Prince Andrew is ‘appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged crimes’

Trooping the Colour Ceremony, London, UK - 8 Jun 2019

The Mail on Sunday finally got their butts in gear on the Jeffrey Epstein-Prince Andrew story. Not content to simply smear the Sussexes, the Mail on Sunday somehow – ?? – got their hands on an exclusive paparazzo video from December 6, 2010, which was two years after Epstein’s shady deal with federal prosecutors, a deal which seemingly left him free to continue to abuse, rape and traffic girls. Prince Andrew had come to visit Epstein in Epstein’s Manhattan mansion on that cold day in December, and the paparazzo recalled seeing very young-looking women/girls go in and out of the house all while Andrew was inside.

According to the Mail, at one point, Andrew is seen in the video giving “a nod and a cheery wave to the pretty brunette as she leaves the £63 million Manhattan mansion. He appears entirely at ease but then, for a split second, glances around the door as if to check that no one had witnessed the brief encounter.” That happened “less than an hour after Epstein, who had been convicted of sex with a child in 2008, left the house in the company of a young, shivering blonde woman.” One “observer” told The Mail on Sunday that “several of the women leaving and entering the home while Andrew was apparently inside ‘looked very young indeed’.”

So, that was the story yesterday. I didn’t know what to expect from the royal family as far as ass-covering. I guess I just expected more smears against the Sussexes as a way to deflect from Andrew. But no – it’s apparently so bad that Andrew has now issued a statement:

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

[From NPR]

Pro-tip: you don’t have to say “alleged crimes” when the man took a shady deal in which he was put on the sex-offender registry. At that point, the crimes are no longer “alleged.” We describe it as “Epstein’s crimes” or “the crimes for which he was convicted.” As for “the suggestion he would condone, participate in or encourage” the exploitation of any person… literally, Andrew has been accused of raping a minor who was trafficked to him. Literally, there’s a video of Andrew waving goodbye to a very young woman (or underage girl) TWO YEARS AFTER Jeffrey Epstein’s pedophilia plea deal.

Here are some photos of the Duke looking super-appalled 24 hours after Epstein’s mysterious death:

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of WENN and Getty.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

73 Responses to “Prince Andrew is ‘appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged crimes’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mignionette says:

    JFC will one decent journo worth their salt write an in depth article on Prince Andrew already instead of re-printing soundbites and b*llshit statements from BP ?

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      The UK press have to tread lightly on this as they can’t print anything without evidence as the RF WILL sue them into oblivion if they did. This video clip is new evidence hence why its being reported on, also the Fail did a piece on how Andrew needs to come clean about what he knows and his relationship with Epstein and Maxwell. To me that reads that the press know things that they can’t print without exposing themselves to libel. Its only a matter of time before the full history of Andrew and those people become public knowledge, its being drip fed as it is now.

      • Mignionette says:

        But being sued into oblivion is a good place to start as Prince Andrew will effectively be ‘opening the door’. Also he will have to prove the truth of his statements whilst on the defensive and if he is later found to be guilty (which every rational adult can see), he will have perjured himself in a proceeding.

        He will effectively be finished.

      • Millennial says:

        Yeah I’m waiting for someone in the UK press to grow a backbone. Say what you will about the US, but the Washington Post would be so far up Andrews a** right now, lawsuit or not.

      • Beli says:

        But they’re presuming that he wasn’t involved and that he knew nothing. He’s being protected by headlines.

        The difference between “What did Andrew know?” and “How did Andrew not know this was going on?” is a crucial one.

        Most of us here would see through that, because we know a bit more about the case, but the average tabloid reader isn’t going to put that much thought into it as they glance through the paper.

      • Megan says:

        In the UK, the age of consent is 16, it’s 18 in the US. The crucial question for Andrew is where did he have sex with underage girls? If it was the UK and they were 16+, he is guilty of being a fcking pig, but that isn’t a crime as such. If was in the US, then he is guilty of rape. However, having sex with a minor is not a federal crime. It would have to be tried at the state level and I don’t know how likely or even feasible that would be. He won’t face any criminal charges for his behavior, which may discourage legit press from chasing down this story.

      • Darla says:

        But Megan, if the women were trafficked it’s a crime regardless of their ages.

      • Megan says:

        @Darla – Epstein and Maxwell are guilty of trafficking. Andrew could be guilty of soliciting a minor for sex, but that is part of the rape charge.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think the issue would become if the girls were victims of sex trafficking , how much could they have consented?

