Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, has always been gross about women. When he was a young, unmarried prince, he dated a series of utterly unsuitable women, like p0rn stars and nude models. That was one of the reasons the Queen initially approved of Sarah Ferguson for Andrew: Fergie was far and away the most suitable girl Andrew had ever dated, and that’s saying a lot. During the marriage, Andrew and Fergie both fooled around, but since Fergie was the one who got caught, she ended up taking the blame.
Here’s another part of Andrew’s backstory: he’s always desperate for money. He’s a hustler always looking for an angle, looking for someone to pay his way or provide for him. This means that Andrew has been drawn to some very shady people. Shady people like… Jeffrey Epstein, an American banker who spent 13 months in prison in 2008-09 on a charge of soliciting prostitutes after he trafficked underage girls to his well-connected friends. Friends like… Prince Andrew.
A new year, a new scandal for the royal family? Prince Andrew, Queen Elizabeth II’s second-eldest son, has been mentioned in a lawsuit filed in Florida by a woman who alleges that a banker forced her to have sex with a number of his rich and powerful friends, including the royal, between 1999 and 2002.
Buckingham Palace has denied Andrew’s involvement as claimed, releasing the following statement Friday to The Guardian and others: “This relates to long-running and ongoing civil proceedings in the United States to which the Duke of York is not a party. As such we would not comment in detail. However, for the avoidance of doubt, any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue.”
The lawsuit in question was first filed in 2008 but new paperwork filed this week sucked Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz and others into the fray. At the center of the allegations is investment banker Jeffrey Epstein, who spent 13 months in prison after pleading to soliciting prostitutes in 2008, having cut a deal while being investigated for alleged sexual activity with underage girls at his Palm Beach, Fla., home. Prince Andrew remained friends with Epstein following his release from prison in 2009, a connection that has reportedly not sat well with the Duke of York’s family. Vanity Fair reported in 2011, meanwhile, that Andrew had denied ever attending any of the wild parties at Epstein’s house where illegal activity allegedly occurred.
Per Britain’s Sky News, the motion filed this week alleges that “Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 [the plaintiff] that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse.”
The Jane Doe in question is now a legal adult and she’s giving interviews. Her name is Virginia Roberts, and she told the Enquirer that she had sexual relations with Andrew when she was only 17 years old, and she did it on the behest of Epstein.
Britain’s Prince Andrew is a royal footman. A 30-year-old former teen “sex slave” has shared with the National Enquirer the sleaziest details of her alleged romp with Queen Elizabeth’s second son — featuring a toe-sucking session — when she was only 17. The accuser, Virginia Roberts, insisted in an interview published Saturday by the Enquirer that her tryst with the prince was paid for by her purported pimp, billionaire financier-turned convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who she said hired her as his “sex slave.”
She claimed in the interview that the fancy footwork happened in the London home of socialite Ghislaine Maxwell.
“Ghislaine played one of her favorite guessing games,’’ Roberts told the tabloid. “She asked Andrew how old he thought I was. He guessed 17. They all kind of laughed about it, and Ghislaine made a joke that I was getting ‘too old’ for Jeffrey.”
Later, they adjourned to a nightclub, where the Roberts and Andrew dirty danced.
“He was groping me. He touched my breasts. He touched my ass,’’ Roberts said. “He was not my type, but I’d been trained not only to not show my emotions, but to do what [was] wanted.’’
The couple then returned to Ghislaine’s home, she said, where the prince resumed their romance in a bathroom. The prince undressed and got into a bathtub.
“He started licking my toes, between my toes, the arches of my feet,’’ she said. Then off to the bedroom, she said, where “he proceeded to make love to me . . . He wasn’t rude. It wasn’t like rape, but it wasn’t like love, either. It was more like, ‘I’m getting my business done.’ ’’ She said the prince didn’t use a condom because, “Jeffrey knew I was on the pill.’’
Page Six goes on to say that Epstein worked out a “sweetheart deal” with the authorities back in 2008 because people high up in the Bush administration didn’t want Epstein’s list of “friends” to become public knowledge. Page Six also got a comment from a “source close to Andrew” who said: “It is emphatically denied that the Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Virginia Roberts.” Ms. Roberts also issued another statement, which you can read here. She says she’s being bullied by powerful men, basically. I don’t know, you guys. I believe Ms. Roberts.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Men in the Royal Family do not age well.
Anne looks old enough to be the Queen’s sister …
Andrew looks like the guy from harry potter.
Which guy? Voldemort?
Probably Peter Pettigrew LOL
Peter Pettigrew
I believe her too. Google; sex kittens, mind slaves, the vigilant citizen, Brice Taylor – thanks for the memories. This kind of thing goes on all the time. It is extreme and unbelievable to read about but I think you’d be naive to not believe it to be possible and true. Hopefully this case opens a huge can of worms.
I wonder if PR is contemplating a Re-marriage of Andrew and Sarah, in about a year or so, for his PR to convey he likes women his own age and has loved Sarah all along?
The whole story concerning Epstein and Andrew is disgusting. Yuck.
Creepy.
Usually when there is a big story in the media, I can make a pretty decent assessment about what I think the truth might be. It isn’t guaranteed because I wasn’t there, obviously don’t know the full story, but I can reconstruct it, read reports, watch interviews, research ect. This is one story where all angles look and sound shadier than the next. I really don’t know what to make of it.
But Prince Andrew is in fact guilty, I hope he gets his due. It would mean that justice actually means something.
I want to know more about this “sweetheart deal” and what other men may have been involved. Now that is much more newsworthy. Bush squashing a big scandal…may be Bush’s family or very well-known political figures were involved??
Just from those possibilities, it shows how much you can get away with , with money and power at your side.
I read in this morning’s paper that Clinton was the person who helped broker the deal, and Clinton was a well known user of Epstein’s largesse……so there that’s another person to potentially add to the murk.
When I first read about the story a year or so ago (or whenever it initially hit), Clinton’s name came up as one of the men who frequented Epstein’s place and parties.
That’s what I want to know too! Who are the other “powerful” men who got away with sleeping with underage girls! It makes me so mad that they got away with it and probably continued on doing the same thing. And LAK, I believe that. Clinton really was/possibly still is a sleazeball when it came to women. Grrrrr it makes me so angry!
The Bush Administration was protecting Bill Clinton. It’s all coming out now. It’s going to be devastating for Bill Clinton.
Why would the Bush Administration protect Clinton? Just wondering are they maybe protecting Jeb as this all came to light as Florida state prosecution when Jeb Bush was Governor in 2005.
This and POW BBC is old news ( POW PR head ignoring senior reigning authority BP PRto release footage to BBC) .
Someone PR person (new celeb) dug up from US on PA and DM made front page. Dersowitz, fame Jewish Attorney Professor – Former Prez Clinton- Former Isreal PM- others included.
Diversion from current Royals HM Christmas Traditions not carried out to months and Year wnd Royal duties tally. P Will and team someone changing the focus.
Rumours are it was a former President Bush aid who helped broker the deal.
I so agree with this comment. I am not sure what to make of it either, as it just all seems shady. I did see Alan Dershowitz on the Today show this morning. Apparently, he was also named in the suit as someone who allegedly had “sex slave” sex with the accuser, similar to Prince Andrew, and he is flipping angry about it. He wants the lawyers who are pursuing this case disbarred. Apparently, they are suing the “sex slave” owner not the men who she had sex with and they are throwing in names of prominent men for attention to the case without any proof or investigation of the claims. He wants them to file rape charges on him, and he wants to defend himself and he wants it proved in a case of law. He said he was brought up in the press initially by the lawyers and the accuser, but as he started to make a stink about it his name was dropped from the media by the attorney and the accuser, and they just started focusing on Prince Andrew. Although he is still in the initial court documents filed. Hearing his anger on television and if he is guilty he sure didn’t sound like it, and this makes it seem even more shady to me. Hope Dershowitz gets his day in court.
I noticed this too. This woman is giving interviews to everybody who will listen and not a word about Alan D or the mysterious 3rd Co-conspirator.
The interview he gave to UK media, Alan D said what was happening to him was probably what was happening to Andrew and recommended that Andrew not take it lying down, pun unintended.
I really want Alan D to have his day in court too.
I saw that too. Dershowitz was PISSED. He says he can verify his whereabouts on every single instance. And given his high profile career (where he probably tracks travel, etc for tax purposes) I wouldn’t doubt it. He had a real bring it on attitude. The anger seemed genuine and I’m no fan of his.
I think it is equally as likely that she is highly pissed too at Epstein’s sentence. So she could have just named more media damning men such as Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz as they had contact with Epstein and she knew it. However, with Dershowitz it might have been a big mistake he is looking for every legal avenue to bring this to court. He wants them to state it publicly so he can file a defamation suit which they haven’t just in court documents which believe it or not aren’t considered public enough. He wants them to file rape charges on him. He is looking for every legal avenue, and he is brilliant I bet he will find one to bring it to court, and I bet he will win. He sounded more confident than I have ever heard him before, and that is saying a lot.
She is not suing Epstein, she is suing the prosecution/state for making that deal with him. Though Epstein has settled around thirteen civil suits and counting on similar allegations of statutory rape, etc….
