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

[Osipi]

I agree, I don't see a contradiction. Andrew said he doesn't remember meeting her (meaning in general) but even if he had, he knows the events of the specific night in question did not happen (at least in his words).

Once in a while I run into someone who thinks we've met before, which I don't remember. But I do know I've never had sex with them. That I would remember. ?

I can state and back up my statement that I have met and talked with Gordie Howe of the Detroit Red Wings several times over a period of time. I can also state that Gordie would have to have had an eidetic memory in order to remember me out of millions of fans he has met over the years.

What it seems like to me, from all that has surfaced, is that Andrew did meet with Maxwell on that occasion and Guiffre was there at that time and part of the evening which was shown by the picture taken of Andrew, Virginia and Ghislaine. Andrew also recalled the pizza party that day so I do think Andrew kind of put his foot in his mouth about spending time with Guiffe. However, this in no way *proves* that there was a sexual encounter or any kind.

I am seriously interested in watching this case develop and learn what happens from it. Hopefully once there has been a judgment made, it will be the end of the Andrew/Virginia saga.

 

[sophie25]

I agree, I don't see a contradiction. Andrew said he doesn't remember meeting her (meaning in general) but even if he had, he knows the events of the specific night in question did not happen (at least in his words).

Once in a while I run into someone who thinks we've met before, which I don't remember. But I do know I've never had sex with them. That I would remember. ?

If someone said to me I did something I know I categorically did not do I would say it did not happen, I would not say I can't remember if it did. You can't be certain of a situation you can't even recall happening in the first place especially when there is a picture of you with the person involved. The other major contradiction, which I thought he was lucky to have gotten away with without Maitlis probing too much, was his relationship with Epstein. At the beginning of the interview he is adamant that JE wasn't a close friend. He emphasises that he was just the "plus one" of Ghislaine who was his actual close friend (how he must regret admitting that now). That didn't explain why he then felt the need to jump on a plane to America to break up a friendship with someone who wasn't actually a friend in the first place. That interview had more holes than Swiss cheese.

 

[Gawin]

If someone said to me I did something I know I categorically did not do I would say it did not happen, I would not say I can't remember if it did. You can't be certain of a situation you can't even recall happening in the first place especially when there is a picture of you with the person involved. The other major contradiction, which I thought he was lucky to have gotten away with without Maitlis probing too much, was his relationship with Epstein. At the beginning of the interview he is adamant that JE wasn't a close friend. He emphasises that he was just the "plus one" of Ghislaine who was his actual close friend (how he must regret admitting that now). That didn't explain why he then felt the need to jump on a plane to America to break up a friendship with someone who wasn't actually a friend in the first place. That interview had more holes than Swiss cheese.

I agree the interview was a train wreck but Andrew did refute Giuffre's allegations by stating they DID NOT HAPPEN, and proceeded to list the reasons why her story could not be true (whether or not his reasons hold up under scrutiny is another issue). He never said he did not REMEMBER whether they happened or not.

What he did state is that he no recollection of ever MEETING her, which is something different. It could mean "yes, I could have met her at some point in my life, which explains the picture, after all I meet millions of people each year and can't remember every single person, but even if I did meet her, I did not have sex with her." You can't deny ever meeting someone if you're not certain.

There are two separate issues:
(1) ALLEGATIONS - he vehemently denied (according to Andrew, they did not happen)
(2) MEETING GIUFFRE - he has no recollection of meeting her (maybe he did, maybe he didn't)

But you are spot on regarding Andrew's relationship with Epstein. As the saying goes, if you sleep with dogs you will wake up with fleas.

 

[sophie25]

I agree the interview was a train wreck but Andrew did refute Giuffre's allegations by stating they DID NOT HAPPEN, and proceeded to list the reasons why her story could not be true (whether or not his reasons hold up under scrutiny is another issue). He never said he did not REMEMBER whether they happened or not.

What he did state is that he no recollection of ever MEETING her, which is something different. It could mean "yes, I could have met her at some point in my life, which explains the picture, after all I meet millions of people each year and can't remember every single person, but even if I did meet her, I did not have sex with her." You can't deny ever meeting someone if you're not certain.