        I know this story has been known for a while, but my mind is still kind of blown that we are discussing the legal ramifications for the son of the Queen in terms of sleeping with a teenage girl who was trafficked by a sex offender.

      • Nic919 says:

        The talking point about age of consent needs to be retired. It is irrelevant since the girls were trafficked. It is also dangerous to keep pretending that consent was given by these girls when they have commenced civil lawsuits stating otherwise. That’s in addition to the criminal charges that were first laid as a result of the victims going to the police. Epstein should have been convicted of trafficking years ago and but for a shady deal he would be.

      • Mignionette says:

        @Megan – Andrew could be convicted of a WHOLE LOT MORE if it can be shown that he was aware of Epstein’s exploits and continued to partake in the exploitation and that is the reason for the ‘appalled’ statement today. He is technically an accessory to human trafficking, the very thing his daughter campaigns against. The video of him in the house when Epstein is not there is so damning it’s frightening it has existed without action for this long.

        That video was recorded 2 years after Epstein was indicted and just before he lost his trade envoy position. Both of those factors are smoking guns because one led to the other. BP and Govt advisors would have examined Andy’s potions, got legal advice on the Epstein’s trial /conviction and deduced that he was a ‘wrong-un’.

        I suspect Andy was then stripped of his position / volunteered to step down to avoid facing further scrutiny in the hope the whole mess would go away, which it did initially….

        Fast forward 10 years and an amazing Journalist (sorry forgot her name – someone please interject) uncovers the whole sordid plea-deal. Trump wishing to distance himself from the oncoming shit show distances himself from Epstein and Andy’s mooning arse is out for all to see bc Epstein kept that little black book….

      • kittencat says:

        Mignonette, please don’t state untrue things about the British court system as if they were fact.

      • Megan says:

        As for those photos of Andrew peeking out of Epstein’s house, I am far less outraged by pedo Andy’s behavior than I am by the fact that authorities did so little monitoring of a level 3 sex offender and child rapist that he could openly flaunt teenage girls in his house. It blows my effing mind.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      I also wonder how closely tied Andrew was to Epstein financially…..and I’m not talking about the odd hundred grand or so Epstein gifted Fergie with…..I mean, were there actual business transactions carried out between the two men? And of what nature were those transactions? Because Andrew also (in my view) has a significant amount of unexplained wealth and my tin foil hat keeps vibrating, whenever I think about how much of that may have come from deals with Epstein.

      • Megan says:

        Epstein was never a licensed broker in the US. I assume “financier” is how you say “money launderer” in polite company. Serious question, did Andrew ever have enough dirty money to need Epstein’s laundering services?

    • Tigerlily says:

      I hope that as all the video, photos come out that the British press will go after Andrew as wholeheartedly as they have after Meghan. I am appalled at the crap stories about the Sussex’s private jets, vacations etc whilst the “journalists” look away and whistle at possibly criminal activity by Andrew. And enough already with the AFA (Apologists For Andy) and their but but…the age of consent….. Bullsh*t. Age of consent is irrelevant if the girls were trafficked and/or coerced or lets just say it: raped. I am glad to see that this site is on it and doing stories about this creepy “Prince”/mama’s boy.

      • kittencat says:

        Tigerlily, you may want to familiarise yourself with British laws re: slander/liber/defamation.

    • Annaloo. says:

      There was a PHOTO of Andrew with his atm around one of those girls!! You cannot tell me he didn’t know. He knew! He absolutely knew!

  2. A random commenter says:

    Trying to distance himself from Epstein by claiming to not be aware of his crimes isn’t cutting it. Andrew *might* have had better luck with that story if he wasn’t photographed with Epstein and documented to be involved with him AFTER his arrest and plea. It’s implausible that Andrew’s protection officers wouldn’t have checked Epstein out, and surely his plea would have come up. No…Andrew knew exactly who Epstein was and he continued to spend time with him because Andrew is exactly the same.

  3. Arizona says:

    why would he be appalled? wasn’t he hanging out with this dude after his initial conviction? ridiculous.

    • Lahdidahbaby says:

      I’d say he’s appalled by the reports, not by the crimes.

    • Himmiefan says:

      Appalled that he got caught.

    • Sof says:

      Like most men in his position, he is appalled that we all know the girls were forced to be with him. He strikes me as the kind of a**hole who would tell his friends all about the pretty girls who wanted to have sex with him, omitting the obvious: they were never really interested in him.