The inclusion of Dershowitz is very interesting.
I wasn’t dazzled by his performance on the Today Show – but I found it very intriguing. I kept thinking “so this is how he is going to play this.”
Is it the truth or a lot of razzle dazzle smoke and mirrors?
Sorry you are right she is not suing Epstein, but using the Crime Victims rights act to force the US Dept of Justice to prosecute Epstein for sex trafficking and the case was filed over 6 years ago. However the Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz accuser was just added to the filing recently. Also, apparently Dershowitz is the one who negotiated the sweetheart plea agreement for Epstein.
This is so sleazy I just feel like Epstein is guilty as sin, and it is possible that neither Prince Andrew or Dershowitz were involved in the crime, other than Dershowitz negotiating a deal. It is just sad all around no matter what comes out.
@Noway This specific allegation against Prince Andrew has been around since 2001. I find it so strange that people are bending over backwards to discredit it.
Dershowitz is a legal powerhouse and I would be terrified to cross him. I think Virginia Roberts is really brave for coming forward as she has.
Dershowitz was representing Epstein. He consulted on the case and apparently has very dirty fingers as well. His bullying tactics won’t work with this situation. He’s going to get a damaged reputation too.
Guilty or not, he knows this is near impossible to prove in court, and it’s just a he said-she said.
This is why rape cases are almost never prosecuted…there’s no physical evidence.
If he is guilty, he’s turning the court system to his advantage.
Shazbot, I read somewhere that Epstein secretly filmed a lot of these encounters between the underage girls and the high level men. Probably as blackmail for the future. And I also read that one of the Jane Doe’s has some of the tapes.
Just because her allegations against Dershowitz might possibly be wrong that doesn’t mean that her allegations against Prince Andrew are wrong.
This is true, and what I fear may have happened is that she was angry as Dershowitz negotiated Epstein’s plea, and she may have lied. The problem with that is it really harms her case if Dershowitz somehow proves either through disbarment hearings for the attorneys or defamation suit that she lied about him.
If said events are not true, how did Robert’s know about Andrew’s and Sarah’s toe-licking fetishes? The fact that Andrew did not use protection shows indication of a gentlemen’s agreement
This story interests me for philosophical reasons. Until men stop raping women, we do not have equal rights; we are subjugated by them. This has been going on for centuries. If evolutionary science prevails, this nonsense will end. It will do so, not by women hoping that men will protect them, but by a sustained, cacophony of outrage. Men will not stop this – women must! This is a perfect case against the patriarchy. Andrew’s connection with patriarchy is chief, front and center, for getting some women’s work done.
I have nothing against him personally, and hugs to his family, but shit happens! Seriously, you don’t hang out on a regular basis with a major player, without playing. At the pool, with his widdle hardon, or on the table with the beautiful masseuse, does he turn away, REALLY? Women deserve justice!!!
I don’t knoe NoWay, but that’s probably a factor as well. I think the Bushes and the Clintons have been tight for a very long time. Back to Bush sr. What stuns me is how high up this corruption goes. And why befriend such despicable people? Are they ALL despicable? Maybe they are.
I can buy Bush covering for Clinton. Washington has no moral compass it isn’t what is right, it is politics and money.
Doesn’t any one watch Scandal or House of Cards? I know they aren’t documentaries but I wouldnt doubt Washington is very similar to the fictional portrayal.
Andrew and Sarah Ferguson have always given me the sleazy, creepy feel. Very sinister characters. He looks lazy and they’re both desperate for money and would pimp out their royal connections (Sarah has) for a bit of cash.
I agree, Yo. Despite the sleaze surrounding their divorce, Andrew and Sarah are still besties, which is a good thing, in normal circumstances. However, they are a pair of lazy twats, who love and live the high life by supporting and sponging off scumbags like Epstein. That’s how they afford all the luxury holidays they endlessly take. His royal or armed forces salary could not support the lifestyle they have. And what does Sarah actually do nowadays? They are all extremely shady and as dodgy as a $3 note.
The list should come out. This is a horrible story and the curtains should be drawn back to bring in the light of day.
It’s feeding into a perfect storm for the BRF here. Firstly, it’s coming on the heels of William trying to be above the law about photos in public spaces, and the pulling of the BBC documentary, plus the ongoing row over the publication of Charles’s lobbying letters – so there are “Royals and the law” issues. And secondly, barely a week goes by without further developments in the Establishment paedophile scandal – so there are also “Royals and sex abuse” issues.
I agree. Let’s purge with sunlight.
I was hoping you would weigh in.
The inclusion of Dershowitz in the proceedings is very interesting. He has come out swinging, as expected, but simply naming him either shows a great need for publicity, or a hugely brave exposure of the truth. Because no team of lawyers would pull him into the mix without a lot of rational appraisal – the man can work his way through the judicial system like no other.
As I said below, I feel there is some powerful and frantic maneuvering going on behind the scenes.
Dershowitz lost my respect after coming out as an advocate for mass surveillance.
Suze – I don’t really know anything about Dershowitz, but they put him on the big Radio 4 current affairs show (it’s also called Today, but don’t get it confused) and he was extremely belligerent and angry. And then the BBC – you could almost hear the sigh of relief at News HQ! – got a “don’t listen to these nasty people maligning our Prince, listen to this nice man instead. He’s a lawyer and a professor and EVERYTHING” story out of it. The reporting is quite careful across the board but, BBC excepted, the subtext seems to be negative on Andrew, not defensive of him. And perhaps the BBC are running scared, given they just had that doco pulled and their woeful history with reporting of Savile. We’ll see what happens next, I guess.
This FBI deal seems though it’s difficult to defend, though, I will say that.
Sixer: O/T Have you seen the film REVERSAL OF FORTUNE? That’s where I first heard about Alan D. Then he popped up on the defence team for OJ and i was disappointed that he didn’t look like Ron Silver, the actor who played him in the film. Also, less drama in the real life court room as opposed to the reel courtroom.
Ps: Jeremy Irons is so droll in that film. You can’t help loving him even as he says and does horrid things.
@ LAK – No! *goes off to look it up*
I always thought that we’d see the end of the BRF in our lifetime, but I didn’t think that it could possibly be something like this that might “bring them down”! I believe that people are going to eventually get fed up with Will and Kate’s laziness and spending, but this whole situation – pretty crazy! I genuinely feel bad for the Queen :(.
@Sixer Let’s not forget “The Royal Family is to be granted absolute protection from public scrutiny in a controversial legal reform designed to draw a veil of secrecy over the affairs of the Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William.”
and
“Sweeping changes to the Freedom of Information Act will reverse advances which had briefly shone a light on the royal finances – including an attempt by the Queen to use a state poverty fund to heat Buckingham Palace – and which had threatened to force the disclosure of the Prince of Wales’s prolific correspondence with minister”
The other article I read said that the Queen’s refusal to provide money to maintain Fergie and the girls protection is partly behind his drive to get money.
Also that Epstein had given money to Fergie who was forced to return it when he was convicted and even then Andrew has continued to keep up the friendship
It al sounds like one right royal mess to me but not the first time royals have hung out with dubious people.
“What if?” comes to mind. Around 2000-1 (the time of these incidents), Fergie’s old boyfriend Paddy McNally was said to be fixing up a house for her in Geneva. The girls were going to be sent to Aiglon College in Switzerland, far away from the tabloids. A series of scandals about the school ended that plan (some horrifying ones about assault in dormitories, a dodgy headmaster in prison for sex with underage, etc.).
I am VERY glad B&E were never victims of what was happening there. No one should have been, the governing board should have been cleaning house. IF the school hadn’t been so dodgy, though, tucking Fergie and the girls away in Switzerland (and supported by McNally) until the end of time would have been a very nice solution. I wonder if McNally is the one who paid for her four month “get healthy” jaunt in Switzerland recently?
I literally started shaking, just reading about it. Human slavery is very much alive and well, kept afloat by rich affluent powerful men, with young mostly female victims. It’s disgusting. That poor girl – I hope she keeps talking and naming names
This story makes my blood boil. Epstein could have readily attracted consensual sex partners. The fact that he, and his friends, exploited and trafficked underage girls is a grotesque abuse of power and an absolute middle finger to the rule of law and basic, human decency.
It’s like a real life version of the Taken movies.
megan, you make a great point. It is like when Justin Beiber went to the brothels in Brazil.
When a man can get it elsewhere and still choses to exploit and support the sex trafficking industry, it says a lot of horrible things about him.
I believe Ms. Roberts as well. I find it odd that the daily mail has disabled comments on all of the articles regarding this situation.
They do that because of legal reasons on lots of articles that involve a case that has not gone to court yet.
A poster on another Daily Mail article said comments were open on Nigella case for quite awhile but eventually closed very near her court date.
It wasn´t the Nigella case, it was about the two women. There were no comments allowed because or legal reaons.
At the beginning comments were open in “normal” Nigella posts but that was changed when Nigella was namend in the papers and it was clear that there will be a case involving her and making a testiomy. It was the same with the Guardian and the Independent. No comments allowed because of legal reasons.
Speaking of daily mail… I’m pretty sure that’s where I first read about this mess and it was a couple years ago at the very least. This is old news and they’re acting like it just broke?