There are two separate issues:
(1) ALLEGATIONS - he vehemently denied (according to Andrew, they did not happen)
(2) MEETING GIUFFRE - he has no recollection of meeting her (maybe he did, maybe he didn't)

But you are spot on regarding Andrew's relationship with Epstein. As the saying goes, if you sleep with dogs you will wake up with fleas.

Having no recollection and not remembering are different words for the same thing.

 

[Gawin]

Having no recollection and not remembering are different words for the same thing.

But Giuffre's allegations and the question of whether Andrew ever met her are not the same thing. He denied the first, but couldn't remember the second.

In an earlier post you stated:

If someone said to me I did something I know I categorically did not do I would say it did not happen, I would not say I can't remember if it did. You can't be certain of a situation you can't even recall happening in the first place especially when there is a picture of you with the person involved.

Andrew did categorically state the situation did not happen. He even used those words: "I can absolutely categorically tell you it never happened."

He also offered evidence he believes disproves Giuffre's claims regarding the evening in question (he never sweats, he doesn't drink, he was at home with his children, then took his daughter out for pizza, etc.).

But he was iffy whenever the interviewer asked him if he had ever MET Giuffre or whether he remembered her (which is a separate issue from Giuffre's allegations). In his words: "I can tell you categorically I don't remember meeting her at all. I do not remember a photograph being taken and I've said consistently and frequently that we never had any sort of sexual contact whatever" and "I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever."

These statements are not contradictory. It is possible to have no recollection/memory of meeting someone, or even having your photograph taken with them, but still know without a shred of doubt that you did not have sex with them, especially on a specific night in question when you know you were otherwise engaged.

One can easily forget meeting someone (especially a person in Andrew's position, who must meet hundreds of people a year). But it not as easy (for most people) to forget a person you have had sex with. Andrew even made that point during the interview:

"if you're a man it is a positive act to have sex with somebody. You have to have to take some sort of positive action and so therefore if you try to forget it's very difficult to try and forget a positive action and I do not remember anything."

Whether or not Andrew's explanations pass muster is a whole other debate.

 

[Osipi]

Even if it does come to be that Andrew *did* recognize Virginia when they come face to face in court and recalls being at Ghislaine's and at the bar where Andrew didn't sweat, none of that is pertinent when it comes to Guiffre's allegations of sexual abuse.

We also have to remember that during Andrew's association with Epstein, no matter where it occurred, there probably have been *several* people in and around them and it's possible that Andrew didn't feel the urge to get to know the names and personality of all of them. I've been to parties where friends of friends were there and I couldn't tell you who they were the next day other than that they were friends of the host.

All of this isn't about if Andrew remembers the woman. It's about the allegations of him sexually mistreating her which, I think, will be impossible to prove and mostly be a "he said, she said" situation. I have more and more come to the thinking that Guiffre is taking litigation anywhere she can find it and hope for monetary gain coming her way. I seriously don't see her getting one red cent from Andrew.

 

[yukari]

(...)

These statements are not contradictory. It is possible to have no recollection/memory of meeting someone, or even having your photograph taken with them, but still know without a shred of doubt that you did not have sex with them, especially on a specific night in question when you know you were otherwise engaged.

One can easily forget meeting someone (especially a person in Andrew's position, who must meet hundreds of people a year). But it not as easy (for most people) to forget a person you have had sex with. Andrew even made that point during the interview:

"if you're a man it is a positive act to have sex with somebody. You have to have to take some sort of positive action and so therefore if you try to forget it's very difficult to try and forget a positive action and I do not remember anything."

Whether or not Andrew's explanations pass muster is a whole other debate.

Indeed.
I used to perform as part of tourist attraction while I was student and often they would ask to take photo with me (the usual having photo with local in traditional attire). That was almost a decade ago and if some of them said they've met me, I could honestly say I didn't remember them even though they brought up the photo as evidence.

