Prince Andrew still has his £300K security & federal prosecutors want to talk to him

Commonwealth Day Observance Service, London, UK - 11 March 2019

I hope you’ve noticed that I stopped doing stories on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s security and security costs. I always loathed those stories anyway, and I made the executive, Top CEO decision that I wasn’t going to participate in the British media’s complete hysteria over the very idea that their years-long racist abuse towards the Duchess of Sussex might inspire regular citizens to abuse Meghan as well, and that perhaps the British taxpayer is absolutely on the hook for paying for the Sussexes’ security. There are very real threats against Meghan and Harry, but you’d never know that by the British media coverage. All of which to say, we don’t really know (at this point) who is paying for what security-wise while the Sussexes live in America, but we know that the British media would have us all believing that there will be riots in the street if a black woman gets taxpayer-funded security.

Speaking of, the British media seems sort of fine with a rapist and human trafficker getting full royal protection, even months after he left full-time royal status.

Prince Andrew will keep his £300,000-a-year taxpayer-funded bodyguards after complaining to the Queen. The Duke of York, 60, was set to lose all three protection officers last Monday following a Home Office cost-cutting review. But the Queen asked courtiers to intervene. The proposed cuts were also set to hit Princess Anne, and Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex and their families.

A royal source said: “The Queen’s children all lobbied her but Andrew has been the most persuasive. She has made it clear that she was not happy with the proposal. It has been stopped and will be reviewed over the next few weeks.”

Andrew quit royal duties seven months ago due to his links to paedo Jeffrey Epstein. His minders are each thought to cost £100,000 a year in wages, flights, perks and hotels. Sources estimate total Royal Family security costs taxpayers over £100million a year. The Home Office launched its review earlier this year.

Graham Smith, of anti-monarchy group Republic, said: “If Andrew is not performing public duties, there is no reason to employ security. He can privately pay for any security he wants. If the Home Office and police have looked at the risk and judged that he does not warrant round-the-clock security then it is appropriate.

[From The Sun]

Of course mummy’s favorite was the “most persuasive.” Mummy has to do everything in her power to protect her favorite rapist and human trafficker. Mummy’s favorite way of protecting her favorite is by throwing her ginger grandson and his black wife to the wolves constantly. The fact that there are still hundreds of headlines about the Sussexes’ security situation right now, all while the Queen quietly ensured that Andrew, Anne and the Wessexes all had round-the-clock protection in quarantine?? Well, it’s rich. And Andrew can’t pay for private security – he’s mysteriously broke. His financial situation took a big hit as soon as Jeffrey Epstein died. Which is still so f–king curious to me. Lord, I wish the British media would dig into that.

Speaking of Andrew’s Epstein connection, this story broke last night: federal prosecutors are now formally requesting Prince Andrew sit for FBI questioning regarding his ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

Federal prosecutors in New York have formally requested through the British government to speak with Prince Andrew as part of their criminal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s history of sexual abuse, according to a person familiar with the matter. The request, made under a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, or MLAT, is similar to a subpoena in this case for Prince Andrew’s testimony.

It’s a rare move to seek an interview like this through MLAT, officials say, and it’s focused on making sure the investigation is as thorough as possible. U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman foreshadowed the move in March when he said he would consider legal action after Prince Andrew’s representatives had closed the door to an interview.

“Contrary to Prince Andrew’s very public offer to cooperate with our investigation into Epstein’s co-conspirators, an offer that was conveyed via press release, Prince Andrew has now completely shut the door on voluntary cooperation,” Berman said, adding that his office is “considering its options.”

[From NBC News]

While I doubt anything will actually happen – clearly, Andrew hasn’t even LOST HIS SECURITY – it’s great because federal prosecutors continue to exert pressure privately and publicly. And it’s just another reminder that Andrew is a giant liar who promised to sit down with authorities but still refuses to.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and the royal family enjoy a flypast by the RAF at Trooping the Colour on Saturday 8 June 2019

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red and WENN.

Related stories

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

97 Responses to “Prince Andrew still has his £300K security & federal prosecutors want to talk to him”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Digital Unicorn says:

    So he is the hill TQ and the Monarchy have chosen to die on? Karma has not finished with you yet Queenie nor your favourite who it seems you will burn the institution down to protect and give him what he wants.