I remember it being mentioned on this site a few years ago, and the daily mail and several other sources had articles archived as well. The only reason it’s in the spotlight again is because the court case is actually moving forward (which is remarkable, and wonderful news for that poor woman.)
Just a side note: does anyone else think gross happenings like this are part of the reason the royals don’t give too many hoots about Kate’s Uncle Gary and his creepiness? Because I feel like a lot of parallels can be drawn between him and Andrew. Maybe it’s one of the first things Will and Kate found out they had in common? “Oh, I have a dodgy uncle…” “No way, mine is way worse!”
Yes, what was that about the uncle, he could arrange for parties etc? We don’t hear much about him these days.
They always close the comments with articles on Tom Cruise and Scientology.
I noticed that the Mail had withdrawn commenting-but maybe they were afraid of the onslaught and the legal problems it might cause,
It’s a standard practice on the daily mail when it comes to articles regarding legal matters, although they usually allow comments when reporting sentences
What a sordid bunch these rich and powerful men/women are, they literally have networks to protect each others filth. Look how they are protecting each other in the UK with the pedophile scandal. I will never ever get to grips with how grown men/women get off on innocent and defenseless children,its heart breaking.
Revolting isn’t it.
White rich powerful men, especially politicians, bankers, aristocrats are sick bastards who get off on abusing women and children. The horrific pedophile ring scandal in England that the Scotland Yard is still working on has been going on since the 1970’s.
Unfortunately these people won’t allow any of this to have real consequences for them.
Look at Roman Polanski and Woody Allen.
By the way another one involved with Epstein and his child prostitutes is the lawyer Dershowitz.
Trust me, it isn’t race. Money and privilege yes, but there are creeps from all races roaming this earth.
Most of them are white
No race baiting please. There’s plenty of guilt to go around. Nigeria. Isis. Not exactly white.
@bluhare I think you meant to say Boko Haram, Nigeria as a collective isn’t the problem, that’s like me looking at individual crimes/social problems in the United States and saying “America”.
ann, thats because its mostly whites who are rich in the west. look around the world, child rape and sex slaves are certainly not a white problem. in some countries its not even illegal and there are no whites in power.
That is indeed what I meant, Dani2. Thank you for the correction.
All I could think of was Procol Harum, and I knew that was wrong. I meant to write what is happening in Nigeria.
Well, that was racist. Take a look at what the rich powerful Asian, Arab, African, the list goes onto forever, men/women are getting into and you will see it has everything to do with money and power not race.
+1
Why bring race into this when it isn’t germane to the issue at all? Money and power are at issue, not race.
Certainly white men participate in the sickness as much as any race, but to say “most of them are white” is simply incorrect. Men of all races, in all countries, participate in sexual abuse and slavery. It is routine in many countries where the majority population is not white. We should focus on protecting women and children – not pointing fingers about race. There is plenty of blame to go around, and your ignorant remarks are just clouding the issue.
Thank you, GoodNames.
•GoodNames•
Fantastic reply.
Gnat: the voice of reason.
+1,000
Well, the article here forgot to mention that it was Ghislaine Maxwell (Robert Maxwell’s daughter, and a close friend of paedophile Epstein) who introduced not only Miss Roberts, but also other underaged girls to Andrew, and obviously other high-profile people. And all these mostly Eastern European girls were probably found by HER, not Epstein. Meaning, it’s a WOMAN who seemingly organized parties for the pleasure of these filthy men, and who ‘supplied’ them.
@Ann: race shouldn’t be the issue, it’s money that buys priveleges and power, and a certain chararacter to abuse them. Why there ARE mostly white people in power is a completely different question. But sexual slavery/abuse happens in all countries throughout the world, and that world mainly isn’t ‘white’.
Dershowitz has been helping rich men get away with hurting women for far too many years, in my opinion.
Can’t remember which venue heard Bill Maher said this but he made a statement, that anytime men have power & its a “boys” club, they will protect each other, no matter what. Hence the Catholic sex abuse scandal, Sandusky, sports abuse etc…That would extend to politicians & the ultra wealthy which largely consists of men. Think what he said he very true. These people will protect even the worst of things to keep their “boy or elite” club.
The best defense is a good offence, so I don’t care what dershowitz claims he can ‘prove.’
I doubt any of these people are telling the whole truth. But I suspect the girl is telling some form of it. And if Epstein actually spent time in prison, the whole truth must be pretty vile.
The people who did participate are wrong if they believe they can outmanuever justice. Karma is real. They’ll get their due, even if they are never prosecuted in a court of law. Karma isn’t confined to a courtroom.
It’s so sleazy and disgusting, the entire sex slavery thing, where women are used by rich, powerful assholes who almost never have to pay for it. Sickening.
One small quibble though in these comments, this girl was NOT under age when this happened, though if she was coerced of course it is outrageous and something needs to be done. The event happened in London and she was 17, and 16 is the age of consent in the UK.
Coercion though, is not okay. And who knows if other girls these despicable men used WERE under age? Wouldn’t really surprise me.
A list of sleazy rich dirt bags that will never see the light of day. We get Andrew and Alan D, but I want the rest.
It’s so unfair that a sick a-hole like Epstein was given such a small sentence, just because he was rich and had info on other rich powerful sickos.
Epstein’s sentence is what has prompted the current proceedings.
It’s a class action suit of 3 victims, one of whom has unmasked herself, against the US Government for giving Epstein the plea deal and subsequent short sentence.
They say they were unaware until recently of the plea deal.
There is a lot I find questionable about Andrew, but there is also a lot I find questionable about Virginia Roberts.
Let’s hear them please. I don’t know whom to believe.
I just read your comments upthread, and I think you and I are on the same fence.
I have a laundry list of questions and observations which add up to a very murky situation that makes everybody, victim included, look bad.
The only people who stand alone in their horrid ways are Epstein and Ghaislaine Maxwell.
And I look forward to Alan Dershowtitz’s day in court because he has promised to pursue the case vigorously so we might get a proper look at everyone’s POV and be able to make a clear judgement.
I agree – as much as PA is a bit of a douche her story doesn’t really add up and reeks of an attempt for money. Also where were her parents when she was jetting all around the world with a old, wealthy man? She clearly was a victim of Epstein but am not really buying the PA angle (in the sense that they had ‘inappropriate realtions’). He admitted to briefly meeting her, doesn’t mean anything else.
PS there is no way she met HM. Ole waity had to wait until she got the ring on her finger before she was introduced to her. That’s what makes her story BS. Its not the done thing to take a casual fling home to mommy, particularly if she is of the paid variety.
A lot of underage girls that are brought into prostitution come from broken homes. The pimps target vulnerable girls and feed them lies about how much better their life would be with them. They give them money, buy them gifts and then convince them to run away with them and the parents are to busy getting high or just don’t care enough to notice. And even worse sometimes the parents sell them off themselves.
Why is she considered a victim? I have not looked into this story much, but from the reports here in the U.K., she sounds like a straight-up, well paid prostitute. She may have been underage, but only by months, unlike some of the children that Epstein abused, and it sounds like she knew what she was doing. Do I have it wrong?
The stench I smell reeks of money too but it’s actually that of the rich, well-connected & powerful trying to cover their asses cause what really reeks is child sexual exploitation. Hopefully, in this round of allegations, money & connections won’t be able to paper over the stench of that.
@ Kelly
Prostitution is automatically abuse if one of the parties is under 18 (in Europe) and perhaps 21 (in other countries). So if Epstein paid a 17-year-old for sex then that alone is a crime. If he forced or pimped her out to other men then that would be another crime as pimping and forced prostitution are illegal nearly anywhere.
If Prince Andrew did sleep with a 17-year-old and he knew she was a 17-year-old paid for prostitution by Epstein then he obviously committed several crimes as well. Even worse if he knew she was forced into prostitution. Does Randy Andy really believe that women sleep with him for nothing?
And no, a hormonal 17-year-old does not have the kognitve nor moral ability to estimate the consequences of prostituting herself.
That glamorous kind of high-end prostitution where the prostitute is paid several thousands for a single night is actually the exception. Most kind of prostitution is abuse and exploitation as in 10-suitors-a-night.
Kelly, , I think the emotional immaturity of a person under the age of 18 plays in big time. Making those decisions at thirty years old is a whole lot different than being manipulated into making them at seventeen.
Kelly- She has specifically said that she was prostitued & abused since she was 15 (I personally wouldn’t have a different opinion if she was 17 or 25). She was “given” to Andrew at 17 (pimped out). She was a victim. Do you really think she had control over herself or a trust fund set up where the money went??? And NO amount of money justifies a grown man having sex with a child or postituting a child/woman- period. Just cuz you leave a $100 on the bedside table does not suddenly make a rape okay (Cosby…..) This is too sad- I’m out.
Read this vanity fair article from 2011. Virginia and Epstein are mentioned in the first few paragraphs. Leads me to believe Roberts http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/08/prince-andrew-201108.print
From what I read in her interview, she’d had a troubled childhood which included running away from home and drug usage when she 14 or something. So the chances of someone preying on a disturbed teen are significant. But the most questionable issue is what did a senior member of the BRF think publicly associating with a registered sex offender?! He has been photographed being entertained by Epstein even after the conviction. One of the photos show him at one of Epstein’s (pool?) parties with a horde of topless girls. If this was any other senior public official then the consequences would be huge. So I tend to believe if it talks like a duck and walks like a duck…..