    • Deedee says:

      He’s appalled that he got caught.

  4. Beli says:

    “The Duke of York has been appalled by the recent reports of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged crimes.”

    He was convicted over 10 years ago. Was the Duke appalled then? Apparently not.


  5. Digital Unicorn says:

    He is only ‘appalled’ because this is not going away and more dirt on him is being released. This video makes you wonder what else there is on him. And why was Andrew with young women in the house while Epstein was not there? Was Randy Andy also getting a ‘massage’.

    Denying ANY knowledge or reference to crimes he was CONVICTED for is only making things worse for the RF – Andrew needs to be made to come clean about the nature of his relationship with Epstein and what he knew of the sex trafficking as its obvious that he DID know what was going on. Mummy is not going to be able to make this go away!

    • Darla says:

      I am sure he only got massages from the same 50 yo german woman Dershowitz did. And that andy too, kept his underpants on.

    • Beli says:

      The royals’ press strategy doesn’t account for social media and it shows. They’re living in the past.

      A few years ago they would have been able to bury this in the press with a few words in the right ears (and did), but this story is everywhere and growing.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        Yes its like the William and Rose story, it grew legs and ran amok on Social Media. SM is more difficult to police and control than the mainstream media, hence why Royals/Politicians/celebrities etc.. struggle to make scandals go away now – the internet never forgets.

    • A random commenter says:

      Every journalist worth their salt is probably combing the archives now, searching for any old photos or footage of Andrew with anyone remotely connected to Epstein. The royal family would do well to try to get in front of this but they are stubbornly sticking with the old “but Andrew didn’t know!” excuse. Please. Nobody’s buying it and doesn’t look like mummy will be able to bury this scandal.

      • Bella DuPont says:

        @ random commenter

        With a stellar comment like this, I wonder why you’re on the other hand, falling so easily for the bait and switch “but her flights!!” tactic the RR + BRF are employing to try to bury this.

      • kittencat says:

        You know, Bella, some people see through ALL the Royal Family BS and haven’t picked sides in a family of creeps, losers, and scroungers.
        One can think they’re all awful to varying degrees.

    • Zapp Brannigan says:

      That several girls described as very young were in and out of that house in an afternoon that Andrew was there on his own suggests to me one thing, he was selecting one from a real life catalogue of what Epstein had in “stock”. Sorry to be blunt and if that offends but that is what came to mind for me.

      I agree with you Beli, the palace pr crew are in over their heads and are not up to the task of dealing with the internet side of modern media.

    • Becks1 says:

      I agree with all points. Andrew is appalled that this cant be covered up the way it was in the past. He – and the royal family – just cant keep up with social media. Honestly, maybe that’s a big downside to people like Will and Kate and presumably Harry (and others) not using Facebook, or not using IG in a personal way – its easy to think “gee the younger royals should sit down and talk to them” but its entirely possible that the younger royals are also relatively ignorant of social media and its reach. We just assume that they should be more SM-savvy since they are younger, and Facebook has been around for, what, 15 years now?

      Anyway the bit about being APPALLED because of these “alleged crimes” is just so incredibly tone-deaf. By this point – 2010 – he had been convicted. And like someone said upthread, the RPOs do their homework. My guess is even if this had been before the convictions, they still would have known the rumors and gossip about Epstein.

      • Erinn says:

        This exactly. This was such a bizarre phrasing – there’s no way he didn’t know ANYTHING when the guy was convicted like a decade ago. There’s a VERY VERY slim possibility that he didn’t know what JE was into, but I don’t believe he didn’t know. But even if he didn’t – there’s no way he hasn’t seen any piece of news on the guy that he’s SO friendly with over the last decade.

        And I agree about the SM comments. The younger royals might be better at selecting their photos and things like that to showcase on IG, but they don’t seem to understand just how incredibly fast news takes off and how hard it is to kill any story once it’s started. I don’t know if the advisers that are around everyone are just all dated and never bothered to keep up with tech, or what, but it’s crazy.

  6. Darla says:

    I have to be honest, I cannot get over this look-alike puppet thing. Just when I think I’ve heard it all…this is quite possibly, considering the context, the creepiest thing I have heard in my life.

    • MC2 says:

      What look-alike puppet thing?!? Looks like I’m going to have to do some clicking….

      • Jaded says:

        He used a look-alike puppet to grope a young woman’s breast at Epstein’s house in NY. How creepy is that….

