Prince Andrew flew on Jeffrey Epstein’s Lolita Express at least four times

Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts **FILE PHOTOS**

Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial began last week and it’s just as lurid as everyone expected. Some of Maxwell’s human trafficking victims have testified and there have been many details about Maxwell’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. There were a few mentions of Prince Andrew in the first week of testimony too, because all three (Epstein, Maxwell and Andrew) were friends and part of the criminal conspiracy to traffic and abuse girls and women. Some are arguing that Maxwell’s defense seems to be leaning into the actions of Epstein and others as the primary abusers, hoping that Maxwell’s crimes fade into the background. I don’t know, it’s HER trial. She’s the sole defendant. Meanwhile, the British media is trying to dig a little bit further into Andrew’s connections to both:

Prince Andrew flew on Jeffrey Epstein’s Lolita Express jet at least four times, including a trip to the financier’s private sex island in the Caribbean, flight logs reportedly reveal. Records are said to show the Duke’s first flight was to Little St James – also known as “paedo island” – which was owned by Epstein at the time.

The findings have cast further doubt over Prince Andrew’s personal judgement and his relationship with Epstein, who took his own life in a New York prison in 2019. The Duke has admitted visiting Little St James but insists he never saw anything untoward.

It comes as a jury in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial heard claims the Duke had been on a flight with one of Epstein’s alleged sex slaves. Maxwell’s youngest accuser was quizzed about the plane ride as she was cross examined by defence lawyers during the trial in New York. The victim – who is testifying anonymously as Jane – was asked if she had been on a flight with Andrew, to which she responded “yes”.

There are no allegations of improper behaviour by Andrew as part of this case. It is the second time in as many days that the Duke of York has been dragged into the sex abuse trial of his old friend Ghislaine.

Flight records seen by the Mail on Sunday suggest Andrew’s first flight on Epstein’s plane was to his private Caribbean island in the US Virgin islands on February 9, 1999. According to the paper, Epstein, Maxwell, and one of the Duke’s personal protection officers were on board.

[From The Sun]

Virginia Giuffre and others have indicated or claimed outright that Andrew flew on the Lolita Express many times (more than four) and that he was a frequent visitor to Epstein’s island. And just FYI, to the British and American media: stop referring to Epstein’s victims as “sex slaves.” They are victims of human trafficking, survivors of abuse and rape. Anyway, I wonder if Ghislaine’s lawyers and the prosecution will use Andrew’s name a lot more. I also wonder if Ghislaine is mostly waiting to see if she’s found guilty before she tries to make a deal and turns over evidence implicating other people.

Ghislaine, Amanda and Brooke talk at Womens confernece

Questioned for his connection with Jeffrey Epstein, Prince Andrew "puts an end to his public commitments" **FILE PHOTOS**

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

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

34 Responses to “Prince Andrew flew on Jeffrey Epstein’s Lolita Express at least four times”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Judy bridges says:

    The fact that people, not just Andrew, but others mentioned saw these conspicuously very young girls hanging around Epstein, accepted it and didn’t have the morality to do something about it shows me how sick and depraved the very wealthy can be.

    • observer says:

      also: oblivious

      this is not a defense of any of their actions OBVIOUSLY, i am simply pointing out that with disgusting amount of privilege comes a level of obliviousness that seems absurd to the average person, but is very real to the 1%

      • Lionel says:

        I have to agree here. I am NOT IN ANY WAY defending egregious actions, I believe that great privilege comes with great responsibility and that everyone in this sordid tale is implicated. It’s just that super rich people are used to having a bazillion people hanging around them at all times. I detest Andrew with the fire of a thousand suns, but I am able to believe him when he says he didn’t notice anything amiss at Epstein’s NY house.* He grew up in a literal palace that is also a house of state and a tourist attraction, with a slew of servants attending to his every need. He’s used to strangers wandering in and out of his every private space, and he’s used to them being hired to literally be in “service” to him. I doubt he pays a lick of attention to their gender or age. Unless…

        *… unless he’s attracted to them. This is all IF I thought he was innocent, which I do not. It’s hard to parse the difference. I do believe (and know from too much sad experience) that rich people can be oblivious just as @observer says. That doesn’t mean he’s not also a predator and/or a rapist. GAH! Why can’t rich people use their power for good???

    • Jan90067 says:

      “The Duke has admitted visiting Little St James but insists he never saw anything untoward.”