    Makes you wonder what other evidence Mummy is desperate to stop from coming out about him. Virginia was not the first or last.

    If Queenie stops this request then she may as well just abdicate – its an abuse of power. He said he would help several time and now it has officially been requested by the US authorities he’s sh!t his diaper.

    • ABritGuest says:

      I will never understand the Queen’s handling of Andrew situation from moment Virginia Guiffre news first emerged in 2015& the Queen gave him a medal. isn’t the Queen always praised for putting crown& country first? Why is Andrew the hill to die on when he’s been soo toxic to the royal ‘brand’ for many years now. On one hand love that it shows how awful these people are especially as people think of the Queen as the nation’s nan.

      I can’t see Britain agreeing to this request especially as Boris Johnson has been an Andrew defender& is pro monarchy.

      Where is the outcry over non working royal Andrew continuing to get taxpayer funded security? Oh I’m sorry no half black woman attached to him- carry on.

      Also funny how they ramp up the security figures for the Sussexes. When they thought public would pay for it the tabloids claimed it would be £20m a year.

      • Pearl Grey says:

        The Queen’s handling of Andrew actually makes perfect sense for her, when you consider that it is obvious he is guilty. She has closed ranks around him, using every trick to deflect from him and help him evade questioning, because she knows what he has done and that if it was ever proven, it could spell the end of the house of Windsor. Anti-monarchists and republic movements would have a feast, and this time they would be serving the best course on the menu to lobby for abolition. It is bad enough that some think she is shielding a sex offender, but without an investigation, nothing is confirmed, which keeps them at bay for now. By protecting him, she is protecting herself and the monarchy. It would not survive if Andrew was charged and convicted of any wrongdoing, because everyone would know that she and the next in line aided and abetted him, so she is making sure it never gets to that point, even if it will be a stain on her reign. If he was innocent, he would not be refusing to cooperate with the FBI. The monarch and heir must hide his guilt, so they can hide their guilt by association.

    • Tessa says:

      It makes me sick to see how Harry and Meghan are accused of being “evil” and people want them “stripped” of their titles and have no money from Charles for security. Yet Andrew gets protection and he’s seen as “virtuous” by those who loathe Harry and Meghan.

    • Minny says:

      Ooo Liz is in soo much trouble. She knew all the time. Andy’s abuse of young girls is not the only thing the Feds have on him. Familiarize yourself with the phrase Transnational Crime Syndicate and Andy’’s link to Tower Financial, Ghislaine Maxwell and her daddy Robert Maxwell. Remember daddy Maxwell got suicided before Epstein made it a thing. Is that why granny is keeping his security? Liz knows all about the croooking and criming. Anywho, the Patriarchy is holding to power with bloody finger nails and that means Andrew. If/when he talks to the Feds the game is up for everybody. Panama Papers and whatever is in those Australian papers it’s just the tip of the iceberg. Is this why Harry said,”If you knew what I knew.”🤔

    • Penguin says:

      The man is and has always been vile. I hope they do let him launch”a very public defence” and end up confessing in the process. From all the hills to die on.

  2. Eleonor says:

    Well done Royal Family, well done.
    Happy to be in France where the king was beheaded!

    • Carobell says:

      It is just tone deaf. All this does is enforce the idea that the monarchy is out of touch with the needs and desires of their subjects. Which is what eventually got the king beheaded.

    • Mac says:

      I fail to see why Andrew needs security. His house is on the Windsor estate, which is already guarded and his schedule is no longer public. He can hire a private firm to send a body guard when he feels he needs one.

  3. ArtHistorian says:

    I shouldn’t be surprised but I am still gobsmacked that the Queen intervened so that her scandal-ridden son who no longer performs public duties still has security paid by the British public. Talking about being utter tone-deaf!

  4. Rapunzel says:

    Tin foil tiara theory- both the Cambs and the Sussexes are being fed to the wolves by Petty Betty II. It’s become increasingly clear that the serious scandals stories about those younger royals are being timed for maximum distraction, deflection, and misdirection. The Cambs’ involvement was simply to feed the media beast before GanGan fed them to it. It’s all about protecting pedo Andy.