  7. Zapp Brannigan says:

    “The Duke of York is appalled at the recent reports that implicate him in the crimes of convict Jeffrey Epstein. I mean Randy Prince Andy is special and is not a common pleb like all you oiks! He is a super special boy because his Mummy said so and his Mummy has her photo on currency so she should know who is a special poppet. The very idea that common people with No castles could judge him, well the very idea! He is not subject to the same laws as well, his subjects, and will bloody well do as he pleases with no repercussions.”

    But seriously I hope all the acts he committed comes to light, and that he is feeling every moment of horror that the children that were trafficked and abused for his entertainment, and the amusement of people like him, felt. I hope he never sleeps easy again, I hope he never knows a moments peace, but for me to think that I would need to believe that he has a conscience and regrets what he was involved in, and I have no reason to believe either of those things of this man.

  8. aquarius64 says:

    And people are screeching Meghan will be the reason the House of Windsor falls. The tabloids are still going after the Sussexes but too much has come out on Epstein the Evil the media can’t afford to ignore it. Two opinion pieces in the Fail are calling for Andy to explain himself; so are some members of Parliament. Yeah it’s gotten that real. Plus Andy brought Epstein to a joint milestone birthday party for Anne, Margaret, Andy himself AND William. A future king has been exposed to this monster. Yep Andy needs to explain for the sake of justice for the victims.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      @ Aquarius

      I totally agree with you.

      When the sight of a woc taking a private jet is more appalling to you than an alleged paedophile getting endorsed by the queen…..

      You need to ask yourself questions.

  9. JemimaLeopard says:

    The Met Police have stated they aren’t pursuing an investigation against Andrew. But if he was in the house.. where were the RPO’s? Is that why the Met won’t investigate? Because tax-payer funded police officers were inside the home of a convicted sex offender?

    • Becks1 says:

      I don’t know how these kinds of protection officers work (including Secret Service agents.) my guess is that they are bound by a code of confidentiality and can’t share any sort of details. But were they in the house itself? Did they see these young girls? Did they know what was going on? Those kinds of thoughts make me queasy; how long Andrew has been protected by those around him.

  10. Seraphina says:

    My oldest is usually appalled when his younger brother does something he shouldn’t and gets caught, while he was a willing accomplice. Anything to get out of trouble.

  11. OriginalLala says:

    If he is so appalled why was he friends with Epstein even after his conviction?

    Methinks the prince doth protest too much….

  12. Loretta says:

    He’s disgusting.

  13. Margo Smith says:

    “allegedly” lmao. Obvious Andrew has messed with underage girls. But with how much the royal family controls the media in britain, will he actually go to jail?

  14. My3cents says:

    Those pics of him smiling in the car really make my skin crawl . What an awful human being.

    • Darla says:

      Me too. It looks like he’s rubbing his hands together with malevolent glee right? I feel like somehow that photographer got just the right shot during a split second that andy let his true face show.

    • Becks1 says:

      It’s a chilling expression on his face especially considering the huge-ass smile on the Queen’s. I think those pictures are going to haunt the royal family.

    • Léna says:

      The smile of a man who knows his title and “power” protect him. Shameful

  15. Citresse says:

    Makes me wonder what else the Mail has got on sleazebag Andy??? C’mon Mail, don’t hold out on us, release more!

  16. Mego says:

    At least he didn’t fly on a private jet to the south of France like those awful, hypocrite Sussexes did. 🙄

  17. Mignionette says:

    At this point someone could just ‘leak’ a shit load of docs to a US paper and that would get the job done.

    Even Andy has to know that his life will never be the same again and he can’t just go back to how things were. This is not going away and very soon his patronages will start panicking and dropping him.

    All it takes is for a large donor to stop engaging with the NSPCC and then the NSPCC will in turn drop Andy which will just start the whole media circus again.

    Better to use the courts of due process rather than the courts of social media where you will be skewered every time your name comes up.

    Also the paps will follow him everywhere from now. Every move will be documented in minutiae, ready for that day they finally have enough on him to have him banged to rights.

    In essence he is fukked.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Not only will the follow him around now but they have already started digging into their past new archives to pull out gems like how Epstein and Maxwell were at Windsor on more than one occasion and that he threw a birthday party for Maxwell at Windsor (or was it BP).

      There is also Fergie and HER connections to Epstein and Maxwell.

