Prince Andrew

[Vagabond]

So Andrew didn't go to the Commonwealth Service. Guess they're locking him in the basement for awhile.

He's not doing any official activities. Not even penance.

 

[canbelto]

An op-ed about Prince Andrew:

The Queen is making her most serious misstep here | CNN

Until Prince Andrew cooperates fully with the Epstein investigation, argues Rosa Prince, the Queen should display the sacrifice and sense of duty which have been the hallmarks of her reign by removing from the duke all remaining vestiges of the privilege of serving as a member of the royal...

www.cnn.com

 

[aftershocks]

^^ A well thought out opinion piece.

Since Andrew's connection with Epstein has unfolded over many years, more attention should have been paid long ago to addressing the situation head-on, with an eye to predicting fallout scenarios down-the-line. Instead, I suppose it was felt that the story would disappear since Epstein truthfully was being shielded by U.S. authorities and well-positioned cronies for awhile there. As well, perhaps Andrew was felt to be well above it all. And then Donald Trump happened, and then #MeToo happened, and all hell broke loose.

The way this situation has been handled by the royals, adds to the perception that they are out-of-touch and insensitive. I believe the Queen has served valiantly, devotedly and faithfully throughout her reign. It is sad to see her husband's health failing and her family's personal relationships crumbling before her eyes, in the latter years of her life and reign. As I've previously mentioned, I think the Queen has never focused too much on family problems and inter-relationships. That was always left to the iron fist of her husband (not that he was always especially skilled in his decision-making). Of course, Philip hasn't been well enough to manage the domestic realm for a number of years now. Some time ago, the royal firm should have begun slowly enacting a clean sweep of all the old-fashioned, stuck-in-the-mud palace courtiers. But for the British royals, the way they've been handling crises always appears to be too little, too late.

The Queen is in her mid-nineties and she apparently listens to the advice of the old-fashioned courtiers. She's been doing the best she can I suppose, based on the way she was raised in the 1920s and 1930s. Below is a documentary (in two parts) on the Queen's children, which provides a lot of insight into why Prince Andrew is the Queen's favorite child:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JA7b2GWVjeM part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wam4tm38YjA part 2

Unfortunately, Andrew was coddled and spoiled. Plus, he was also prevented from marrying his first choice (Koo Stark) for a spouse. Denying him the opportunity to marry the woman he loved may have been irreparably damaging in the long run. Andrew maintained a friendship with Ms. Stark that has lasted to this day. The British royal family has an alarming history of adversely interfering with the love lives of family members, largely based upon unnecessary fears surrounding Edward VIII's abdication of the throne in the 1930s. In fact, Edward was not good 'king material.' Even his own father knew it, and the British government certainly knew it. Edward's love affair with Wallis Simpson and his desire to marry her was a fortuitous situation which enabled government officials to force Edward into choosing between Wallis and the throne.

In the recent phone hoax involving Prince Harry (articles linked in royalty thread), Harry is alleged to have said the below when asked about his Uncle Andrew's scandal during one of two prank calls orchestrated by two famous Russian pranksters. It has not been confirmed whether the calls really happened, though the audio resembles Harry's voice and inflections:

"‘I have very little to say on that. But whatever [Andrew] has done or hasn’t done, is completely separate from me and my wife..."

 

[Maofan7]

They should do a swap - Prince Andrew for Anne Sacoolas

Prince Andrew and Anne Sacoolas: Could there be a high-level swap?

Some of Jeffrey Epstein's accusers and the family of Harry Dunn join forces in their calls over the Duke of York and Ms Sacoolas.

news.sky.com

 

[Vagabond]

They should do a swap - Prince Andrew for Anne Sacoolas

Thread starter I may be, but I haven't kept on top of all of the facts. Is there anything for which Prince Andrew might be charged that is not barred by the applicable statute of limitations? FWIW, the statute of limitations for rape in New York is ten years.

 

[Maofan7]

Thread starter I may be, but I haven't kept on top of all of the facts. Is there anything for which Prince Andrew might be charged that is not barred by the applicable statute of limitations? FWIW, the statute of limitations for rape in New York is ten years.

At the moment, he is “vulnerable to extradition” for the reasons set out in the article below. Hence, the suggestion that he make himself available for interview on a voluntary basis. However, he has failed to co-operate with that

Prince Andrew ‘vulnerable to extradition’ as investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's abuse continues

FBI said to be investigating alleged co-conspirators who facilitated mogul’s actions

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Vagabond]

Thanks, Maofan, but I was hoping for something more specific and from an unbiased source. The alleged victims' lawyer has his own agenda.

