Sarah Ferguson ‘stuck to her guns’ about refusing to apologize to Jeffrey Epstein

Sarah, Duchess of York leaves Claridge's

It’s not that I deeply care about all of these old stories regarding Jeffrey Epstein and the Duke of York. I think it’s been well-established already that Prince Andrew’s association with Epstein was always a huge problem, and that Andrew participated in similar crimes. The questions I have are about how many crimes did Andrew commit with Epstein and all of those underage, unconsenting trafficked girls. The questions I have are about what’s happening now with the criminal case and all of the civil cases, and whether Andrew will be deposed in any of the lawsuits, or whether he’ll give testimony (or even be charged) in the criminal case.

But for now, let’s just keep reminding everyone that the Duke of York and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson were deeply and intimately involved with Epstein. In 2011, Epstein gave Fergie about $20K, either as a gift or a loan. That came out at the time, and it was years after everyone knew that Epstein had trafficked and abused girls for years. Fergie apologized publicly but never confirmed if she gave the money back. As part of her apology, she called Epstein a pedophile (which he was). And for that, Epstein wanted to… sue Fergie? Look, if she can’t take a pedophile’s money and still call him a pedophile, what’s the point?

The Duchess of York was threatened with legal action by disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein after she publicly called him a paedophile, it has been claimed. Sarah Ferguson made the statement in a 2011 interview after it emerged she had accepted £15,000 from her ex-husband’s former friend to help clear a personal debt. Epstein had given the money to one of Fergie’s assistants at the request of Prince Andrew. But the payment, which came after Epstein’s release from prison over child sex offences, caused a furore when it became public.

The duchess subsequently accepted she had made a ‘gigantic error of judgement’ and offered a ‘heartfelt’ apology. Speaking to the Evening Standard she said: ‘I deeply regret Jeffrey Epstein became involved in any way with me. I abhor paedophilia and any sexual abuse of children and know that this was a gigantic error of judgment on my behalf. I am just so contrite I cannot say. Whenever I can I will repay the money and will have nothing ever to do with Jeffrey Epstein ever again. What he did was wrong and for which he was rightly jailed.’

According to sources, Epstein – clearly in denial about the scale of his crimes – was incensed by her suggestion he was a paedophile. The billionaire was convicted in 2008 of procuring an under-age girl for prostitution and served 13 months in jail. In 2011 it is understood Epstein hired an unnamed firm of lawyers to sue the duchess, unless she retracted her media statement. At the same time he took on the services of crisis management PR firm Sitrick & Co to deal with the scandal over his friendship with Andrew, who was infamously photographed with the shamed billionaire following his release from prison.

The firm, which confirms it provided ‘consulting advice and public relations services concerning Epstein’s relationship with Prince Andrew’, advised him how to handle the media storm. As a result of the outcry, the Queen’s son was forced to publicly apologise and lost his job as a roving UK trade ambassador. In 2014 Sitrick sued Epstein for £65,000 in unpaid fees relating to their services. In recently re-surfaced court papers, which meticulously chart what the PR firm did on Epstein’s behalf, it includes a reference on March 15, 2011 to ‘work on statement for Fergie’. Two days later, on March 17, 2011, it adds ‘revise suggested statement for Fergie’.

A source close to the duchess said yesterday that the ‘for Fergie’ reference relates to a statement drafted for Epstein which he was trying to get her to release. The source added: ‘Epstein tried to force the duchess to release a statement retracting her suggestion that he was a paedophile which he had drafted by his PR firm. Epstein was very unpleasant and very aggressive. She stuck to her guns despite the pressure being put on her and refused to comply.’ Eventually Epstein halted his threat of legal action.

[From The Daily Mail]

“She stuck to her guns despite the pressure being put on her and refused to comply…” So brave, Fergie. She stuck to her guns, kept the $20K AND called him a pedophile. Where’s her Nobel Prize?? Not to mention, Fergie has been happily doing the most to cover up for Andrew for years, and even now, she wants the conversation to be “are Andrew and Fergie getting back together?” Rather than “why did Andrew get Jeffrey Epstein to give money to his ex-wife?” Or “how many trafficked girls did Andrew abuse?”

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty and WENN.

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

27 Responses to “Sarah Ferguson ‘stuck to her guns’ about refusing to apologize to Jeffrey Epstein”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. OriginalLala says:



    that is all.