      This is the gift thats going to keep giving. At some point the Fail will do what they do best – when this is all over no one will look at the RF the same again. Randy Andy will be the nail in the coffin for the RF as they are now – Chuck may get his wish to streamline the Monarchy sooner than he thinks. TQ maybe forced into cutting Andrew off not just from Royal duties but the line of succession as well. The public will not stand for a sexual deviant to stay in the succession.

  18. Otaku fairy... says:

    Nobody is going to fall for that statement.

  19. marjorie says:

    You know who should be appalled? Virginia Giuffre (Roberts). Andrew has basically called her a liar. Many, many people believe you Virginia and hopefully, one day, the truth – the actual truth, not the royal truth – will be good enough.

  20. aurora says:

    If this doesn’t bring the monarchy down, I don’t know what will.
    God, I’m so disgusted.

    • Becks1 says:

      Serious question, because people have been saying this a lot. what would this look like? a referendum? Would the people have to vote? Would parliament just refuse to accept the monarch?

  21. ariel says:

    So, does anyone know the rules on arresting and incarcerating a prince, the son of the reigning queen, for statutory rape, kidnapping, human trafficking?
    What are the realities, if, say, video shows up, with corroborating statements from victims?

    • Becks1 says:

      someone asked a few days ago about whether Andrew had diplomatic immunity. I knew he was a trade ambassador or whatever (so would have had immunity) but I’m not sure whether being a prince gives him immunity. What happens if he raped a woman in the UK? Are royals accountable to the law at all? hopefully someone from the UK can chime in.

  22. kerwood says:

    Is THIS why there’s so much heavy breathing over in the Sussex threads? Who cares about a disgusting old man forcing himself on a young girl when the Sussex family is taking private plane?

    One of the things that pedophiles and traffickers tell their victims is that if they tell somebody, they won’t be believed. And, if people DO believe them, THEY WON’T CARE. I think this is being proven. MPs have commented on the Duchess of Sussex. Have any of them mentioned talked about THIS?

    Racism even trumps rape and pedophilia.

  23. Syd says:

    He’s appalled that some people are talking about this and that his name is in the conversation.
    He wasn’t appalled when Epstein was convicted and released. He kept hanging around him. Send him to the tower.

  24. YankLynn says:

    That video of Andrew at Epstein’s house is pretty damning in my view. It was post conviction, but still Andrew couldn’t stay away from him. Epstein leaves the house with Andrew still inside, obviously a comfort level there. We see at least 3 young women in and out in that short clip and one at least Andrew feels compelled to walk to the door and wave to, like a host might do anyway. Except at Epstein’s house.

  25. Deedee says:

    The Windsor’s May have Andrews back in public, but Andrew and Fergie beat it out of Scotland pretty fast after Prince Phillip showed up for vacation. And he wrote Fergie off after that toe sucking incident, so I can’t imagine how he’s reacting to this scandal.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Given what has come out over the weekend, its obvs that they knew this was coming so ran away to avoid the press. The Fail is continuing to drop carefully written pieces that are making big holes in Andrew’s defence of ‘he didn’t know’. They’ve just dropped a piece based on an old VF article that talks about Andrew and another friend arguing over his continued friendship with Epstein – in it Andrew states that he’s going to be loyal to his friend (Epstein) as loyalty is a virtue.

  26. FredsMother says:

    This disgusting pig shared a young girl with Epstein, allegedly. Stripped HER naked, commented on her blossoming figure🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮 and licked her toes. LICKED. HER. TOES. I cannot express my distress. I am particularly disturbed because I have a 6 y.o daughter. 6.

    Epstein, Trump et al. are accused of raping 12, 13 and 14 y. o girls. A lot of people besides Prince Andrew are involved. Sex with little girls. I mean. I am facking foaming at the mouth. It was known. Many witnessed. I saw pictures of one of the little girls on a yacht surrounded by grown-ass old men, adult women. No one dragged her little girl ass out and called her mamma for her. I am so livid!!!!! It is wrong, was wrong, will always be wrong that adults on that boat did not object. Did not wrestle her off that boat. No one said this shit can’t happen!!!!!!!! Man, that is just bullshyttt!!! Ms. Naomi Campbell and other models need to step forth and shine a light. What do they know????!!!

  27. bonobochick says:

    That grinning photo on the way to church still annoys TF outta me. Ugh.

  28. Bread and Circuses says:

    You can see the video here:

    And yeah, those girls look really young.

    Like, they COULD be eighteen…but they also could be fifteen.