    • Tessa says:

      I don’t see the Cambridges being fed to the wolves. THe blogs and Comments praise these two to the skies. Meghan and Harry are deemed the “evil” ones and there is full throttle by the bots of those who praise the Cambridges to the skies.

    • Pink says:

      I could buy into this theory. Throw everyone else under the bus to distract from the serious issues. Although the only thing I would say is that the whole Tatler thing really isn’t being run that widely by the media, apart from the daily mail, because our media is only really covering coronavirus and how terrible the government has been in their response, and more recently, the BLM protests.

  5. Talie says:

    Between this and the article over the weekend about Sophie and Edward living in a 57 room house…like, I can’t. All the hand-wringing over Meghan and Harry was just such theater.

  6. bub244 says:

    Please PLEASE come and take him America … and maybe give us Anne Sacoolas?

  7. VS says:

    Has this been reported in the UK by actual newspapers and not tabloids? I didn’t see in the FT or the Guardian…….anyway by the NBC story, at least prosecutors int he US are taking actions and it looks like Lizbeth is behaving as expected as far as her dreadful son is concerned….why are people surprised?

  8. Who ARE these people? says:

    Was he the most persuasive because he was the most desperate due to fears about his physical security given his past crimes and his association with Epstein?

  9. Sofia says:

    So if Andrew’s security is 300k, that means the Sussexes security detail is roughly the same so it’s about 600k or something for them both. I’m assuming since Archie is too small to go anywhere on his own, he really doesn’t have his own security but let’s say he gets one when he’s with his nanny or something. That’s around 700k for the whole family.

    That’s… not a lot. Okay it’s a lot by our standards but it’s peanuts compared to royal standards. So much hysteria over paying for the millions in Sussex security when it’s potentially not even 1 million (and I’m assuming these values are somewhat true). Once again, I know 700k is a lot but it’s definitely not the 20m the DM were shouting

    • molly says:

      Security was NEVER as much as DM and others were “estimating”. Let’s say it is 700k. That’s a couple paid speaking engagements- always something Harry and Meghan could easily knock out in a weekend. The “hoooooow will they pay for this security!” always made me roll my eyes the hardest. Even if they have to pay for it themselves, they’ll be just fine.

    • MsIam says:

      It like the “$500k baby shower” and Meghan’s $1million per year wardrobe. These people are so FOS it’s incredible.

  10. P says:

    I think sadly this criminal will not be convicted for anything.

    • MsIam says:

      Convicted only in the court of public opinion and you know they don’t give a damn about that.

  11. Izzy says:

    Somewhat hilariously, the MLAT request was supposed to be kept confidential until a decision was made, but WHOOPSIE somebody leaked it.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I wonder how much money Christian Jones partner was paid for it?

    • morrigan01 says:

      Hmm. But who initially leaked the MLAT request? Was it The Sun? Because if it wasn’t and was actually NBC News (like the link above shows) then I actually don’t put the leak for this on KP, or W&K. I think it might be quite possible that the Feds might have leaked it themselves for – some reason.

      If it WAS The Sun though, then yikes! I can’t imagine the US Feds were happy about that – or with the person who leaked it.

      • Nic919 says:

        I could see the American side leaking it too. Fewer repercussions.

      • HeyJude says:

        Feds probably leaked it themselves. They have very little leverage diplomatically/legally in getting him to cooperate with them unless they charge him, except for via public opinion pressure in Britain.

  12. morrigan01 says:

    Andrew won’t ever be brought to trial over anything. Not really. At least, if he actually goes and talks to the Federal Prosecutors. If he keeps trying to dodge them, well, that could be a whole different story.

    But what the Feds *really* want from Andrew is names. Names, dates, and locations regarding things. They want him to talk – about Ghislaine Maxwell probably most specifically. But also about Epstein. Or, more to the point, his “suicide” that everyone damn well knows *wasn’t* a suicide and if he might, you know, have any info about that. He talks, tells everything he knows, and he’ll avoid jail time.

    Because really, Andrew isn’t the biggest fish to catch in all of this. There are many *many* others, who have much more power. Andrew was just one who was dumb and didn’t cover his tracks very well.

    • Bella says:

      I think you could be right, Morrigan. Establishment protecting one of their own, etc.

    • Nic919 says:

      Why isn’t there a full out Interpol search for Ghislaine Maxwell? She is the number two in this horrendous mess. It is crazy that she isn’t in custody at this point.

      • HeyJude says:

        Ghislaine has intelligence asset written all over her, that’s why. She’s very likely being harbored by a state.

        Interpol likely knows that. Much as the US authorities seem to.

      • Bucky says:

        I’d think that prosecutors would line up all of the evidence possible before charging her. She’s a target of the investigation.

  13. jen says:

    As a reminder, he also hasn’t lost his HRH titling like the Sussexes have.

    (I’m going to keep beating that drum because it is so ridiculous.)

    • BayTampaBay says:

      The Sussex have not lost their HRH. The Sussexes agreed not to use the style of HRH on a daily basis while living in North America and/or not working as Senior Royals.

      • Betsy says:

        In the meaningful sense of the word, I would consider that stripped of HRH.

      • sarah says:

        Yep – I really doubt that Andy is going to be able to go around using HRH in future but we’ll see.

      • Jen says:

        They technically have it but have been told/agreed not to use it. For practical purposes, a big deal was made out of them not being able/supposed to use it. Andrew, even if he isn’t currently using it, has not had that made public.

    • Tessa says:

      The Sussexes still have the HRH but can’t use it. Theoretically if the Queen allows them to do part time duties in the UK they can use it then or should use it then.

      • Jen says:

        It doesn’t change the fact that it was treated as a punishment for them – not allowing them to use it and being very public about it while there not being any public announcement of Andrew not using it.

    • Pink says:

      As much as I want him to pay for his crimes, from HM’s perspective if he is told not to use HRH it is more or less the family admitting they know hes guilty. We ALL KNOW he is but I can see why they may not publicly be trying to ostracised him.

  14. Becks1 says:

    I remember reading once – years ago, maybe around the time of W&K’s wedding – that Sophie only had security when she was performing public duties. Its funny to me now because the article specifically referenced how happy she was to be able to jump into her Jaguar and do the school run by herself. Lordy someone must have told the royals years ago that “doing the school run” makes you seem relatable. But that may have changed.

    Anyway – if there is a need for them to have security, they should have security. but I am guessing it if it was recommended that they lose their security officers, there isn’t a need. Do the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester or Kent have security? I’m going to assume no. Sure, Anne is a bit more visible and recognizable, but I feel like Edward and Sophie could really fly under the radar if they wanted.

    As for the Epstein bit – I agree with someone up above that the FBI knows they aren’t going to arrest Andrew. They want to know every single thing he knows though.

    • KellyRyan says:

      FBI, SDNY do not need information from PA. They have computers, diaries, notebooks, witnesses. We have people living in our community who are in WITSEC. Government protection for witnesses. I suspect there is more than one employee of Epstein who is in WITSEC.

      • Becks1 says:

        Of course they want information from him. They aren’t trying to talk to him for funsies. They may seeking corroborative information, but they want information.

        The chances that they will arrest and prosecute him are basically nil.

      • morrigan01 says:

        How do you know they don’t need info from PA? This whole thing with the FBI-SDNY and him isn’t them trying to arrest PA. They specifically want to *interview* him. They want to talk to him. And if they want to talk to him, that means they think he has info that they – at the moment – think helps their investigation into what Epstein’s whole operation was . . . as well as possibly some other things/people.

        If the info PA might have can get them a bigger target? They would totally stike a deal with him where he dosen’t go to jail or anything like that for his cooperation.

      • KellyRyan says:

        FBI media relations to appear as if they are taking action. Keep in mind any FBI member can be at high risk in an investigation. How do I know? I had a retired FBI agent as a neighbor, and am involved with LE where I live. Watch it play out. There will be settlements and NDA’s from the BRF to victims.

  15. KellyRyan says:

    He can’t testify. He’d be taken out by those in high places who do not want their names revealed. Where is he to go, disappear into Switzerland and never be seen again.