      Well NO SHIT! It was perfectly NORMAL FOR HIM to have “access” to ANY of Epstein’s/Maxwell’s trafficked girls. WHY would ANYTHING “seem” amiss to him? He “liked” a girl, that girl was sent to him.

      • Andrew's Nemesis says:

        …and to have very young girls wandering around and offering foot massages. Because that’s totally normal.

  2. Emma says:

    The royal family should be cringing in shame and horror if they had an ounce of decency.

    • AmyB says:

      Right???? But they attempt to smear Megan at every turn LOL? What the actual FUCK? In what world does that make sense? Yes, let’s stand behind the Prince who is accused of being a damn sex trafficking pedophile!

      • Andrew's Nemesis says:

        She’s a convenient squirrel and scapegoat for all the colonialist inbreds’ doings. Very sad.

    • keroppi says:

      That might be the problem. They are lacking any decency.

  3. Becks1 says:

    What’s the big deal? He’s just so honorable, and he thought he and Epstein and Ghislaine were all just such good friends, so he accepted the free flight on the private plane to the pedo’s island surrounded by young girls who were victims of trafficking and rape and sexual assault. WHO AMONG US wouldn’t do the same??!?!


    This is obviously abhorrent and I do think that Maxwell is going to tell everything she knows at some point, maybe if she is found guilty, before she is sentenced? She’s not going down with this ship by herself.

    • Jan90067 says:

      I think she’s way too afraid of being “Epsteined” if she talks. There are a LOT of VERRRRRRY powerful people (monied and political) that would crush her like a bug underfoot if she speaks out.

      Somehow, I think *she* thinks there needs to be a dog & pony show for “public” appeasement, but her “friends in high places” will “fix” things: either she’ll spend minimal jail time, or be found not guilty for staying quiet.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think you’re right about both – her fear of being “Epsteined” and her belief that her friends in high places will help her if she keeps her mouth shut.

        but honestly I think she’s at risk of being Epsteined no matter what, so why not talk to make sure we all know what kind of scumbags were dealing with Epstein, because i think she’s in danger whether she keeps her mouth shut or not. Although she may not think she is, I guess.

      • Jan90067 says:

        Becks, I think she’s someone who has always “escaped” consequences, and doesn’t believe this will ultimately change. I think she feels she runs in a hallowed, influential crowd, and while she is in the “net” now, it will be “fixed” down the line. If she opens her mouth, she is *surely* dead. If she is killed, these people don’t know if she made steps to have certain “things” hidden with lawyers, in safety deposit boxes, all over the world as “insurance”.

      • lanne says:

        @Jan, I agree with you. There were months and months and months where GM was missing, and it turns out she was in New Hampshire the whole time? She should have fled the country, gone to someplace where she couldn’t be extradited–there’s probably a Persian Gulf state that would have harbored her. I think she still believes she’s above the law, and that the rich and powerful men she pimped for will save her.

  4. observer says:

    “sex slaves” is more lurid and sells more papers/gets more clicks. they ain’t gonna stop using that phrase, especially the BM.

  5. Sofia says:

    I’m surprised RPOs haven’t come forward or testified against Andrew yet. This article mentions he had one on one of the flights so I assume he had one on all of them. I suppose airtight NDAs, a few threats here and there and an allegiance to Queen and Country keeps them quiet.

    • ThatsNotOkay says:

      We’ll now, Jason Knauf broke his NDA, why can’t those guys? Or would the reason for doing so be actually consequential and important and, thus, not anything the Royal Family would want to be a part of?

    • StartupSpouse says:

      But there are usually carve-outs that you can break an NDA if requested by a court. Even if that doesn’t exist here, imagine issuing a subpoena for an RPO to testify in a sex trafficking case and BP objecting to that? PR nightmare.

  6. Merricat says:

    Duchessing while black is somehow worse than sex trafficking. They should put that in the travel brochure.

  7. WithTheAmerican says:

    Repugnant British media has focused so much in MM, who committed exactly zero crimes, while ignoring this outrageous abuse until they absolutely couldn’t, and even then, they’re not condemning Andy.

    Andy gets all the benefit of the doubt, when he clearly should not.

  8. MerlinsMom1018 says:

    Can someone who has the knowledge help me here? Do pilots have to log every person who flies on a private jet? Is it electronic or on paper? Is this for safety reasons ( in case of a crash, etc). I am genuinely curious, not trying to be sarcastic or anything.
    Wouldn’t that pretty much put Andrew on the spot despite his denials?

    • Jaded says:

      From US Department of Homeland Security: “Operators of international private-plane flights to and from the US are required to electronically provide full advance manifests of their passengers and crew an hour before departure.” Similarly, flights out of the UK must provide voyage reports, load sheets and passenger manifests. The info is out there.

  9. Jaded says:

    PA’s relationship with Maxwell and Epstein goes far deeper than simply being on his private jet 4 times for *business*. For instance, he took an all-expenses paid trip to Phuket with them and there are dozens of photos of him partying with a bunch of topless young women on a yacht. He was an active and willing member of Epstein’s inner circle and took advantage of more girls than just Virginia Roberts. My fervid hope is that when Maxwell is sentenced she will do anything to reduce her jail time and spill.

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      And Ghislaine basically had an all-access pass to Buckingham Palace. The pictures of Epstein, Maxwell & Weinstein at Beatrice’s 18th birthday at the Palace are revolting.

      Considering that the Maxwell/Epstein operation was a money laundering scheme in addition to sex trafficking, I’m sure Andrew was profiting financially in addition to abusing girls. And he & Sarah Ferguson let these people around their own daughters. Sarah also took the young princesses to Peter Nygard’s private island. Fergie is very much mixed up in this whole thing.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Jaded, that is my hope as well. I hope she sings long and loud for everyone to hear her across the pond and the US as well!! The only solution to eliminating trafficking of minors is for everyone that participated, watched, ignored and never spoke out and exposed the crimes that Epstein and Maxwell committed.

      Human trafficking is a multi-billion dollar crime and it’s one of the most egregious crimes committed against the most vulnerable. The underbelly of human trafficking is not limited to just the wealthy but also the most corrupt. We have drug traffickers involved, and probably the most influential people and countries involved as well. There are too many channels that play into this industry that are protected and not enough is being done by governments across the globe to tackle it, yet alone address it’s very existence.

  10. KW says:

    Well, I read that the pilots for JE only put initials a lot of the time. I also want to point out that Pedrew (love that name) was raping Virginia on pedo island, 1999 would have put her at 16. I also want to tell everybody that my 16 year son did a project in law about this being in the news. His male law teacher stopped his presentation mid way through and stopped it and then sensored everybody in class. The misogyny runs deep and there are many, many males who have a hard time dealing with the shit they do and having consequences to face. My only hope is that my voice is teaching my kids what is right from wrong. Here’s to the future if we can help it.

    • rmcgrudiva says:

      Good on your son for speaking out, and on you for fostering that in your household.

    • AmelieOriginal says:

      At the same time I can see why the teacher stopped it though, especially if it was in a high school. It’s a very sensitive case due to the sexual exploitation of minors and human trafficking aspect of young girls. If the students in the class go home and report to their parents about your son’s project, parents might complain to the administration and then your son’s teacher’s job might be in jeopardy and he could get fired. Teachers have been fired for lesser controversies. When parents aren’t happy, the administration does anything in its power to minimize the responsibility and the teacher in question often takes the fall. It’s great your son wanted to present on it though and I commend you for addressing difficult subjects in your household.

      • lanne says:

        I have a different take. The teacher should have already known the subject of a student’s presentation–it should have been part of the assignment process. I teach at a private high school, meaning I have no job security. I don’t believe an angry parent would try to have me fired for a presentation a student did–(never say never, but it wouldn’t work). Teachers have to be savvy enough to ” psycho parent proof” controversial assignments–this can be done by setting very specific parameters, having department head/principal approval, and by have clear pedagogical goals for the assignment that can be stated and defended (crafting and supporting an argument, for example). Students should know what they can and can’t present in terms of images and videos–that should all be clearly outlined in the assignment.

        A teacher who lets a student get up to give a presentation that the teacher knows nothing about ahead of time has dropped the ball in a big way. That’s poor planning and bad practice on that teacher’s part. Your son should be proud of his presentation, and his teacher needs to do a better job of creating assignments and communicating expectations.

  11. Blip Esq. says:

    ” I also wonder if Ghislaine is mostly waiting to see if she’s found guilty before she tries to make a deal and turns over evidence implicating other people.”
    I don’t think so. Ghislaine and her ilk are so entitled, so used to using money and lawyers to get what they want, that she is hoping she’ll get off. If a good deal was to be made, it probably would have been made before this point.