•LAK•
•Everyone•
I’d keep in mind that false accusations of rape are far fewer than most people realise (same with false accusations of domestic violence/abuse). The UK and the US govts both put it at about 2% of the time. There is a study that put it well below 1% and another at about 5% — so 2% is a very reasonable estimate.
Andrew has been sketchy for quite some time and most of what I read is fairly damning of the whole group he was friends with. My guess is there is some truth here as Virginia Roberts is not the only minor that is or was in play here. She’s just one of many.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape
Just an aside, I know someone who used to work at Buck Palace who has always said that Andrew was the most arrogant, bombastic, entitled twat out of all of them and if anyone would believe they are above the law it’s him. That doesn’t make him guilty of a crime but leads me to believe he is capable of it.
Ladyslippers: i’m fully aware of the rape stats thank you.
I’m not going to make a blanket judgement based on murky details.
As I said, EVERYONE is murky here which makes it difficult to come out for one or the other.
I’d like to know more which is why I welcome Alan D’s day in court.
It 100% clear that Epstein and Ghaislaine are guilty, no more to say there, throw the book at them.
Ladyslippers: please don’t make assumptions about how I made my decisions and likewise don’t accuse me of things I haven’t done simply because of a difference of opinion.
My view of Virginia is based entirely on her own account, from her own words.
Asking for more evidence or at the very least to hear from the men doesn’t make it victim blaming.
Just because an accusation is made, and we already have a low opinion of the accused, doesn’t make them guilty. The same is true about the assumption of innocence just because someone has a lily white reputation.
That just means we are making a judgement based upon their presumed guilt or lack thereof without evaluating the accusation. And our own prejudices based upon the societal view.
You might be comfortable with that, but i’m not.
As for the ‘we should correct powerful men speech’….
1. Has it escaped your notice that Maxwell, a WOMAN, was the trafficker?? She’s as guilty as Epstein. If you are going to pontificate about powerful men and sex trafficking, you shouldn’t ignore the female pimps. From Heidi Fleiss to that lady that runs room 23 in Hollywood to Maxwell.
2. something *is* being done. The trafficked *are* suing the government who colluded in the light sentence that Epstein served. I’d rather support that effort.
Do you know if any other women (former sex slaves) have come forward as well? Or if any had been named, or at least mentioned, in the past? I’m guessing there had to be more than one woman who was abused.
•littlestar•
There are many women that would not come forward and pled the 5th in court as it was believed they got huge chunks of money in order for them to stay silent.
There are a few women that testified but AFAIK only Virginia Roberts is brave enough to come forward with her name and not be anonymous. I applaud her for that. It’s a tough row for her to hoe that is for certain.
That makes my blood BOIL! Of course they paid the other women off. I applaud Roberts too, and I truly hope she isn’t lying about any of this just to get money. I also hope that more information and names start to come out, and that the perpetrators can no longer pay people off to get their way.
•littlestar•
Doesn’t it? Geesh and abuse of the vulnerable (women and children) keeps happening all over the globe. 😡
Virgina Roberts, reportedly, did get money (as probably the other Jane Does) but still came forward. Throwing cash around does not right any wrong, as so many wealthy people think.
I agree with you Lady Slippers, awesome comments.
Isn’t there a statute of limitations on these types of cases? Or does it not apply because it is a civil suit?
I looked it up because it is a bit complicated. They are joint suing with four Jane Doe accusers now, one Ms. Roberts has come out in public. They are suing the US Dept. of Justice to prosecute Epstein as a sex trafficker under the Victim’s Crime Right’s Act. No suits against Prince Andrew or Alan Dershowitz and that is why Dershowitz is angry as he wants to go to court as he has been accused in court documents. Since technically they are Jane Doe’s you can’t really sue for defamation, however, Jane Doe #3 who accused Dershowitz and Prince Andrew went public but she is not talking about Dershowitz only Prince Andrew. Still I think Dershowitz could make a case for defamation and certainly disbarment of the lawyers if he has proof which he claims he does. Maybe he will talk to Prince Andrew and sue for him. I doubt the Queen would let that go, but it would be interesting. We will see how this plays out.
Uh, if Dershowitz sues for defamation based on what is contained in a court filing then he is a moron, because the contents of a court filing are protected by the litigation privilege. Press statements are another thing, of course.
I think it’s really gross how in the cited article they refer to what happened as a “romp,” a “tryst,” and a “romance.” So weird and wrong.
Orwellian, for sure.
Who knows if this is true or not, but he has always set off my creepy freak alarms.
For the people in the UK… is this being covered a lot?
It’s barely on The Daily Mail website, which I find surprising.
Yes, but carefully. It was the first item on BBC News yesterday and on all the breakfast news shows this morning. Fallen out of the big stories in favour of election gearing-up now, however. Your lawyer guy – the one named in the suit, Alan Dershowitz, is it? – has been doing the rounds of news outlets, saying it’s all rubbish.
Sixer, is there an “age of consent?” This says she was 17 when this incident with Andrew happened. In most states here, 17 is not legally underage. Still sordid and disgusting, yes, but the legal aspects would focus on the prostitution/slavery issues and not her age.
The age of consent is 18 in New york which is where the primary jurisdiction of the case lies. Roberts being a citizen of the USA, British law would not apply in this case. Even though one these incidents took place in the UK the victim was a citizen of the USA based in New york.
Lilacflowers: the age of consent in the UK is 16yrs old.
It’s 16 here. But 18 for prostitution. Also 18 in situations where the older person has a duty of care – eg student and teacher.
The age of consent in New York is not 18 but 17, which happens to be the age she is stating she was so it wouldn’t be rape. Now it was a high class prostitution ring with Epstein as her pimp even if it was wealthy men. Wonder what the average sentence for a convicted pimp is in NYC? If it is 13 months I think I am going to puke, and it scares me that it just might be. This sweetheart deal may be just the norm. Now that is depressing.
Thanks, her being over the age of consent wipes out a slew of possible charges and pretty much limits things to prostitution and trafficking. Johns face very little in the way of punishment.
@ noway
If it is prostition then the age of consent is definitely 18.
I have just counted 6 articles on this topic on the DM website.
“It’s William and Kate’s fault”!
“How c………..”
Oh, sorry, wrong Prince. *backs out slowly*
😀
I find it disgusting that rich, powerful man are allowed to get away with abusing woman. I read on the dailymail that Epstein would send the girls off to politicians and afterwards they had to come back and tell him everything that they did so he could use it as blackmail. And these are the people that are supposed to be protecting us.
There was a Vanity Fair article on this about four years ago and it was…pretty damning. There are an awful lot of pictures of this girl to back up her location. The plea deal Epstein got was a travesty. There’s smoke and fire here folks…stay tuned.
Agreed. This is only going to get uglier and more sordid. I was actually pretty shocked that the Vanity Fair article got as little publicity as it did – no one wanted to talk about it.
Just to add, a “better at technology” poster has a link to the Vanity Fair article above (thank you!). Very much worth a read.
And Dershowitz helped him get that ridiculous plea deal. Dershowitz is just as unethical and disturbing.
The only thing that would make me even SORT of believe this story is the picture of her with Andrew. One – she looks really young in the picture. Two – he is really close to her in the pic, with his hands in places that one wouldn’t normally pose with a perfect stranger or someone they aren’t hooking up with. I find his closeness with her in that picture incredibly disturbing due to how young she looks in the picture.
Great observation!
I don´t know what to believe, all people involved are questionable.
The father of the woman now says she told him that Andrew introduced her to The Queen(!) when she was in London. The Palace denies that they ever met… wonder what true is. Would Andrew really bring is underage “sex slave” to meet his mother?! We´re talking about The f*ing Queen here not just someone´s mummy!
Somehow this story is tacky. There is a Harvard Professor who says the woman lies. He knows Epstein… so he could be tacky too. Everything is possible. He says she makes the same charges against him and he claims that she made wrong charges before and he will fight in court… that all will end dirty.
The “Harvard professor” is Dershowitz, who was Epstein’s attorney and has been named as a conspirator. The people with power in this scenario will continue to attack the credibility of those without it. Standard playbook.
I guess they don’t call him Randy Andy for nothing.
This may not be true, but it sounds believable. Not only does Andrew have a creepy aire to him, but rich people do a lot of things thinking they won’t be caught.
Some historians have argued that Prince Albert Victor was the serial killer known as Jack The Ripper.
His brain had become severely damaged due to the effects of syphilis and the murders suddenly stopped after he’d been locked away in an insane asylum.
Prince Albert Victor is one of MANY people suspected of being Jack the Ripper.
As no one has ever conclusively unmasked Jack the ripper, a cottage industry has grown around him that points fingers as everyone from members of the royal family to various gentlemen living and or working in the neighbourhood.
The latest news on Jack the Ripper is that he was a Polish immigrant, Aaron Kosminski. An author named Russell Edwards who has been researching Jack the Ripper for many years came into possession of an old blood-stained shawl that had been found at the site of the murder of Catherine Eddowes. DNA tests were done with descendants of both Kosminski and Eddowes and the scientist who performed them claims the blood stains are a match for both. Food for thought! Oh, and Kosminski died in an insane asylum some years later.