As for sex, I know someone who often have hook-up (often made it a game with his fellow of who can take a girl for the night) and with straight face he would tell you that he didn't remember some of it or even recognise the girl when they pass each other on the street. In Andrew's case, maybe his "encounter" with Virginia is not as memorable as his (many) other "conquests", hence the " don't remember" statement.

 

[Curryong]

Except that Virginia asserts that the pair had sex on several occasions not just the one, in various locations. I have read that she stated that the reason she was there in London, where the photograph was taken, was because Ghislaine escorted her there specifically at Andrew’s request (or so Ghislaine informed her.)

 

[Osipi]

Except that Virginia asserts that the pair had sex on several occasions not just the one, in various locations. I have read that she stated that the reason she was there in London, where the photograph was taken, was because Ghislaine escorted her there specifically at Andrew’s request (or so Ghislaine informed her.)

That's right. I think I've also read too that there's some guy that worked on the estate on Epstein's private island that is willing to come forward and attest that he's seen Andrew "fondling" Virginia by the pool.

That's still a lot of "he saw, she said" and there's really nothing much that can really point to Andrew actually having sex with her and/or abusing her. Juicy details coming out in court though will *not* be doing Andrew any favors whether he wins or he loses.

 

[yukari]

But unless there's strong evidence (eg. timestamped video/photo) or witness' testimony, it will only end up as he-said-she-said (for both) like some of the posters are trying to convey (or maybe I mistook it, English is not my first language). In that photo of them together, other than the fact that they were at the same place and the same time to take that photo, there's nothing to suggest that they had sex (unlike say, half naked pict in bed) or under duress (they're smiling and look relax).

Yes, there's many criminals who got away without punishment easily, but there's also innocents who's been accused and wrongly punished for crime they didn't commit. Who know about Andrew in this case, but for one I think it's very unlikely that his reputation will ever recover.

 

[Leopoldine]

I can state and back up my statement that I have met and talked with Gordie Howe of the Detroit Red Wings several times over a period of time. I can also state that Gordie would have to have had an eidetic memory in order to remember me out of millions of fans he has met over the years.

What it seems like to me, from all that has surfaced, is that Andrew did meet with Maxwell on that occasion and Guiffre was there at that time and part of the evening which was shown by the picture taken of Andrew, Virginia and Ghislaine. Andrew also recalled the pizza party that day so I do think Andrew kind of put his foot in his mouth about spending time with Guiffe. However, this in no way *proves* that there was a sexual encounter or any kind.

I am seriously interested in watching this case develop and learn what happens from it. Hopefully once there has been a judgment made, it will be the end of the Andrew/Virginia saga.

You met Gordie Howe?

I'm beyond impressed.

 

[Curryong]

Indeed.
I used to perform as part of tourist attraction while I was student and often they would ask to take photo with me (the usual having photo with local in traditional attire). That was almost a decade ago and if some of them said they've met me, I could honestly say I didn't remember them even though they brought up the photo as evidence.

As for sex, I know someone who often have hook-up (often made it a game with his fellow of who can take a girl for the night) and with straight face he would tell you that he didn't remember some of it or even recognise the girl when they pass each other on the street. In Andrew's case, maybe his "encounter" with Virginia is not as memorable as his (many) other "conquests", hence the " don't remember" statement.

I wrote my last post in response to your last sentence quoted here and only on that. Andrew’s memory of ever meeting Virginia was being discussed.

Now, if we take Andrew’s statement at face value, the two either briefly met or didn’t meet at all and he has no recollection of the lady. He cannot explain the photograph and there were attempts I remember, by Andrew’s side to say the photo of the two of them together was doctored.


On Virginia Guiffre’s side she states that there were sexual encounters on several occasions at different locations. She has one photo of their meeting, in London.


Now, I have no insider info on whether Virginia is telling the truth or not. I don’t know, and like presumably everyone else on this forum I wasn’t ever at any of Maxwell or Epstein’s properties.


I do know one thing however. Going back to the last sentence of your post quoted above, it is possible for a man to meet a pretty girl and, if he has a lively love life, have sex with her once and then completely forget her. However, if the ‘encounters’ amounted to half a dozen occasions or even just three or four, at different times and places, to have no memory of the young woman involved would IMO amount to a case of amnesia!


It has been written in articles that Epstein used to have two way mirrors and keep hidden recording and video equipment in rooms at his properties for his own purposes. That doesn’t mean however, that, if such evidence of couples undressed, in bed etc does exist, that he or Ghislaine would be handing photos etc of them over to the young girls in his employ.


However, one photo does exist, and unfortunately for Andrew it was taken in Ghislaine Maxwell’s house, not in a pizza restaurant or any other neutral establishment.


Of course, it all depends on who you believe in this saga, and it may be that neither is telling the truth. That will be up to a Court to decide, if it gets that far.

 

[Granada]

Bravo Sophie25. I always thought Andrew did deny meeting Virginia at all.

 

[Osipi]

Andrew's "denials" of any kind came at a time around that nuclear disastrous interview. At that time, I seriously believe that Andrew, with his inherent attitude of entitlement and arrogance, actually believed that whatever he claimed would be accepted as gospel and this would all fade away and not touch him at all. That happens to *not* be the case and he's mired up to his nose in all this still and it's not getting anywhere better for him.

He's not stated one single word about this ordeal publicly since the interview and has let his lawyers deal with it while he isolates himself away from it all at Windsor and only has really been "spotted" riding on the estate or driving his car. I am wont to believe that his lawyers have put a nice little muzzle on the man to prevent further controversy. ?

 

[Gawin]

Bravo Sophie25. I always thought Andrew did deny meeting Virginia at all.

Do you have a source to back that up?

According to the transcript of the BBC interview, he said he didn't *remember* or had no *recollection* of meeting her.

But he denied her allegations (they didn't dance together, have drinks, or have sex).

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50449339


EM: … has made allegations against you. She says she met you in 2001, she says she dined with you, danced with you at Tramp Nightclub in London. She went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell, your friend. Your response?

PA: I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever.

EM: You don't remember meeting her?

PA: No.


EM: She says she met you in 2001, she dined with you, she danced with you, you bought her drinks, you were in Tramp Nightclub in London and she went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell.

PA: It didn't happen.

EM: Do you remember her?

PA: No, I've no recollection of ever meeting her, I'm almost, in fact I'm convinced that I was never in Tramps with her. There are a number of things that are wrong with that story, one of which is that I don't know where the bar is in Tramps. I don't drink, I don't think I've ever bought a drink in Tramps whenever I was there.

 

[Osipi]

PA: No, I've no recollection of ever meeting her, I'm almost, in fact I'm convinced that I was never in Tramps with her. There are a number of things that are wrong with that story, one of which is that I don't know where the bar is in Tramps. I don't drink, I don't think I've ever bought a drink in Tramps whenever I was there.

He admits right there he's actually been in Tramps. It's illogical to think he doesn't know where the bar is though. Even people that don't drink alcohol will buy themselves non alcoholic drinks while passing time there. Then again, he very well could always have been served at a table. It's illogical to think that he never consumed anything when in that venue. He did state that he doesn't remember being at Tramps with her specifically though. Virginia said he sweated like a pig and Andrew came back with his side that he can't sweat.

Two stories from both sides. I don't envy the judge that gets this case in a civil court proceeding at all.

 

[Roslyn]

(snip)

Two stories from both sides. I don't envy the judge that gets this case in a civil court proceeding at all.

Judges are used to it. They are constantly required to listen to often very differing accounts of the same circumstances and decide which account is more likely to be reliable. The evidence will be tested by rigorous cross-examination.
I have a feeling Andrew will crumble in cross-examination; he is not used to his word being challenged.

 

[King of the Jungle]

Court proceedings and cross examination are often onerous and I would think that people, both guilty and innocent, crumble and that is not necessarily an indication of guilt.
The legal process should be trusted. It will be very interesting to see the outcome of the involvement of Epstein, Maxwell, Prince Andrew and Giuffre.
One thing for certain, some mud will remain stuck on Andrew, regardless.