 

[aftershocks]

They should do a swap - Prince Andrew for Anne Sacoolas

Prince Andrew and Anne Sacoolas: Could there be a high-level swap?

Some of Jeffrey Epstein's accusers and the family of Harry Dunn join forces in their calls over the Duke of York and Ms Sacoolas.

news.sky.com

The content of the article denies that 'a swap' is viable, nor is it being requested. Therefore, the headline contradicts what's being reported in the article. The suggestion of a so-called 'swap' is described as 'preposterous' by sources involved in representing both families.

OTOH, legal reps for both families have joined to outline the fact that both Andrew and Sacolas should not be viewed as being 'above the law,' and that both should be required to cooperate with authorities in each of these very different cases.

 

[Winnipeg]

One would think cooperating would be an opportunity to clear his name and reputation

 

[mag]

One would think cooperating would be an opportunity to clear his name and reputation

Andrew could clear his name by allowing the royal protection officers who were with him on the night in question verify where he was. I have no doubt they keep very careful records.

 

[Vagabond]

But maybe he can't clear his name no matter how much he wishes he could.

 

[Tesla]

But maybe he can't clear his name no matter how much he wishes he could.

That’s what I was thinking.

 

[taf2002]

But maybe he can't clear his name no matter how much he wishes he could.

Is there actually anyone who thinks he could clear his name?

 

[Vagabond]

Is there actually anyone who thinks he could clear his name?

His mother?

 

[Winnipeg]

I cannot recall if he made a statement declaring he is innocent of the allegations or not. Did he?

 

[canbelto]

I cannot recall if he made a statement declaring he is innocent of the allegations or not. Did he?

He has the airtight alibis that Virginia Geffre's recollections can't be accurate because:
1) he went to pizza express
and
2) he had a medical condition where he couldn't sweat back then but can now

Oh also, he thought Epstein's girls were just "staff."

 

[barbk]

I'm pretty sure that if his protection staff had exculpatory evidence, they'd have been encouraged by the queen's staff to share it.

 

[Winnipeg]

He has the airtight alibis that Virginia Geffre's recollections can't be accurate because:
1) he went to pizza express
and
2) he had a medical condition where he couldn't sweat back then but can now

Oh also, he thought Epstein's girls were just "staff."

IN that case, a refusal to cooperate now makes it seem like he was lying. If what he said was true, he would want desperately to prove it! Obviously his avoidance more or less proves guilt. He would have been better to say nothing at all that to lie and then not prove something that would be easy to prove if true.

 

[mag]

Is there actually anyone who thinks he could clear his name?

I think Andrew thinks we should just believe him because his is, after all, a prince. He would never lie, right?

 

[Winnipeg]

He is avoiding.............he should not have lied or he should prove he is not lying. What he did by denial and then not cooperating is doubling the bad marks on his character (a liar and a child molester).

 

[VarBar]

The House of Saxe-Coburg renamed Windsor is going down. Simple as that.

 

[Winnipeg]

Going down because of one person? Isn't that a tad harsh?

 

[canbelto]

Well actually I think that with the UK locked in because of CoVid the huge tabloid/media revenue "royal watching" brings in, as well as the revenue from British designers, is obviously going to go down. And after this blows over, the country might re-evaluate whether they NEED to see royals parade around in nice clothes.

 

[Winnipeg]

The public may not need to see them but they sure seem to like to see them

 

[Vagabond]

Looks like more trouble for Prince Andrew:

The United States formally demands that the UK hand over Prince Andrew for questioning - Royal Central

The United States Justice Department has demanded the UK hand over the Duke of York for questioning regarding his relationship with American paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The Sun has exclusively revealed that the Department of Justice...

royalcentral.co.uk

@attyfan I'm quoting you here so that the main Royalty thread can shine like a tiara in the sunlight at a garden party.

 

[aftershocks]

^^ Yes, I've seen that news. I'm surprised there hasn't been any discussion here about the Epstein documentary series that debuted on Netflix last week, Filthy Rich (unless perhaps it has been discussed in a different thread). There are four episodes and Prince Andrew's connection to Epstein is covered in the fourth episode. Possibly and hopefully there will be new installments to this series. That seems to be the case in the way the series has been described on Netflix as Season 1, Episodes 1-4. The extent and reach of Epstein's criminal activities definitely needs to continue being investigated and documented on film. The production is heartbreaking and gut-wrenching in its main focus on Epstein's victims, but it is must-see viewing. It is a very well-made documentary, and I learned a lot that I didn't know previously.