Prince Albert Victor’s movements were published in the Court Circulars of the day. He wasn’t near London when 1 or 2 of the minders happened. He was in Scotland back before automobiles. And he also wasn’t locked away–that’s so much mythology and has been thoroughly discredited. He may or may not have had a venereal disease–many royal men did–but he died in the influenza epidemic of late 1891/1892 along without 100s of others. His illness was reported on for several weeks leading up to his death as he first because ill with pneumonia and then in his weakened state caught influenza–his sister Victoria had it as we’ll. His only brother George was just recovering from a near fatal bout of typhoid and the monarchy almost devolved upon their sister Louise, married to a commoner, as George was as yet unmarried and still very weak when plunged into grief. I suppose one could say dozens of diaries and letters from friends and family were all doctored in a coverup.
In 2008, Colleen Fitzpatrick, a genetic/forensic genealogist identified the parents of the unknown toddler interred at the Titanic graveyard in Halifax NS. I bet many more definitive clues pointing to JTR’s identity could be uncovered today if funding to pay Fitzpatrick’s team and the British public will to identify him could be mustered.
Wouldn’t that be interesting to see who, if any, wealthy/powerful members of Brit society raised a ruckus if it were announced that this investigation had been funded.
Forensic genealogist interview re: Titanic’s unknown child.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/fitzpatrick-213784-dna-child.html?page=1
Jaded,
At least two major problems with Russell Edwards’ claim it was Kosinski. The provenance of the bloodied shawl is questionable. The DNA test results were never subjected to peer review.
I first read an article in the New York Times about Prince Andrew and Alan D (Professor at Harvard Law School and former lawyer to OJ…). I was so unnerved by the limited details that I started digging for more information about Epstein and the original case against him.
From the information that I read, it sounds like a massive coverup on the part of the Feds, which is disgusting. Allegedly, Epstein paid 4 different people to procure specifically under 16 y/o girls to perform massages on him thrice daily – and we would try his darndest to sleep with each girl. These were like homeless girls, girls roaming areas where they shouldn’t be etc. So essentially they targeted the most vulnerable teenage girls they could get their hands on.
Epstein also employed a modeling agent to travel the world and find super young beautiful girls under the guise of “modeling contracts”, who may have done some modeling but also were coerced into sleeping with him. This dude is a sick perv and while I cannot say for sure, do some math on your own and think about the type of guys that this guy hung out with and partied with. He is a billionaire who specifically sought out underage girls to have sex with – because super hot 19 year olds just were not enough of a thrill?!?
And the dude pulled enough strings to walk away with 18 months of PART TIME jail – after the FBI got involved… yeah, if I had to guess I would say that his list is chock full of powerful men who do not want this information to get out. But that is just my guess!
Exactly! All this is on record, plus we have a (photographic) history of Andrew’s involvement with Epstein yet people attack the survivors of this sordid tale. Its not easy to voice allegations against men as powerful as these. Unfortunately, this is going to be like the Woody Allen saga all over again.
And when brought to court, it appears if some of the young women who were in positions to speak pled the 5th in order to not self-incriminate (with the implications that there were big $$ pay-offs).
Oh wow, you brought a lot more details I hadn’t heard, about finding 16-year-olds, promise of a modeling contract etc. The plea deal is definitely disturbing. As others say upthread, bring it all into the light.
Anyone know if Epstein and his Madam could head back to prison for these crimes?
I think, I think it’s double jeopardy and they cannot. But I’m not a legal expert.
Thanks Scarlet – how frustrating!
“So essentially they targeted the most vulnerable teenage girls they could get their hands on.” Or tween. There is a massive amount of human trafficking in the US. See the ThinkProgress site article Girls, Human Trafficking, And Modern Slavery In America as one example.
I remember his choice of women back in the day, and wondered if he really put to rest his ‘randy Andy’ appetite.
His reputation was already zero. He’ll be forever associated with air miles for helicopter trips to play golf, the Sarah craziness, connections to several dodgy foreign businessmen/dictators etc etc., so it’s quite easy to believe these recent accusations.
And the Buckingham Palace came out with two denials in just two days, wow…they are panicking because, if he were innocent, they could prove it easily.
There is panic in the land.
This story has been brewing barely under radar for years. Where the truth lies is unknown, but the Prince is guilty of at least showing exceedingly poor judgment about the company he keeps.
The general feeling I get is that there are powerful, yet increasingly panicky, strings being pulled
Bloody hell, Suze – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2898083/Ten-questions-Palace-answer-scandal-Prince-Andrew-sex-slave-escalates.html.
Is it possible Andrew’s been thrown under the bus in an effort to protect whomever else *may have been* on those lists, in that address book, and filmed?
Andrew already has a bad reputation, if BP didn’t say anything, his guilt would be assumed.
And for the record, BP rarely puts out statements. They let a lot slide so for them to come out so strongly for Andrew is indicative that they intend to fight this. It’s early days yet, the case hasn’t reached court yet.
Of course, Andrew is also HM’s favourite son so she’s probably going to defend him vigorously.
You’d think it would be Edward, as he’s caused the least amount of scandal between the three of her sons! LOL.
Strongest rumor is Andrew’s the favorite because he was the make-up baby after a period of estrangement from Prince Philip over their last name. (“I am the only man in the country not allowed to give his name to his own children.” – Prince Philip).
Especially ironic, given Philip’s surname is not his own father’s but his mother’s.
On this story, I believe the girl. I’m glad she is using media-bait names to get this horrible mess the attention it deserves. The way children are abused by adults and it’s just ignored is only now starting to be broken open in the UK – the politicians and celebrities involved protected for decades, and probably forever.
I’m sorry for his girls, though. They have been so unlucky in having that pair of parents, and such a high profile.
@littlestar You’d think, but it never seems to work that way. Anyway, I think Edward would be happily working in the theatre with a nice BF if he weren’t a royal, so bringing him ‘in line’ with expectations was probably a bit of an issue at one time.
This just goes to show that money can’t buy you class…or morals, or decency…
Yes, quite true, although it can buy a few secrets but secrets can get out.
It’s three or four statements now.
Suze: “The general feeling I get is that there are powerful, yet increasingly panicky, strings being pulled.” Yes, me too. Whether that indicates actual guilt or just behaviour embarrassing enough to bring real discredit to the BRF, I don’t know. They’d pull strings for either.
When this story first came out in the MoS back in the day, HM had it pulled by mid week (same week) never to be referred to or re-printed. And it wasn’t.
Back then it was a direct accusation, although the MoS was careful to say (or was it Virginia) that there were no sexual relations.
This current story is a reporting on a court case, so i’m curious to see how HM will handle it.
Oh gawd. Sexual slavery. Rape of a minor. False imprisonment. These are crimes against humanity. If these claims are true, every single person involved needs to be tried on criminal charges. Why do we still live in this kind of world??
I know, it’s beyond horrific to contemplate.
Man, today is just one of those days where my faith in humanity is at an all time low, I was reading about the VIP paedophile rings here in the UK and I am so disgusted and sad, this world can be such an evil place.
It’s pretty gross, isn’t it?
Or silly individuals who believe in Karma. There’s no Karma. Good and bad happen to good and bad. End of story.
In the case of Saint Diana, why, of all people did she die in the manner she did if so saintly? God, what a horrible death.
I am glad she came forward. These wealthy men are vile and twisted. It all sounds very highly organized and I wouldn’t be surprised if it extends here to the US. I hope the FB I is looking into it.
The elite ultra wealthy are mostly connected. If its happening there its happening here.
The main perp who organized it all is American (and it was America gave him a slap on the hand for it).
I think he’s guilty. He likes the world of Koo Stark and beyond. The beyond has finally caught up. But don’t worry Andrew old boy, the old guard (mummy et al) will likely protect you.
I was going to add-
remember the Paul Burrell trial?
I think same will happen here- powers that be can move mountains.
No I don’t, can you enlighten us?
Andrea: The Crown Prosecution brought what appeared to be a water tight, open and shut case against Paul Burrell, Diana’s butler for stealing hundreds of things from Diana’s estate after her death. Everything from paperwork to actual possessions.
However, midway through his trial, when a particularly sensitive witness (or possibly paul himself) was going to be deposed, word arrived at the court that HM had remembered that she *had* asked Paul to look after the things he was accused of stealing. This had been his defence all along.
Trial collapsed and Paul walked away vindicated.
The entire thing was so dodgy if only because the case had been a media sensation, from his arrest to months of police investigations to the trial and then out of the blue, mid trial HM suddenly remembers???!!!!!! Everyone rightly concluded that someone wasn’t lying and it wasn’t Paul.
Ps: obviously no one brought a criminal case against HM for perverting the course of justice as would have been the norm in cases where witnesses are thought to be liberal with the truth thus affecting outcome of criminal investigations. One can’t persecute oneself!!!
And to be clear: I believe no individual anywhere is above the law.
In the case of Paul Burrell, I believe he grew obsessed with Diana and he did steal some items.