 

[Alisa]

Do you have a source to back that up?

According to the transcript of the BBC interview, he said he didn't *remember* or had no *recollection* of meeting her.

But he denied her allegations (they didn't dance together, have drinks, or have sex).

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50449339


EM: … has made allegations against you. She says she met you in 2001, she says she dined with you, danced with you at Tramp Nightclub in London. She went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell, your friend. Your response?

PA: I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever.

EM: You don't remember meeting her?

PA: No.


EM: She says she met you in 2001, she dined with you, she danced with you, you bought her drinks, you were in Tramp Nightclub in London and she went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell.

PA: It didn't happen.

EM: Do you remember her?

PA: No, I've no recollection of ever meeting her, I'm almost, in fact I'm convinced that I was never in Tramps with her. There are a number of things that are wrong with that story, one of which is that I don't know where the bar is in Tramps. I don't drink, I don't think I've ever bought a drink in Tramps whenever I was there.

Aaah that terrible interview! For me that horrific interview convinced me that he was guilty to some extent.
He absolutely denied meeting her yet there is that famous photo of the Andrew and Virginia standing side by side. It would have been better to have said that he did meet her but they were both simply mutual acquaintances of Epstein and nothing more.
Then the Tramps discussion he clearly contradicts himself by saying there are "a number of things wrong with that story". In order to say a story is wrong that means you must remember the story and remember details to say that they are wrong.

 

[crm2317]

I have no idea if Andrew is guilty or not, I wasn’t there. However the fact that he has been so awkward with the authorities, refusing to assist in enquiries and avoiding being served papers at all costs certainly doesn’t look good!

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I have no idea if Andrew is guilty or not, I wasn’t there. However the fact that he has been so awkward with the authorities, refusing to assist in enquiries and avoiding being served papers at all costs certainly doesn’t look good!

With other words: the Duke has to roll out the red carpet for every possible alleged victim stepping forward with a claim ?


Of course the Duke (and his legal team) let the "other party" work.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50449339


EM: … has made allegations against you. She says she met you in 2001, she says she dined with you, danced with you at Tramp Nightclub in London. She went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell, your friend. Your response?

PA: I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever.

EM: You don't remember meeting her?

PA: No.

Aaah that terrible interview! For me that horrific interview convinced me that he was guilty to some extent.
He absolutely denied meeting her [...]

I am in agreement with Gawin that "I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever" is not, under examination, an "absolute denial" of meeting her (even if the Duke almost certainly wanted the audience to believe it was an absolute denial).

EM: She says she met you in 2001, she dined with you, she danced with you, you bought her drinks, you were in Tramp Nightclub in London and she went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell.

PA: It didn't happen.

EM: Do you remember her?

PA: No, I've no recollection of ever meeting her, I'm almost, in fact I'm convinced that I was never in Tramps with her. There are a number of things that are wrong with that story, one of which is that I don't know where the bar is in Tramps. I don't drink, I don't think I've ever bought a drink in Tramps whenever I was there.

Then the Tramps discussion he clearly contradicts himself by saying there are "a number of things wrong with that story". In order to say a story is wrong that means you must remember the story and remember details to say that they are wrong.

As a generalization, that is not correct. For instance, if I were to tell a story of you and I having dinner at Buckingham Palace on the evening of (to choose a date at random) April 3, 2020, I imagine you would truthfully deny my story even if you did not remember the details of your dinner on the evening of April 3, 2020.

Regarding the Duke of York's claim about drinking, if he was truthful in stating he was a teetotaler, then it is plausible that he would remember that he did not drink at any social event without remembering any particular event.

 

[Osipi]

I have no idea if Andrew is guilty or not, I wasn’t there. However the fact that he has been so awkward with the authorities, refusing to assist in enquiries and avoiding being served papers at all costs certainly doesn’t look good!

A lot of that could also be because Andrew feels like he has to stand loyal to his friend, Ghislaine, and won´t say anything against the woman that the authorities really want him to spill the beans about. Remember how staunchly he defended his friendship with Epstein. Right. Um... When it comes to Andrew, he is a dark horse and hard to figure out.

 

[Lady Daly]

I turned on the television this morning to catch a bit of news expecting anything but this: "Prince Andrew served with sexual assault lawsuit after papers sent to US lawyer".

US District Judge Lewis Kaplan approved a request from Virginia Giuffre's legal team to seek alternative means of serving a lawsuit against Andrew. Kaplan, approving the request Thursday evening, said that "service of the defendant's United States counsel is reasonably calculated to bring the papers served to the defendant's attention, regardless of whether his US counsel is 'authorized' to accept service on his behalf."

The fact this made national morning headline news on CNN (not entertainment or lifestyle) in the US is a pretty big deal.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/us/prince-andrew-us-lawyer-served-sexual-assault-intl/index.html

"The US court documents, seen by CNN, show the legal papers were delivered to the duke's lawyer, Andrew B. Brettler, at the law firm of Lavely and Singer in Los Angeles on Monday morning at 9:22 a.m. local time.

The court document also shows legal papers being delivered to the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Monday."

 

[ladongas]

… When it comes to Andrew, he is a dark horse and hard to figure out.

It’s not hard to figure out that he has terrible taste in (at least some of) his friends! “A (person) is known by the company he keeps, and also by the company from which he is kept out.” …Grover Cleveland

 

[Osipi]

It’s not hard to figure out that he has terrible taste in (at least some of) his friends! “A (person) is known by the company he keeps, and also by the company from which he is kept out.” …Grover Cleveland

Great quote and is very true in assessing someone's character and demeanor as a man but I'm still not ready to convict Andrew in the court of public opinion as anything else but having bad taste and being naturally arrogant and entitled. Don't need a lawsuit to figure that part out.

As for the papers being served to Andrew's US attorney (in LA no less), I think with following this case and how it progresses and how everyone reacts to things, we're going to get a glimpse into the world of international law here.

 

[suztav]

I certainly don’t want to appear to defend Andrew, however I think Ms Giuffre should be suing all the men she was made to have sex with — if not, it appears that she is just going after Andrew for the $$.JMHO

 

[Silverpot]

I certainly don’t want to appear to defend Andrew, however I think Ms Giuffre should be suing all the men she was made to have sex with — if not, it appears that she is just going after Andrew for the $$.JMHO

I also think it's totally without risk to sue Andrew, the other men could be more dangerous to name. Or maybe they've already paid up?

 

[Curryong]

As has been discussed here before, Virginia has evidence in the shape of a photo in her legal team’s possession, that she and Andrew were together at the same time at Ghislaine’s house, though Andrew stated that he could not remember her.

Maybe if the two of them had been photographed at a party or on neutral ground it might have been different. But that photo backs up Virginia’s story that at the very least she was known to both Ghislaine and Andrew. There’s no sign of any others there, bar the person that took the photo.


Virginia probably does not have that sort of proof about other men in her possession. Though it was said that Epstein may have had hidden recording and video equipment in his properties it’s not likely that Virginia or any other employees have them.

 

[MARG]

I certainly don’t want to appear to defend Andrew, however I think Ms Giuffre should be suing all the men she was made to have sex with — if not, it appears that she is just going after Andrew for the $$.JMHO

I also think it's totally without risk to sue Andrew, the other men could be more dangerous to name. Or maybe they've already paid up?

Andrew is an easy and obvious target as he doesn't have the ability to be anyone other than who he is, HRH Prince Andrew and it's not like he can even retire from being a working royal as the media keep trying him in absentia. Other of the rich and famous 'name's originally found seem to have disappeared into the mist and fog of time but I do seem to remember the complainant saying Andrew was nice way back then. Now he has a target on his back.

As a matter of interest, do any of our American based members know if any court proceedings such as this have come before the courts?

https://www.newsweek.com/every-celebrity-named-jeffrey-epstein-files-1521985

https://www.insider.com/famous-peop... Ted Kennedy, Alec Baldwin, and Courtney Love.