In regard to Andrew, a witness (a former technology worker on Epstein's island) appears on camera to state that he personally saw Andrew with the young Virginia Roberts by the pool. The way the government and law enforcement protected Epstein over the years against being brought to justice (due to his money and connections) is shocking and alarming. But there were investigators, police officers and attorneys who remained steadfast over the years in trying to help the victims, despite the push back they received from Epstein and the system that protected him. The worrisome thing is that there are still shadowy, powerful men out there who were deeply involved and who remain hidden. The part about a pedophile in France purchasing two 12-year-olds from their respective parents and sending them to his friend Epstein as a birthday gift, is beyond disgusting and vomit-worthy. Such revelations make this documentary difficult to digest and discuss.

Interviews with some of the Florida victims are searing and unforgettable. One of the young women survivors, who was 14 years of age when Epstein raped her, exclaims in a cathartic moment of reliving the trauma: “I felt so used, like I was just this dirty person. [Tears of anguish flow as her voice breaks and she places both hands on her head and intensely smooths back her hair as if trying to cleanse herself of a memory that will stain her consciousness forever] Before this, I was ... I was something else, something about to bloom.”

The revelations surrounding two of Epstein's earliest known victims from 1996 are heart-wrenching, but their stories (as two sisters who are stealthily seduced and relentlessly traumatized) bookend the first four episodes, providing poignant, hard-won personal redemption toward the end of the fourth episode.

BTW, an independent coroner's report (paid for by Epstein's brother), shows that the broken areas of Epstein's neck bones are not consistent with the mode of suicide prison authorities and police investigation claim took place. The neck bone damage is more consistent with the type of extreme pressure which occurs during death by strangling.

 

[aftershocks]

The United States formally demands that the UK hand over Prince Andrew for questioning - Royal Central

The United States Justice Department has demanded the UK hand over the Duke of York for questioning regarding his relationship with American paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The Sun has exclusively revealed that the Department of Justice...

royalcentral.co.uk

Andrew's reps are quoted in the above article:

“We have made no comment about anything related to the Department of Justice during the course of this year. We believe in playing straight bat.”

As opposed to 'playing crooked bat'?

I wonder where Ghislaine Maxwell is holed up?

 

[Lorac]

@attyfan I'm quoting you here so that the main Royalty thread can shine like a tiara in the sunlight at a garden party.

Interestingly Prince Andrew's legal team have put out a statement stating that Prince Andrew has offered on 3 separate occasions this year to assist with the US DOJ on this matter but has been ignored and they have implied that maybe the DOJ - and specifically the prosecutor - is looking for publicity rather than justice.

Prince Andrew 'offered to help Jeffrey Epstein prosecutors'

 

[Vagabond]

I do recall the Prince's stating publicly at least once that he was willing to help. That's not the same thing as actually helping by, for example, responding positively to a request for an interview.

 

[Lacey]

^^ Yes, I've seen that news. I'm surprised there hasn't been any discussion here about the Epstein documentary series that debuted on Netflix last week, Filthy Rich (unless perhaps it has been discussed in a different thread). There are four episodes and Prince Andrew's connection to Epstein is covered in the fourth episode. Possibly and hopefully there will be new installments to this series. That seems to be the case in the way the series has been described on Netflix as Season 1, Episodes 1-4. The extent and reach of Epstein's criminal activities definitely needs to continue being investigated and documented on film. The production is heartbreaking and gut-wrenching in its main focus on Epstein's victims, but it is must-see viewing. It is a very well-made documentary, and I learned a lot that I didn't know previously.

In regard to Andrew, a witness (a former technology worker on Epstein's island) appears on camera to state that he personally saw Andrew with the young Virginia Roberts by the pool. The way the government and law enforcement protected Epstein over the years against being brought to justice (due to his money and connections) is shocking and alarming. But there were investigators, police officers and attorneys who remained steadfast over the years in trying to help the victims, despite the push back they received from Epstein and the system that protected him. The worrisome thing is that there are still shadowy, powerful men out there who were deeply involved and who remain hidden. The part about a pedophile in France purchasing two 12-year-olds from their respective parents and sending them to his friend Epstein as a birthday gift, is beyond disgusting and vomit-worthy. Such revelations make this documentary difficult to digest and discuss.

I saw this and it turned my head, IMO, Andrew is cooked, but I think the Royals already knew that by withdrawing him from things royal this spring.