If anyone is deemed a threat to the Queen in terms of revealing insider information, then the trial presented a major concern to the Queen et al in terms of what exactly would be revealed by Burrell.
Yes, if you read the link you’ll note one of the items listed was Diana’s pajamas.
Do you really believe Diana handed over her pj’s to her butler for safekeeping?
Burrell=creep
I believe at the time of Koo Stark there were also rumors of sexcapdes aboard ship of a different kind. It looks like Andrew does not discriminate as to gender, at least that was what was being said years ago about life at sea, in particular, with Andrew. Maybe he and Edward are not so different after all.
Also, as far as Alan D goes, I saw the interview where he is livid but did anyone notice how much he was blinking? His wife did it as well, just less so. Body language experts have educated us to the fact that blinking is lying about the truth or trying to avoid the truth. Something is wrong and I want this woman to bring every bloody one of them down. Enough of the preying on the weak and innocent. This makes my blood boil and I have to admit that if guilty I think that the guillotine would be too good for them. Let them rot in prison where rats can do Andrew the favor of licking HIS feet and munching on some not so discreet body parts.
I can hear Prince Charles saying at the next family gathering, “So, who is the tampon — I mean douche —- now? Hmm.”
Ha ha I remember the tampon reference with Camilla. Eeeugh these royals sure are gross.
Prince Andrew has been pictured getting too close with ‘models’ countless of times before. People aren’t gullible any more, we know ‘companion’ is euphemism for someone in the game. He is not called Randy Andy for nothing.
Ms Roberts is to be commended as alleged sexual predators like Randy Andy and accused pedophiles like Sylvain Kustyan, Jerry Sandusky, etc. must be apprehended before they have decades to prey upon our women and children. Sandusky is safely behind bars. But unfortunately, Sylvain Kustyan, who has been formally charged with two counts of 1st Degree Sodomy of a ten-year-old little boy, fled to avoid imminent arrest. Kustyan, formerly of Tuscaloosa, Alabama and Hermin/ Mazingarbe, France, is now a fugitive from the law. Victims of Child Sexual Abuse often suffer lifelong physical problems as well as the psychological and emotional trauma from their horrifying experiences. Male victims have 3x’s the heart attack risk and 10x’s the suicide rate. Since the average pedophile has 300 different victims in their lifetime and since the recidivism rate among pedophiles is virtually 100% they must be stopped ASAP!
And it’s scary too when you consider many offenders aren’t caught and convicted until they’re seniors.
I was watching documentary Queen by Rolf. I had no idea the abuse by Rolf Harris until I googled later.
Thanks for the sobering facts about pedophiles. I heard the researcher behind your stats speak on NPR quite awhile ago. The 300 average number of lifetime victims speaks to the slow progress we have made in getting victims to report these crimes and in how quickly (if ever) the perpetrators are caught.
Charles has been trying to downsize the official royal family for years. I wonder if it’s because he sensed, heard or knew something about his sibling’s proclivities? I know it’s not the official reason, that remains “there are too many people doing too few royal activities. ”
Look for some cute photos of George to show up soon. Also, I predict a spate of activity from the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, showing off good wholesome family life. Maybe they’ll even manage to get Harry to marry – a wedding should take the pressure off Andy.
I hasten to add that as of right now, Andrew hasn’t been proven guilty of anything. However, at the least, his judgment in both male and female company has always been suspect. I also always thought that Fergie’s “closeness” to her ex was less about their great love story and more about her knowledge of where the bodies are buried.
Yes, I was wondering what they could spin to take collective minds off of this story. Harry marrying would be ideal of course, maybe Andrew could marry Fergie again, she brings memories of Diana with her.
Fergie doesn’t have a great reputation and I think Epstein gave Fergie some money a while ago so I doubt marrying her would stop people from talking about the case if anything they’ll bring Fergie into it too. And if Harry has to get married because of this I volunteer.
Yes Epstein gave Fergie a large sum to settle debts. Whether Andrew ever did anything with this girl I don’t know. But it’s 100% obvious that he has shown horrendous judgment in his choice of friends–not acquaintances, friends. Andrew continued to associate with Epstein even after he pled guilty to solicitation of a FOURTEEN year old girl and went to jail. And that was with charges pled down. And the shady oligarchs and foreign businessmen, all of it. It’s why he lost the cushy ‘Airmiles Andy’ trade envoy job. I think Charles does honestly want to streamline the monarchy but I think he also keeps his brother away from other duties–or encourages the Queen too. Edward may be married but there are many duties he carries out that Andrew could do and doesn’t–and Edward has young children while Andrew doesn’t. Both Yorks have run around with some very unsavory characters AND exposed their daughters to them over the years. I wonder how Andrew would’ve viewed Epstein’s proclivity for young women if his eye had turned their way?
I am guessing Fergie’s U.S. infomercials for her super blender have been put on hold. She just can’t catch a break.
ITA. The cynic in me says, yes, it’s time to trot out the little lord and for his inert parents to up their appearances game. But, my gosh, this scandal has the potential of spraying crap all over the place. Recent articles about Andy’s daughters are referencing him, so it will be interesting to see how the media attempts to keep it in the news by indirectly linking it to other family members whenever they make appearances.
This whole thing is gross, and I believe her. Andrew has a rep and it may finally come back and bite him. I also think there’s videos and photos and the whole nine. There’s no way Epstein was sending these girls around and asking for reports and not getting stuff to use for blackmail purposes.
It never ceases to amaze me how powerful men get taken down because they only think with their little head.
Hubris.
It is hubris for sure. I would love to know who else is on the list. Clinton seems far too close to this to not be involved.
Apparently there are fears that this could sink Hillary Clinton’s chances in the next election … as allegedly Bill went to Epstein’s “island paradise” as well and later assisted in getting the gag order in place on the Epstein conviction meaning all dignitaries and big names involved in this sordid case are both protected and immune from prosecution …
Wow, yeah, I didn’t even think about that. This really could affect her chances if more info does end up coming out.
I think that’s more the reason for the Bush admin to have tried to squash things rather than Andrew (hinted somewhere else). Political differences aside, Bill is super tight with the Bush clan with them joking how Bill is like another son to George sr.
I can’t imagine Hillary’s rage at Bill if this affects her presidential bid. And how could it not?
I’ve always been a huge Bill fan but if this is true then…..I don’t this the words are allowed on this site!
But this time there will be no sympathy for Hillary if God forbid it comes out that Bill was hooking up with underage girls. Hillary knew about the adult mistresses; if she knew about the jailbait jump-offs she’s done.
This is why I love the internet. Because we’re finally hearing about these things. This has been going on forever behind closed doors but now these creeps are finally being called out. I know they’re still protected but hey, it’s a first step.
I just hope all of the creeps preying on child stars in Hollywood get taken down next. What has happened in the UK with so many celebrity profiles being convicted for abuse is a huge step in the right direction.
Thank you. Yes!
Don’t hold your breath where Hollywood is concerned. A high profile case brought last year against a predatory group of Hollywood big wigs including director Bryan Singer collapsed because the accuser settled and backed away.
Do the BRF really think they are untouchable?? Is Teflon Andy under the impression that by issuing a “statement” denying everything and badmouthing the victim(s) it will all go away?? My, he’s led a sheltered life. Besides, as we’ve seen before with other royals including Charles, Camilla, W&K, etc. etc., their practice is to deny, deny, deny unless there is photographic evidence (and in that case, they try to block publication or get rid of the evidence some other way).
SMH and ROTFLMAO.
Perhaps you’ve been living under a rock, but yes! They are untouchable. We’ve had centuries of their demonstrating this fact.
The last time this story blew up, HM had it removed from the airwaves by the forth day of the scandal. It was top line news for each and every one of 3 days. After it was pulled, no one had a peep about it. Didn’t refer to it, didn’t hint at it….it was as forgotten as if it had never happened.
William and Charles redrawing the privacy laws for themselves vs what is actual law for entire population of the UK.
Then there is the case of Paul Burrell where HM remembered crucial evidence at the very last moment that resulted in the case being thrown out of court and no more reporting on it thereafter.
What about the alleged rape at BP in the late 80s/early 90s. So murky has that become that it’s hard to tell if it is true or the fantasies of a person who was mentally unwell – the victim had a nervous breakdown and was therefore portrayed as loony tunes thereafter.
The list is long of examples where the royals being above the law (or trying to be) has been demonstrated repeatedly.
makes them sound like the mafia!!!
The Queen threw Andrew a shield and gave him full immunity not too long ago. He’s going to literally get away with it.
If anyone ever doubts stories like these are not true, you should look up Jimmy Savile. He was close friends with Prince Charles and was knighted by the queen in the early 90’s, and he was a huge pedophile. Lots of cover ups involving his name and his ties to the royals. There are now over 50 sex abuse cases involving him and underage boys and girls. He died recently, but there is a lot of sex abuse going on with minors within the industry and among the elites. It’s sad that as long as you have wealth and a name to protect, abuse like this can happen and be protected.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jan/19/call-to-end-bbc-culture-of-secrecy
It’s also coming out that there are so many Establishment figures (including politicians) suspected of being involved in Westminster paedophile rings, they’ve had to stand down two of the judges heading the inquiry in succession because their links to those suspected of involvement were too numerous and close. One has complained that it’s not fair of the victims to object, as only an Establishment figure is capable of heading such an inquiry. Convenient, that.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11318760/Westminster-paedophile-inquiry-may-be-doomed.html
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/22/media-gagged-westminster-child-abuse-ring
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11306575/Five-Westminster-paedophile-rings-probed-by-Scotland-Yard.html
K : how about the recent outing of Patricia Hewitt, Harriet Harman and her hubby for providing legal council to the pedophilia information exchange, a body that wished to legalise pedophilia in the early 80s under the guise of civil liberties!!!!