    • morrigan01 says:

      At the moment, the Feds don’t even want him to testify. They want to have a sit down meeting with him, meaning they want him to give up people to save his own ass from even the possibility that they’ll arrest him and bring him up on anny types of charges, even if it’s just for something like obstruction of justice.

      The fact that he’s been dodging even an interview with the Feds means he knows there is no way he can talk himself out of this mess, short of giving up names during the interview, to avoid arrest/jail/a trial on an obstruction of justice charge.

      But if he talks? Eh . . . I can’t say for sure someone wouldn’t try to . . . you know. Might even try it *before* he met with the Feds if it even remotely looked like he was going to talk. Which makes the fact that this thing leaked . . . .

      *Could* he make a run for it? IDK, given how that would make the RF look if he did . . . .

      • KellyRyan says:

        He’s in a no win situation. The Epstein murder/suicide was a warning. Run for it? No? BRF always attempts to cover their rotten carcus through the media. Some will believe, most will not.

  16. Sunshine says:

    I watched the Epstein documentary yesterday. I thought there were so many questions unanswered. This information is available in the public domain, though not widely reported. Can you imagine what we don’t know? How many Royal media embargoes are there?

    • CL says:

      I watched it this weekend. So hard to watch.
      And I agree that there is a lot the public doesn’t know, and I am sure that there are v powerful men all over the world who are making sure things stay buried. The tapes from his NYC townhouse alone….

  17. S808 says:

    So his security is reported to be $300K while the Sussexes is in the millions…..I’m not even mad anymore. Andrew getting to keep his titles and security despite not serving the public anymore vs H&M says enough on its own. The fact that the gp has no smoke for Andrew vs H&M sends a message as well. *shrug*

  18. Pearl Grey says:

    I’m awaiting the national outrage that they are spending £300,000 of taxpayers money for a non-senior, non-working royal and for the newspapers to lead the charge that he must pay back every penny and relinquish use of his HRH title.

  19. 10KTurtle says:

    Of course he needs the RPOs to protect him from law enforcement! I’m a little bit sad in a petty sort of way that QEII won’t be alive to see Charles throw Andrew to the FBI wolves after her death.

    • Betsy says:

      That is a thing. Because while I don’t know that Charles will make his brother speak to prosecutors, he won’t give him the protection Lizzie does.

    • MsIam says:

      I don’t see that happening. Charles knows what Andrew has been up to and I bet Andrew will try and take him down too. It’s a deal with the devil between those two.

  20. Lizzie says:

    I think the monarch’s (and future monarch) children should have security for life. They are high risk simply by being the monarch’s child. I don’t know why it has suddenly been tied to ‘working’.
    I hope PA is held accountable legally but I think all of Liz’s children are entitled to security. As Charles is next in line his children deserve security for life as well. That ‘working’ nonsense was just made up for H&M.

    • Tessa says:

      Charles should pay for both his sons.

    • yinyang says:

      Why should tax payers fund their security for life, they are worth over 10 Billion. Every other billionaires and millionaire pay for their own security out of their own pockets and their kids too. Frankly Andrew, Kates, Williams security matters less to me (the taxpaying public) than the security of my nieghbors kids?? They can dip into their billions.

  21. NoWords says:

    I hate this sniveling, punchable, rat-faced, POS. He deserves nothing but a cold, dark, jail cell.
    I have nothing else I want to write on the internet about him.

    Also, save the taxpayers! Every single person with the last name Mountbatten Windsor is ridiculously wealthy and privileged. They can ALL afford to pay for their security on their own. In fact, that whole family is sitting on so much (stolen) wealth that they could fund themselves (sure maybe they’d have to downgrade on the jewelry and palaces/mansions, poor things). The taxpayer money should go BACK to the taxpayers – to the hospitals, schools, social programs, housing, etc,. I find the whole thing so offensive especially when we consider where we are in society now. Grenfall towers and the people that lived there are still f-cked, there’s a pandemic going on, there are huge issues in the economy so people are going to be fighting off financial woes, and the Mountbatten-Windsor clan is complaining about potentially not getting “taxpayer-funded security.” GMAFB.