    • Birdix says:

      How do these people continue to be symbolic figureheads? It’s the frog in the slowly boiling water, I suppose…

    • Bella DuPont says:

      And I keep seeing people argue that these clowns aren’t celebrities.


      In fact, in many cases (like this), they behave far worse and with far less dignity and integrity than your average, money hungry, shady, Hollywood types.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        Hollywood types still depend in their reputation with the masses for their money. The royals get money by virtue of their birth alone, and answer to no one. That’s the price of having a monarchy.

  2. Becks1 says:

    well, you go Fergie. Way to stick to your guns. You were so contrite and ashamed etc but none of that stopped you from taking the money in the first place.

    • Anners says:

      “I will fly on your planes. I will visit your exotic homes. I will accept your ill-gotten gains to fund my lavish lifestyle, but I *will not* apologize for calling you a pedophile.”
      #ihavestandards #feministforever #whiteladybrave

  3. minx says:

    Those poor kids, with these parents.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      Beatrice & Eugenie seem to have turned out very well for having two parents like the Duke & Duchess of York. I have always liked both Beatrice & Eugenie.

  4. himmiefan says:

    All I can see is that dress. Oh my…

    As my mother used to say, you are the company you keep.

  5. Ugh says:

    Fergie is irresponsible, selfish, worthless, utter f$cking TRASH.

  6. Zapp Brannigan says:

    The cynic in me thinks that money was the first payment for something (silence, introductions of some sort) before she was rumbled. I also think that cash scam for introductions to Andrew was an agreement between her and Andrew and they split the proceeds, no way money was being made without Andrew wetting his beak.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Yeah, I think she was the front for Andrew getting money for introductions to people via his role as UK trade ambassador. There is more to this story than the under age trafficked girls, there is shady money deals that is being covered up.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      I think there’s more to it, too. Which is why I also think the royal family will never let Andrew be deposed or charged with a crime — because, I doubt it is ONLY Andrew who has shady financial deals going on. The royal family will not want to set a precedence that its members can be sued, deposed, etc. Even if they don’t care about what happens to Andrew, it’s the precedence that counts. That’s why even after the Queen dies, Andrew will still be given immunity and protected. People who think Charles will let Andrew take a fall are dreaming.

  7. Marjorie says:

    No F-ing way this was over the paltry sum of $20 grand.

  8. Cee says:

    If my ex husband, father to my underage daughters, had a close relationship to a convicted paedo I break down any kind of relationship with him. So yeah, Fergie, way to stick to your guns-

  9. Mignionette says:

    So how can Andy continue to deny that he was not aware of Epstein’s ‘life style’ when Fergie was calling him a Paedophile in media interviews in 2011, when he was still in communication with Epstein?

    Surely Fergie would have expressed her doubts about Epstein to Andy given that he had been around their daughters and at Bea’s 18th no less ?

    This whole situation is beginning to make them look extremely shady and evil.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      This whole episode makes no sense. The pieces do not fit. There must be much more that we do not know.

      • Senator Fan says:

        I think you’re right and there’s way more that we don’t know that will come out. There’ waay more to this story and I think the surface hasn’t even been scratched yet. This whole thing creeps me out and makes me shudder.

  10. Fluffy Princess says:

    Fergie is a money grubbing hag. She would sell her soul, anything and everyone down the river for a bit of shine.

    I love how the RF, keeps relying on the women in the family to cover for the BS of the men. Both the Queen and FergieTrash trotted out to put band-aids all over Andrew’s “reputation.”

    It is too late. The jig is up! We already know and there is no credible explanation for his paedo ways. Sorry, not sorry.

  11. cluces says:

    Sarah knows who and what Epstein was. There’s pictures online with Andrew and Sarah taking pictures with Epstein housekeeper. Is it protocol for royalty’s to fraternize with the help?

    When Piers Morgan was on the “APPRENTICE” he called Sarah for help (rich somebody to make a big donation). According to Morgan, Sarah rich friend/friends secured his WIN! Could it have been Epstein??????

    • Senator Fan says:

      You bring up a good point and I vaguely remember this. Could of well been Epstein that supplied the money which eventually led to his win. Interesting.

  12. Ann says:

    Some of the Epstein victims lost their civil suits in Florida recently, yesterday, IIRC. They were told to be grateful that their stories were heard and that they have changed history for victims’ rights. It was a total sham. I don’t think these scumbags will ever face real justice.