They wished to lower the age of consent to 4yrs old.
Those awful PIE people were connected to all the goings on at the Elm Guest House, which is in turn connected to the guy who has recently come forward with accusations that an MP murdered a boy. It all interconnects, you know. Scary stuff.
The best (good) journalism on this is being done by Exaro News (you can Google them) and most of the big publications are taking their careful stories from what Exaro uncover.
It’s horrible. Did you know that the PIE were closely linked to the North Wales children’s homes run by paedophiles? Apparently there were several social workers in the field of child protection in their ranks, who lobbied under the guise of “children’s liberation” (seriously) that children should have “the right” to “initiate” sexual relationships with adults. Because naturally, no child can ever be manipulated by an adult and no child ever wants an adult’s approval, to the point they will do almost anything that adult wants. They wrote papers on it and presented them at conferences. It’s taught as an example of how widespread abuse can be in our society, now. Just mind-boggling, and so swept under the rug.
And then there was Margaret Hodge: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3270149.stm
And dear Lord, but Harman bugs me. She claims to be a feminist, but she degrades all caring and child-related forms of labour as “a waste” and “doing nothing”. Which is insulting to women doing paid work in those areas, and actually insulting to women in general, given historically such labour is exclusively performed by women. Only valuing traditionally male roles and labour and degrading all traditionally female contribution is not my idea of feminism.
It infuriates me when people cheerfully try to say that the 1970s was a different time and people didn’t understand paedophilia was so wrong then. They didn’t know it was so common – that doesn’t mean people didn’t know it was wrong.
K
My late mother belonged to a feminist group associated with the NCCL (now Liberty) when all this was going on. She could never stand Harman et al for tolerating these people for so long before the NCCL eventually binned them.
She used to say that PIE were very clever though – they associated themselves with the gay rights campaign for lowering the gay age of consent (at the time it was 21) to be equal with the straight age of consent (then, as now, 16).
It was considered by civil rights campaigners then as very bad to say or do anything that would compromise the march towards gay equality and PIE took advantage of that by insinuating themselves into that strand of the debate. It was hard to condemn them without playing into the hands of the anti-gay rights campaigners like Mary Whitehouse.
Seems unbelievable now, but that was the climate then. And indeed, it took 30 years from the 1970s until the millenium, and the Blair government, to see the age of consent equalised. So in fairness to those campaigners, they were fighting an uphill struggle.
My mother would be VERY glad to see that, troubled as it is, the CSA inquiry is now inevitable, however much shite the elite try to throw in its path. I keep thinking about her with all this going on.
Seems these dogs usually get “caught” after they are older or die. When they are younger, more in the public, they’re more protected because they’re relevant. Victims feel more threatened to come out & they have the protecting of status When they are at the height of their fame or still relevant, douches come out of the wood work to cover up their sins. When they are old & have less people helping them keep their secrets, is when we find out this stuff. Cosby comes to mind & yes gross Savile.
A lot of these higher ups prey on vulnerable children, that’s what Savile did, go to orphanages and hospitals pretending to volunteer and contribute charitable contributions, while secretly seeking out children to abuse, for himself and other men. The worst part was that the BBC knew this and covered up for him, until his death. Now we have Bill Cosby, which I’m sure within the industry, his reputation was well known, but not spoken of.
This girl’s story of a being sex slave reminds me of Brice Taylor s book, “Thanks for the memories.” She alleges she was also a sex slave and was abused by Bob Hope and he essentially acted as her handler, passed her around to high ranking individuals and himself.
Wow @ the Vanity Fair link. Andrew is a scoundrel.
Did anybody here notice that the girls, mostly Eastern Europeans, were introduced to these guys by a woman? Ghislaine Maxwell (daughter of Robert Maxwell, and a long-time friend of Epstein’s) ‘found’ the girls for them…so if this is true, SHE had/has the connections to the human trafficking circles. So is Epstein basically just another client of ‘Madam Maxwell’…?
Yeah, the family money is gone and she has to pay for her lifestyle somehow. The whole thing is just sad.
Okay, I finally finished reading the 2011 VF article. I have lost every ounce of respect I had for Lizzy. She is an enabler and there is no need to “hope” the monarchy crashes and burns. I simply can’t see it surviving much longer.
What caught my interest was the foot fetish part because as I recall it was pictures of Sara Ferguson getting her toes sucked by another man that ended her marriage to Andrew.
That caught my eye as well and brought up the same image. It makes me think that is Andrew’s MO as far as fore play goes.
These people are evil, evil, evil. They need a legal reckoning of epic proportion, and if that means Billy Boy as well, and it torpedoes Hill’s run in 2016, all the better. Hill was the best at slinging poo at Bill’s victims, the ones we knew about. I believe she is just as heinous as Ghislaine Maxwell in how she publicly and privately dismantled Bill’s victims through psychological and legal (most probably illegal as well) warfare throwing the weight of the Whitehouse behind her scorched earth assault. It was a D-I-S-G-U-S-T-I-N-G use of power against powerless women AND their families and friends. Hill didn’t care how far she had to go and it appeared there was no line she would not cross, all in the name of power and ambition.
I am happy to say I have never voted for her, nor will I EVER vote for her. What she did to those women is forever imprinted on my mind.
Interesting that Clinton’s name came up so frequently in court documents about this issue. He traveled on Epstein’s private jet and visited his private island MANY times to party. During any one of those visits there were at least 4 young girls there who were available to any of the male guests in their private villas. One confirmed that there were “orgies” taking place with them.
Both Andrew and Clinton have a long history of philandering with inappropriate women. They both behave like hormone-drunk 16 year olds when it comes to the women/girls they associate with and lose all perspective on how this could affect their careers, families and future prospects. They both think they’re above the law, and in Andrew’s case that “Mummy” and Buck Palace will protect him. I really hope this snowballs into a massive reveal of the sleaze, cover-ups and outright lies that have been put into motion to protect what amounts to be a couple of truly hideous men.
Yep. And if this happens at the right time it’ll tank Hillary’s presidential aspirations.
He is breaking his mother’s heart.
Why are so many commenters feeling sorry for the queen? She indulged her son for YEARS. This is on her, too. So she gets a pass and William and Kate get raked over the coals for laziness? I think indulging a scumbag just because he’s your favorite is a lot worse than laziness.
VERY good point. I’m going to go read right now that Vanity Fair article everyone is talking about.
mte
Yes, Andrew has definitely been enabled, but even he should know that hanging out with a convicted sex offender is really stupid. So either he has no sense of judgement or Epstein has red hot dirt on him. Or both.
Megan, it could be a combination of factors re- continued involvement with Epstein. However, keep in mind, sex offenders are cold, callous individuals. The fact he maintained contact with Epstein post conviction leads me to believe he’s cut from the same cloth which leads me to believe the current allegations.
I agree! The only thing I appreciate about people feeling sorry for the Queen is that it is in juxtaposition to how people frequently jump to blame the mother for sick adults. In this case, though, I think Lady Slippers, Megan, etc have a great points in how she indulged him for way to long.
I think HM has indulged Andrew his entire life, and chose to believe him if/when he lied to her face. Chose to turn a blind eye and chose to do her ostrich impression. I’m not excusing that.
Now more than ever W&K&H may be needed to step up and get to work. Charles’s cull could happen sooner depending on the outcome of these legal issues. Andrew may be removed permanently along with any possibility of B&E as working royals. If that occurs, what happens to the 5-year EAAA helicopter employment plan and Harry’s hopes to be re-deployed to the Middle East?
I tend to believe this woman. I read some more detailed descriptions in the DM she gave of Andrew and his awkward, sweating, overtures and I almost gagged. He’s a complete pig and morally bankrupt.
I read that also, and tend to believe he would be that way. Bad dancing and icky in the romance department because he’s likely never in his life had to make a real effort at anything.
From the Vanity Fair article, it was odd to read, “But the major reason Andrew hung out with Jeffrey was to get money for Sarah Ferguson,” this person continued.
Did Andrew really have this friendship because he needed money for his ex-wife? She had huge debts and only paid 25% off? I wonder how they might update that article for 2015. Charles has his hunting, farming, artistic and aristo friends. Anne has her horsey set. Edward & Sophie have their family life. Who are Andrew’s friends? Does he have any that don’t involve foreign money? He used to golf. Does he have ‘golfing buddies’? Lots of angles that I’d love to know more about.
Evidently, Andrew has two qualities he seeks in a friend – wealth and debauchery. So sure he has golfing buddies but his favorites are rich in money and depravity.
