The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 1: 2010-2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow PA seems to be damned by the press no matter what he does. If he ran into oncoming traffic to save a small child from being hit by a car the press would say he staged it.:bang:
 
@ Mermaid1962 I'm smirking at all that, too. Yellow muckraking press, dirt, mud-slinging, libellous and slanderous articles, just boring. A litter bin is worth more than that! jaja :lol:
 
HRH Princess Sonya said:
Wow PA seems to be damned by the press no matter what he does. If he ran into oncoming traffic to save a small child from being hit by a car the press would say he staged it.:bang:
Click to expand...

That does seem to be the way of it -- if he'd let Sarah crash and burn, he'd be criticized for that, too. He can do no right, it seems.
 
Yes. There's no evidence that Andrew did anything wrong on his trip to New York, but his company is certainly questionable.


Russophile said:
Gee that will go a long way for HRH to polish his tarnished image.
Click to expand...
 
The DM have never reported positively about Andrew so what is new but ... I do think he needs to step down from his position and retire from public life after this.
 
This is looking quite bad for Andrew, I agree. I feel badly for his daughters. The DM is getting more and more daring as far as Andrew's connections are concerned. If there aren't out-and-out denials issued about this latest article--with proof to back up those denials--Andrew's public role is over.

Iluvbertie said:
The DM have never reported positively about Andrew so what is new but ... I do think he needs to step down from his position and retire from public life after this.
Click to expand...
 
Mermaid1962 said:
This is looking quite bad for Andrew, I agree. I feel badly for his daughters. The DM is getting more and more daring as far as Andrew's connections are concerned. If there aren't out-and-out denials issued about this latest article--with proof to back up those denials--Andrew's public role is over.
Click to expand...


The story that he meet a 17 year old 10 years ago, for a night out, with nothing else happening isn't a problem for me but...that he openly associates with pedophiles is - that should be a no no for anyone of any integrity.

Time to go Andrew - live on one of Mummy's estates and stay away from the public life for the next 40 years.
 
Interestingly, I can't open the Daily Mail link. I can see the headline on their sidebar when I go to the Daily Mail home page, and I can open up all their other articles without any problem, but not the article about Andrew and the sex offender. I wonder if someone has blocked it?

Can someone tell me what the article is about?
 
I'm sending you a private message, rmay286.

rmay286 said:
Interestingly, I can't open the Daily Mail link. I can see the headline on their sidebar when I go to the Daily Mail home page, and I can open up all their other articles without any problem, but not the article about Andrew and the sex offender. I wonder if someone has blocked it?

Can someone tell me what the article is about?
Click to expand...
 
rmay286 said:
Interestingly, I can't open the Daily Mail link. I can see the headline on their sidebar when I go to the Daily Mail home page, and I can open up all their other articles without any problem, but not the article about Andrew and the sex offender. I wonder if someone has blocked it?

Can someone tell me what the article is about?
Click to expand...


I have just gone to the site and have had no problems opening it.
 
It might be too late. The pictures of the two of them walking together have been published. What has seen cannot be unseen.

Irish Eyes said:
His "Friend" sounds like bad news and i hope Andrew has nothing more to do with him.
Click to expand...
 
You're right, I can open it now. Strange, though. For about 10 minutes I couldn't open the link, maybe because they were adding new pictures?

Having read the article, I agree with Iluvbertie...Prince Andrew may have not known who he was associating with 10 years ago, but after this man's conviction, he should have known better than to hang around with him.

I can't really see this costing him his job, though...
 
I always like to give people the benefit of the doubt; but now that Andrew's friendship with this convicted man is known, there'll be a large question mark over his head as to his judgement. Should a man who lacks the wisdom to avoid a convicted pedophile's company be a person with a high-profile, responsible position where a lot of judgement is needed? It's not just that this man is Andrew's associate; it's that Andrew didn't seem to see a problem with going for a walk with him in public. There was apparently no concern that his friendship with this pedophile would be publicly noted and recorded. Even if Andrew's person behaviour has been above-board, he doesn't seem to understand that a person is often judged by the company he keeps.


rmay286 said:
I can't really see this costing him his job, though...
Click to expand...
 
Mermaid1962 said:
I always like to give people the benefit of the doubt; but now that Andrew's friendship with this convicted man is known, there'll be a large question mark over his head as to his judgement. Should a man who lacks the wisdom to avoid a convicted pedophile's company be a person with a high-profile, responsible position where a lot of judgement is needed? It's not just that this man is Andrew's associate; it's that Andrew didn't seem to see a problem with going for a walk with him in public. There was apparently no concern that his friendship with this pedophile would be publicly noted and recorded. Even if Andrew's person behaviour has been above-board, he doesn't seem to understand that a person is often judged by the company he keeps.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree that Prince Andrew often hangs around with questionable people. I'm sure there is more that goes on behind the scenes than even the Daily Mail can uncover. I don't think Andrew has very good judgment, really. It's just that he has associated with questionable people before, and after an initial outcry, it hasn't ever forced him to resign...and frankly, a lot of people in public positions hang around with shady characters.