    I’m American and I get pissed that money I work my ass off for, and get verbally abused by people for, gets taken away and goes to God knows where – because it’s certainly not coming back to the people of Oklahoma. I cannot imagine losing a cent to royalty. Even a dollar per person adds up to so much. Get rid of the taxpayer funding, get rid of the titles and treasures, stop living off nepotism. Abolish the monarchy.

    • Lizzieb says:

      @nowords.👏👏👏👏👍. Well said. Agree with so much. As an aside Pedo Andy makes my hand itch I so want to slap him.

      • NoWords says:

        I’ve never liked any of the royals but this year each one of them has left an acidic taste in my mouth. They have all appeared so out of touch and all of them could donate millions and do more but…..no………..

        If Andrew doesn’t have security… I’m done. Lips zipped. Infer what you want haha

    • KW says:

      right here for your words. I feel sick with this POS still peaking around corners. PUKE.

  22. JaneDoesWerk says:

    Well there goes any remaining appearance that the Queen and her firm weren’t just being petty with Meghan and Harry.

    She personally paid for Andrews $8.5million debt over his luxury chalet that isn’t even in the UK and Insisted that he keep his security team.

    STOP PROTECTING YOUR NASTY, PERVY SON WHILE YOU BULLY YOUR BIRACIAL GRANDDAUGHTER IN LAW

  23. Sunday says:

    I read this whole thing a bit differently. I think that while the article focuses on the sweatless wonder, it DOES also mention that this was (1) a result of a review from the Home Office and (2) that it would have impacted ALL of the “fringe” royals, meaning all the queen’s other kids and their families save for the direct heir and his family. Hmm… who would appreciate a slimmed down plan like that? A certain tampon-enthusiast, perhaps?

    Because the state of the world has permanently fused my tinfoil tiara to my head, I think this has Charles’ fingerprints all over it. The question is, did Charles take the opportunity around Sussexit to immediately start pushing for costs reflecting his slimmed down monarchy? Or, did Charles leak/encourage all the security cost stories about the Sussexes in order to stoke outrage and therefore support his cost-cutting cause?

    It’s also interesting that the queen stopped the whole thing, seemingly for all her children, not just the pedo. Obviously it’d look even worse if she intervened solely to cover costs for Andrew while leaving the others on their own… but that’s exactly what this article focuses on, which one could argue is written to make the queen look as bad as possible. Consider: this story could have been written to more evenly focus on Anne, Edward, and Andrew rather than just the latter, but they chose the angle that makes the queen look most like she is giving Andrew special treatment. Wouldn’t the better angle for the Sussex-hating sun have been “Queen vows to pay security costs for Anne, Edward & Andrew – but not Harry and Meghan”? Just seems like another odd choice in a slew of odd choices for the otherwise sycophantic British press.

  24. yinyang says:

    And taxpayers will be paying for his lawyer?

  25. molly says:

    Based on his television interview, I’d love to see Andrew sit down with authorities or lawyers. He couldn’t handle an interview HE arranged without being totally unprepared with plausible answers to inevitable questions. He’s too privileged (and I don’t think very bright) to do anything other than spit out “don’t you know who I am!?” when pressed.

  26. Harla says:

    I’m rather glad now that the Queen didn’t step aside a year or so ago so that the Charles could take over. With the Queen’s “impeccable” guidance and her shining example the monarchy is on a steep downward trajectory and I’m here for it.

    • FicklePickle says:

      I mean, the impact when it finally lands is going to leave one hell of a crater, but it sure is fun to watch ‘em fall first.

  27. Lilly (with the double-L) says:

    Just as I was reading this, I got a breaking news alert from the BBC that he’s saying (I inserted whiny tone as I read) he offered at least three times to talk with the FBI. Yeah, right. I’m sure there were millions of conditions, if true, that made it a worthless offer.

    • Jaded says:

      It’s my understanding that under something known as a “Mutual Legal Assistance”, both prosecutors and the lawyers acting for Epstein’s accusers can issue a formal request for Prince Pedo to give evidence by deposition in the UK. As part of the MLA request, American and British authorities can cooperate when evidence needs to be gathered in a prosecution or investigation of criminal offences. If approved by the Home Office, the FBI could ask PA to be compelled to go to a British court to give evidence under oath as a witness if he refused to cooperate. It would be up to the judge in the UK to decide if the hearing was in open court. If US prosecutors wanted to extradite Andrew, they would have to obtain an arrest warrant or a grand jury indictment to make a request to the UK.