Shudder. These rumors aren’t new at all – I remember a decade ago when they first surfaced – so it puzzles me that people are denying them so vehemently. I believe Virginia, and I hope Andrew faces at least some social consequences for this (I suspect it’s too much to hope that he’ll face legal ones). I also hope people finally start to recognize Clinton for the creep he is. Whatever his talents as a politician, he’s gotten too many passes for sexually harassing women in the past.
+1.
I think Dershowitz doth protest too much.
I agree with you. His reaction is a best defense is a firm offense. Old trick.
According to the DM today, Fergie calls Andrew “the greatest man there is”
If that’s true then how is it they drifted apart and divorced?
He was a full time naval officer when they married and almost always posted abroad for long stretches of their marriages.
She said they spent exactly 42 days together one year.
I remember how much crap she got for flying across the world to see her husband for a few days after B was born. She hadn’t seen him since the birth. He’d gone away days after it. Frankly, given how little time they spent together, it’s a wonder children were born of the marriage.
Their marriage never stood a chance. No foundations were built as they never dated for long. Pressure for Sarah to conform to the firm with no support whilst Andrew was away.
When her scandals hit the papers, they were forced to divorce. No marriage counselling, cool off blah blah blah.
It was straight to divorce court with no reprieve.
And Andrew really tried to stop the divorce because he never blamed her for any of it, but it had been decided and that was that.
Ironically, once the troubles came to light, they both made an effort to be considerate of each other and have been very good friends ever since and support each other absolutely.
Thanks LAK for that recap.
I wonder if some courtiers after Sarah married Andrew felt she was a bad influence on Diana? So perhaps another strike against Sarah?
Actually Diana occasionally encouraged Fergie to behave in ways not approved by the courtiers in order to gauge reactions and manage her own behaviour according to the result. Fergie was her canary so to speak.
Fergie is unruly, but easily led and manipulated. Plus lacks common sense or a sense of self preservation that could have helped her in many of the problems she continually finds herself in.
It doesn’t help that neither Sarah or Andrew had a lot of money. Especially considering their status and compared to Charles. They are motivated by money or rather the things money can buy, and this has led them to unsavoury characters.
I feel a lot of pity for her. She seems such a lost soul. No common sense or dignity, but no malice at all either. She would have been far happier if Andrew had never dated her to begin with.
I feel no pity at all for Sarah Ferguson. She married into a privileged life and threw it away. Though she wormed her way back in somewhat by using her children, then stating recently she’s part of a “tight unit.” She’s a greedy, selfish individual who shares a sick co-dependent relationship with an ex husband.
LAK, are you sure Andy and Fergie have no money? I think when news agency undercover caught Fergie pimping Andy, it was the tip of the iceberg.
When Fergie claimed to be sitting in a Thai jungle during W&K wedding, I seriously wonder about that trip and any other with or without Andy aka Prince Sleazebag given their business associates.
Andrew’s misbehaviors were always ignored by his mother. He’s the naughty boy who never grew up & still gets mama’s protection. Fergie’s been treated poorly by her in-laws from the time of the divorce but she remains a sleazy money-grubber who always publicly supports Andy in return for being allowed to live in his home. There may well be residual affection between them & some people think that they will remarry after Philip’s death, but Andy will never be faithful to any wife, much less an aged one.
For many years, Andy has resented his older brother as the heir & eventual ruler who can limit Andy’s access to family funds. Chas likewise resents this brother for his prime place in mama’s heart and her ongoing tolerance of the bad behaviors.
Andrew has always struck me as the stupidest and most entitled of Queen Elizabeth’s children. While I’m not a fan of Charles, I did like how he cut down the working family/royal list. I hate having to pay for them when they visit. So useless.
men are always dangerous, men with money are the worst because they know they can get away with anything.
No, men are not always dangerous. This is a dangerous attitude, actually. If you think no men can be trusted, you’re much more likely to be taken advantage of, since you don’t know what normal behavior for men is. (It’s the same as normal behavior for women: don’t treat people like crap.) I’ve seen far too many naive and inexperienced women taken in by “sensitive”, “exceptional” men who pretend all other men are dangerous in order to hook victims. This attitude also excuses dangerous men from their actions. It’s “boys will be boys”, and that’s completely wrong.
People with money know they can get away with anything. Combining that with male privilege and entitlement, men with money can be — and often are — incredibly dangerous. Power corrupts. But all men with money are not dangerous either.
Well said, Emily, and extremely important. In addition to the points you made, I will just mention that it is a very common (though rarely acknowledged, even by experienced therapists of all stripes) trope in abusive, quasi-incestuous and incestuous families to encourage children to not learn to trust people outside their families. In the case of abusive father-daughter relationships, some of the implications of the term “Daddy’s girl” are sometimes helpful, particularly when compared to the very contrived “daughter-as-deliberate-agent-of-seduction” put forth eagerly by many therapists, but rarely enough to really account for the multifaceted dynamic that occurs in these relationships.
I would say that there are more morally corrupt rich men then there are morally corrupt averagely wealthy “normal” men. The latter know they might be taken to court. The former just buy themselves out of court by pulling strings and by paying off their victims.
There are experiments which test how corrupt the different classes are. The upper classes are at average more corrupt.
And yes, there are more petty crimes and shoplifting at the bottom but that is partly out of need.
It’s utterly disgusting and inexcusable that rape and sexual slavery were instead treated as “soliciting prostitutes”.
I completely agree.
Honestly – what the HELL is up with the toe-sucking?! Many moons ago, Sarah Ferguson was photographed (while married, I believe) with some guy sucking her toes.
Never, have I ever, needed my toes sucked nor wanted to suck someone else’s toes. EEW! Is this really a thing? Please do share!
I’m getting, like, obsessed with this. For an interesting read, link through the VF article to the 2003 piece they did on Epstein. Apparently he was / is the Queen of England’s financial manager! Dum dum da dummmm!
Also, side note, it’s amazing how much he looks like Jerry Sandusky, another pedophile pervert.
Wasn’t Epstein a school teacher before he became a banker?
Is this the new annus horribilis for the House of Windsor?
2015 is five days old, and already old accusations are being rehashed, with the potential becoming major image-damaging scandals for the British Royal Family:
1) Prince Charles’ lawyers have leaned on the BBC to pull a documentary claiming he ordered a charm offensive on the British public to rehab his love rat image and to to accept former royal sidepiece Camilla Parker Bowles as his future consort. Judging the comments I’ve read in some British blogs, it didn’t work. Note to Clarence House courtiers and advisers: when you tell your boss to sic the royal lawyers on a TV network without going through the courts, you give the appearance of “truthiness” to that documentary, just sayin’.
2) Randy Andy’s chickens coming home to roost? Andrew has a rep for pushing up on anything with a XX chromosome, but now old charges that he cross the legal and pervy line in one of his sexacapes are coming back to haunt him. He’s denying it of course, but with the other parties involved it’s hard to give him the benefit of the doubt. His BBF Epttein is a convicted sex offender. Alan Dershowitz, who was also named and has vehemently denied the charges, cut a deal for Icky Epstein to get a slap on the wrist. The accuser, Virginia Roberts, is now working on a tell all book about this mess.
With the current news cycle and social media these steaming piles of scandal will not go away like they did before. I fear for the British monarchy when the queen is gone. I can’t find a grown up in the bunch.
It feels like there’s barely any morally upstanding famous or wealthy people out there. It’s really sick and sad.
Don’t know how anyone could doubt the veracity of her story. The fine details? Sure. But the general gist of powerful, wealthy men treating women like garbage and essentially forcing them into sexual slavery? No shock there for me. The ultra wealthy have always held themselves above the law, and that’s precisely why they are so morally bankrupt. When you can get away with anything, why do you care about the impact you have on others?
Slam!
Andrew is not the brightest he got money from Epstein for Fergie I’ve never heard they gave it back. Even after he convicted Andrew still got papped with him and had a friendship with him it says it all really. Do I think Prince Andrew took advantage of course he did if everyone else was having fun he has no spine he would off just joined in. There is a picture of him with the girl in question and he has admitted to getting “messages” he went to plenty of parties etc Andrew knew what was going on and either ignored it or joined in. Either way he is a disgrace and should no longer represent the Queen or the Royal Family. Arrogant Andy thought he had gotten away with it but this girl wants justice if it was just cash no doubt Epstein would have paid her off. There is talk he wrote a letter asking for Epstein to get a lighter sentence let’s all hope this comes out. And several of the girls under oath took the fifth when asked about Prince Andrew. Where there is smoke there is fire I think Andrew has really done it this time.
Google THE TALENTED MR. EPSTEIN and you will find a very interesting old piece on him from 2003 before he had been convicted.
Vicky Ward seems to have got it in one with the title to her Vanity Fair article from 2003 “The Talented Mr. Epstein” … with so much suspect about this man already over a decade ago one would’ve thought the Palace would’ve advised Andrew to keep well away.
http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2003/03/jeffrey-epstein-200303
Interesting how none of his siblings are stepping forward to defend him.
It doesn’t surprise me, though they, like I, probably think he’s guilty.
I don’t like any of the Queen’s children. William is the best hope at this point.
“William is the best hope at this point. ” That’s a terrifying thought.
“fancy foot work” lol!!
omg i almost died at that one!