Spending time with a convicted pedophile is pretty sketchy; but it really depends on what UKTI decides. Public outry in the papers alone can't affect Andrew's role one way or the other.

I must say, though, that on the whole I don't think Andrew is any better a judge of people than Sarah is. She's just much more of a risk-taker and ends up doing questionable things, publicly, with the aforesaid people...but neither of them seem to have good sense when it comes to who they associate with.
 
Last edited:
Iluvbertie said:
Time to go Andrew - live on one of Mummy's estates and stay away from the public life for the next 40 years.
Click to expand...

Surely he doesn't need to become a recluse?
Why not devote himself to more charity work, perhaps more with injured military personnel?
(Something like that would gradually reestablish his reputation with the public).
 
Will he though? I think he's enjoyed the fact that's he's "the spare" and isn't even needed unless there's a massive catastrophe. He likes riding planes and helicopters and meeting important people. Maybe he actually has small man syndrome because he's the second son. I'm not sure but I don't see him just bowing all that easily.

By the way, Epstein isn't a pedophile. A pedophile is a person who's sexually attracted to children. I'm not defending him on what he did, he got his comeuppance but there's pervert and then there's sick, he's the former.
 
In my mind, a 15-year-old is a child. Plus, the girl in the article we're discussing was a vulnerable teenager who seemed to be willing to do anything for security.

sliver_bic said:
By the way, Epstein isn't a pedophile. A pedophile is a person who's sexually attracted to children. I'm not defending him on what he did, he got his comeuppance but there's pervert and then there's sick, he's the former.
Click to expand...
 
Iluvbertie said:
Time to go Andrew - live on one of Mummy's estates and stay away from the public life for the next 40 years.
Click to expand...

That's a ridiculous assumption to make IMO. He cannot just disappear like that.
 
Perhaps what he needs to do is spend more time in the UK focusing on where he's needed there rather than flying around the world meeting with questionable characters. It's not like he can be stripped of his HRH and his military rank, and no-one wants a member of the RF who sits around doing nothing to contribute to the nation.


Lumutqueen said:
He cannot just disappear like that.
Click to expand...
 
His job entails him to fly around the country. I know his friends are questionable, but he shouldn't hide away from everything and become a recluse.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not suggesting that he should. So much of the criticism that's thrown at him seems to happen when he's outside the UK, though; especially when he's in places like former Soviet Republics or being entertained in regimes like Libya. I know that he likely goes to these people at the request of the government to achieve particular things through UKTI. But when he does business with a foreign government and then sells his house to someone from that nation, something doesn't look right. I've never been one to be suspicious of Andrew, but I think that things are at the point now that something has to give. I'm not sure what.

Lumutqueen said:
I know his friends are questionable, but he shouldn't hide away from everything and become a recluse.
Click to expand...
 
I don't think Andrew's job is a good one for any member of the royal family to hold, even an otherwise "good", ethical person. His job requires him to mix politics and business to an extent, and I don't think that's something a royal should be getting mixed up in.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Duke of Kent had the position before Andrew took it on, and I don't remember him ever being involved in anything questionable. I think that there are a couple of things going on here: The Duke of York has a higher profile than the Duke of Kent, and he's always been considered to be the "wild one" in the family. Also, The Daily Mail seems to really have it in for the Yorks for some reason. There's something about Andrew's personality plus his international friendships that gets him into these scrapes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The DM would like Britain to become a Republic and the Yorks, Charles and Camilla are the ones they attack because they know they are the ones that people like the least.

William and Harry are sacrosanct because they are Diana's sons and she couldn't be touched and her sons can't be either but the rest of the family are fair game - particularly the unpopular and even hated Yorks. They are able to use them to show a side of the royals that the DM wish to emphasise - poor judgement, lazy etc (conveniently ignoring the fact that the girls are at uni but emphasising the fact that they don't 'do anything' - William didn't either at the same age but don't let the facts get in the way of a good story).

That being said - I do think it is time for Andrew to step down from this position - his own position is too far gone to be credible any more.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lumutqueen said:
That's a ridiculous assumption to make IMO. He cannot just disappear like that.
Click to expand...


It is not ridiculous. The more he does the more he makes the wrong decisions and the more damage he is doing to the family.

While he has a high profile he will continue to damage the institution so teh Queen needs to step in and remove him from view so that he can't continue to pile on bad press on bad press.

When was the last time there was a 'good' story about Andrew? Even when he visits troops he gets bad press.

He can easily 'disappear' by taking on a different job for Mummy and keeping out of the public eye. How many people would even notice if he didn't attend the Trooping the Colour or some other such royal funciton - outside of boards like this - no one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Marengo
The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 2: Sep 2022 -
6 7 8
Replies
223
Views
17K
Curryong
C
L
  • Locked
Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles News 1: October 2002-October 2003
3 4 5
Replies
134
Views
29K
Alexandria
A
J
  • Locked
Queen Margrethe II and Prince Henrik, Current Events 1: May 2003 - November 2006
17 18 19
Replies
564
Views
103K
norwegianne
norwegianne

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom