the new monarch? Time will tell. If the latest claims rumble on and again grab the headlines, I think the advice will be that the current approach of the Royal Family may have to change.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Isn't the accussation that he participated in an orgy with minors new? A game changer perhaps not, but many will have felt before that the BRF should distance themselves more from the Prince.

No - that was part of the original allegations made in 2011.

 

[Hallo girl]

No - that was part of the original allegations made in 2011.

I am always uncomfortable with historical allegations, it comes down to one persons word against another, there can be no tangible evidence. I always have this view even when it is Joe Bloggs along the road not just ' named' VIP's.

 

[tommy100]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67893392

The Metropolitan Police says it is not investigating allegations against the Duke of York detailing connections to the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In unsealed US court files, Prince Andrew is accused of groping a woman at Epstein's house, which he has previously denied.
The Met said it would assess "new and relevant" information should it be brought to its attention.
The prince is one of several high-profile figures named in the files.
The newly released documents form part of a case against Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's girlfriend, who has been jailed for helping him abuse girls.
Many of the allegations in the documents are not new.
Included in the files is the detailed testimony of Johanna Sjoberg, who describes meeting Prince Andrew at financier Epstein's home in New York in 2001, along with Epstein's associate Maxwell and Virginia Giuffre, who went on to make and settle a civil sex assault claim against the prince

It just always seem to be the same info brought up time and time again IMO. I’m really not sure what else people want to happen- Andrew will always be invited to Christmas with his family so even if he doesn’t do the walk to church will that be enough? People can seriously expect Charles to never be seen near his brother again. As for Royal Lodge I understand it is frustrating to know he lives in a rather large house but he does so on commercial terms that even the National Audit Office found not favouritism had been part of. So if he leaves there will be a large property sat empty making no money for the Crown Estate. Seems an odd wish IMO. I think he should move out, and tbh I think he is wasting money staying but he is legally entitled to stay so unless the Crown Estate buys him out (and imagine the drama and outrage that would create) there is not much that can be done.

 

[sophie25]

I've always thought that if your being truthful you have absolutely nothing to fear. The smartest lawyers in the World cannot catch you out if here is literally nothing to catch you out on. On the contrary, if someone accused me of something really terrible that was untrue not only would I not be paying them off I wouldn't be able to get them into court quickly enough to clear my name before suing them in turn for slander. Prince Andrew has lost his reputation and his place in public life, allegedly over something he is entirely innocent of. I just can't believe that he of all people would continously endure this punishment if he was innocent, not to mention the multi millions he paid to Virginia Guiffre to try and make her go away. Whatever he is hiding, even if he is innocent of the specific charges she has labelled against him, he is certainly hiding something, perhaps a number of things, that are so bad he would rather tolerate this constant humiliation than go to the authorities to try and clear his name.

 

[Lori138]

Sophie, I respectfully disagree. There is absolutely no proof that Andrew did anything to this woman and the payoff was just to keep him from being dragged thru the courts and therefore harming the BRF.

In all honesty, even as a woman, I am a little hesitant about all the dirt that Virginia Guiffre keeps throwing out there. There was the professor in the US that she named and then when he pushed back, she changed her story. There were a couple of other men that she named as well, and then backed down. I have no doubt she was trafficked as a young girl, but she has already received millions of dollars from both Epstein and Maxwell, so IMO the only reason she went after Andrew was because he was an easy target. How many millions will compensate for what happened to her? It seems the number is endless.

Andrew's only proven sin is that he was friends with a pedophile, and continued to be even when the allegations were first brought to the media's attention. Very poor judgement on his part.

 

[GondorHasNoPants]

I've always thought that if your being truthful you have absolutely nothing to fear. The smartest lawyers in the World cannot catch you out if here is literally nothing to catch you out on.

Sadly, this is not the case. Many, many people have been sent to prison for crimes they did not commit. Even when they knew they were innocent at the time, and maintained that innocence in the face of enormous pressure to confess.

When you are facing a serious criminal charge, and public opinion is moving against you, and the 'system' needs you to be guilty, because you are an easy target, and jailing or convicting you will satisfy social and political demands, you absolutely have something to fear, even if you know you did not commit the crime.

I don't say this as a defense of Prince Andrew's conduct - merely to point out that our justice systems are extremely flawed.

 

[sophie25]

Sophie, I respectfully disagree. There is absolutely no proof that Andrew did anything to this woman and the payoff was just to keep him from being dragged thru the courts and therefore harming the BRF.

In all honesty, even as a woman, I am a little hesitant about all the dirt that Virginia Guiffre keeps throwing out there. There was the professor in the US that she named and then when he pushed back, she changed her story. There were a couple of other men that she named as well, and then backed down. I have no doubt she was trafficked as a young girl, but she has already received millions of dollars from both Epstein and Maxwell, so IMO the only reason she went after Andrew was because he was an easy target. How many millions will compensate for what happened to her? It seems the number is endless.

Andrew's only proven sin is that he was friends with a pedophile, and continued to be even when the allegations were first brought to the media's attention. Very poor judgement on his part.

By that logic any woman, or man, whom Prince Andrew has never met, could accuse him of a heinous crime he is totally innocent of and get a big fat cheque to stop it going to court. Where do I sign up!

 

[Alison H]

For all of the Brits in this forum...how is the new-ish Epstein news going over with general public? Are they outraged? Indignant on HRH The Duke of York's behalf? Bored about the whole situation?

The Sun and the Mirror both ran the Andrew story as their front page headline, but the other papers didn't, I haven't heard anyone talking about Andrew. Some parts of the country have been affected by flooding, a lot of people have had hospital appointments cancelled due to a strike by junior doctors, the political parties are preparing for a General Election later this year, and everyone's been talking about a 16-year-old lad who unexpectedly reached the final of the World Darts Championship. Then there's the situation in the Middle East. No-one is talking about Andrew.

One of the papers, I forget whether it was the Sun or the Mirror, had "time to give Andrew the chop" on the front page, but what do they expect the King to do? Exile him to St Helena? Lock him up in the Tower of London? The man's got to live somewhere.

 

[Hallo girl]

I would agree with that summary, until now he is guilty of naivety, boorishness, arrogance. Foolishness in his choice of friends then failing to distance himself from them, as far as I can see it is word of mouth. No physical evidence.

 

[Mirabel]

By that logic any woman, or man, whom Prince Andrew has never met, could accuse him of a heinous crime he is totally innocent of and get a big fat cheque to stop it going to court. Where do I sign up!

That's why I have always said that Andrew should never have settled the case!
Once someone does that, the public automatically assumes guilt.

Yes, I understand the RF wanted it to go away, so as not to cast a damper on the Queen's Jubilee.

Still, I feel it was a huge mistake.

 

[suztav]

Sophie, I respectfully disagree. There is absolutely no proof that Andrew did anything to this woman and the payoff was just to keep him from being dragged thru the courts and therefore harming the BRF.

In all honesty, even as a woman, I am a little hesitant about all the dirt that Virginia Guiffre keeps throwing out there. There was the professor in the US that she named and then when he pushed back, she changed her story. There were a couple of other men that she named as well, and then backed down. I have no doubt she was trafficked as a young girl, but she has already received millions of dollars from both Epstein and Maxwell, so IMO the only reason she went after Andrew was because he was an easy target. How many millions will compensate for what happened to her? It seems the number is endless.

Andrew's only proven sin is that he was friends with a pedophile, and continued to be even when the allegations were first brought to the media's attention. Very poor judgement on his part.

Thank you! Very well articulated.