      All that being said, I don’t know if “Mummy” would be allowed to interfere in this and stop any further investigations from taking place without incriminating herself and risking even more exposure of PA’s involvement with trafficked girls/Epstein.

  28. Andrew’s Nemesis says:

    Mummy, the Great Enabler, should remember what happened to other monarchies that were too aloof and disdainful and spendthrift at times of public crisis. The loathsome old trout is going to bring down ‘her’ Crown singlehanded because she has NEVER been able to say ‘no’ to her ‘favourite’.

  29. AMM says:

    The amount of support the queen had for protecting him on that often- linked- fashion- site was disgusting. They don’t expect her to turn him away because he’s her son and it hard to cut off family. But if she can’t distance herself from him because her motherly feelings override her actual job description, then she needs to step down. Coddle him all she wants in retirement. Right now the actual Queen of millions of women is publicly supporting a known rapist and associate of a convicted human trafficker. Fuck the sympathy for his mother being in a tough spot. They can put the firm over family in every other situation but when one of them is a predator?

  30. Charfromdarock says:

    This is petty and completely not the point but PA has all that wealth and privilege and he’s still walking around with those teeth.

    I really hope for Virginia’s sake that he does have to answer for his crimes. Sadly, I’m sure she isn’t his only victim.

  31. OnceUponA says:

    Serious question:

    If Epstein was keeping him afloat — and at the very least he most assuredly was helping –why?

    One you get past, “Lookie everyone!! I’m hanging with ROYALTY!” what was in it for Jeffrey?

    I’d normally guess wider prospect of five-star names for business — but what was JE’s business? He sold himself as a money man, but I’ve heard many reports by the biggest money movers on Wall St and in the UK saying not a one of them knew him in that world — and that he had no clients in that world.

    He was known as a world-class “partier” (so much nicer than Human Trafficker or Rapist) — but what did it get him, beyond the ego of hanging with some of the most powerful people in the world.

    Were they paying for to attack girls, in which case he was just an old-school pimp? Of all the vile, immoral things said about JE, I haven’t heard that one.

    I didn’t get the sense he was blackmailing them, which is a business model that fits his morality — bit if he was, they didn’t seem to back away from being best buds.

    So where did his money come from and why/how did he subsidize Andy and Sarah?

    Any insights? Thanks.

    • Shoshone says:

      Earlier in his career Epstein reportedly got away with an extremely large sum of money from an illegal Ponzi scheme that he ran with a man named Hoffenberg. (See Tower Financial Corp circa 1993). When it imploded it became the the first of Epstein’s very questionable interactions with the US Justice system. His partner (Hoffenberg) was convicted, lost his assets and did serious federal time. Epstein was not charged and he kept the money according to Hoffenberg although this was never proven in a court of law. Even to this day Hoffenberg is still pretty salty about the whole situation.
      I believe that Epstein could have continued to invest and grow this money over the years as he had formerly been a partner with Bear Stearns and they considered him to be pretty capable. I also think that he acquired wealth by being a high level pimp and blackmailer.
      Do the feds have the blackmail recordings, photos, records and tapes or does Maxwell currently have them? Since she is suing Epstein’s estate the court certainly knows where she is. Why hasn’t she been charged? Over a year ago the court was going to do a large document “drop” that named hundreds of individuals who may or may not have been implicated in sexual crimes by the victims. Why hasn’t that happened yet?

      • A says:

        There’s some interesting and weird speculation out there that the reason Epstein was let off the hook for that Tower Financial corps case was because he was involved in or recruited for the purposes of gathering intelligence on behalf of some American agency, likely for the purposes of investigating financial crimes among the wealthy.

        The evidence for it is pretty flimsy if one wants to be charitable, but it does make you think. Ghislaine Maxwell’s father, Robert Maxwell, was also suspected of being involved in something similar for the M16 or some other intelligence agency. He died under suspicious circumstances that only compounded that mystery, and his company had to declare bankruptcy after it was found out that he’d been embezzling money from its pension fund. He was the largest media baron in the UK before Rupert Murdoch came on the scene.

        Either way, it’s remarkable (and not in a good way) that Epstein slipped out of the hands of the law in so many situations. Yes, there are powerful interests who are trying to cover up their routine and sustained abuse of children and minors, but I’m willing to bet that he’s not the first or the last well-connected sex trafficker in those circles, or even the most prolific one. So that begs the question, why him? And why has he gotten away with his criminal activity for so long, in so many different instances?

  32. adastraperaspera says:

    Andrew is afraid of being thrown out a window. I’m sure the RF knows exactly who he’s been getting dirty money from and what kinds of “parties” he’s attended all these years. If he talks for real, a lot of organized crime baddies will go down. I assume they’re actually having to keep his security (and increase it?) because they know who is gunning for him. But why should taxpayers have to foot the bill for this?

  33. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    Here’s my guess: Andrew convinced the Queen to write some type of letter, so that when she dies, he will have documentation that all the times he assaulted girls occurred while he was acting as her “emissary” — so he will get diplomatic immunity.

  34. Jane says:

    I don’t have a problem with Andrew keeping his security, that’s not unreasonable given the threat level, what bothers me is that Harry and Meghan don’t also have that protection, despite having the same threat level. It makes no difference to their safety whether they’re working royals or not, they’re still an enormous kidnap risk regardless. Their mother/grandmother is head of state of 16 countries and a very wealthy woman as well. An attempt was made to kidnap Anne in the 70s, and that was well before September 11 and everything that’s happened since. They need protection, all of them.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Duplicate

    • L4frimaire says:

      What threat level is against Andrew? Maybe the US Justice Dept. and people he owes money to. No one else seems to care about this train wreck. Seriously, if he was kidnapped, they’d pay the kidnappers to keep him. As for Harry and Meghan, the threats against them are real, especially Meghan. There are some unhinged people out there who wish them real, serious violent harm. Some of them have columns in newspapers.

  35. Bucky says:

    Maybe the security is employed to protect other people from Andrew? The role might be to supervise him and keep him from giving incriminating interviews or abusing children.

  36. A says:

    I gotta ask, at this point, is the Queen protecting Andrew out of personal affection, or out of this completely misplaced belief that protecting him will help protect the monarchy. Because Liz, sweetie, come on.

    Either way, while I’m not trying to move the responsibility from the Queen in this case, I have to say that she’s being completely let down by her staff. The last remaining years of her reign are going to go down the toilet because anybody who worked for her who had the guts and the capacity to tell her the truth has long since left. Her office and her position has been systematically weakened by Charles, but he’s misjudged the situation. He thought if he sorted out her staffers, he’d be able to consolidate more influence over the monarchy as a whole. But clearly, if this Andrew debacle is any indication, that’s clearly not happening.

    I really want to know what’s going on behind the scenes, because at this point, there’s no way that the Queen hasn’t been advised about what the best course of action would be, both from the standpoint of the case, and from the PR perspective. She’s been told this, probably multiple times, but is refusing to accept it and change her behaviour because???? I’m not denying that Andrew’s her favourite, but is he still? To the extent where she’s willing to risk the monarchy for his stupid self? Something’s off here, but I can’t quite put my finger on it.

  37. Pat says:

    So disappointed that Epstein never got to give evidence against his co-offenders. The world is run by criminals.

  38. blunt talker says:

    I doubt anything will happen to Andrew-his mother has enough good-will around the world to stop Andy from being interviewed or arrested. She is paying the chalet off and allowing him to keep his security. He will no longer do any royal duties in the near future-most people have said not ever again. The chalet is on the market for sell. The queen has get some of her money back. I bet she gets to give Andy a yearly salary after the sale of this property. Prince Charles has his loveshack he used to meet Camilla on the market for sell as well. As one poster stated-Harry once saying if people knew what I know. That is why he stressed things going on with Andy has nothing to do with his family.–I truly believe that so-called conversation with Greta was done so he could make his feelings on certain things known. Harry appears do things with a slight back-handed slap before you realize what has happened.