nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Andrew formally known as Prince in jep?

Hitchens

"Suggestion of impropriety with minors untrue," says Buckingham Palace after Prince Andrew named in US sex lawsuit

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30659629

this is surprising if it's true

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Leg End Reject

Andy looks rather uncomfortable throughout that interview. I bet he had no problem sweating then.

padd b1975

Paddy Cow wrote: »

It was all over twitter a few months ago. He cheated with one of their country friends. The press were starting to hint at it and William brought in the lawyers to shut them up. You can't stop twitter though.

Oh yeah I remember reading somewhere that Kate had cut some toff couple from their Sandringham inner circle.
I never thought that was why.

Twister2

omerin wrote: »

I wonder were the questions given to him prior to the interview?

Yes i would say they were agreed

He seemed to have answers at the ready, although looks like he was on his own with no backing

The Rape of Lucretia

These are the kind of dilemmas you can be presented with if you are a Prince. But look, we've all been there : sex with an underage girl, or go for a pizza in Woking. I think Pizza Express has gone downhill a little, and not sure that Woking has anything much to recommend it at all, but all in all, I think he made the right decision.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Plus, if you were accused of sleeping with a teenage girl - three times over a prolonged period - would you say, "I have no recollection of meeting her", or instead do what most people would do - deny it ever happened and then express in robust terms that it's not something you could ever do.

In that interview, he never claims that it's something he could never do. He just claims not to remember perhaps doing it.

That itself is a form of tacit admission that he believes the crime was at least possible for him to do.

Exactly, where is the anger at been questioned about the incidents?I'd presume any innocent man would be fuming if they were wrongly associated with anything similar..it seems to be that he won't deny anything because he's worried there is definitive evidence out there..he's a worried man imo.

[Deleted User]

tedbrennan wrote: »

Did he show his hand to match the one around her waist in that photo.

Plus, if you were accused of sleeping with a teenage girl - three times over a prolonged period - would you say, "I have no recollection of meeting her", or instead do what most people would do - deny it ever happened and then express in robust terms that it's not something you could ever do.

In that interview, he never claims that it's something he could never do. He just claims not to remember perhaps doing it.

That itself is a form of tacit admission that he believes the crime was at least possible for him to do.

[Deleted User]

dubrov wrote: »

To be fair, only the third point you made could be classed as valid evidence.
The rest is all conjecture.

I doubt we'll ever know the truth

To summarize my points, his conclusion appears to be, "I have no recollection if I had sex multiple times with an underage girl".

For someone who a) doesn't drink or b) take drugs, that's quite a statement.

The cumulative case I made above (and lawyers can tear apart that interview and amass the evidence needed etc.) quite clearly show that he's guilty.

dubrov

Deleted User wrote: »

Prince Andrew was lying through his massive teeth.
Stating "I have no recollection", then going on to say, "That didn't happen". Both of those statements cannot be true. It's either one or the other.

Stating he worked closely with children's abuse charities etc., and knew what to look for, yet couldn't find an iota of suspicion - nothing, nada - with Epstein or in any of Epstein's properties.

Stating that he didn't want to be seen in public with Epstein (who wasn't a "close friend") after his release from prison in 2010, yet had to meet him in order to say that; and stay for 4-days, one of which was a dinner party, in Epstein's properties at the same time ("it was a convenient place to stay", as if a member of the Royal family would find it difficult to procure accommodation in the US). Weird way to split up a friendship and not be seen in public.

Showing no remorse for Epstein's victims, which says a lot about how he must view his own victims.

Throughout the program, he nods his head (a sign of agreement) whilst disagreeing with something Maitlis is saying; that's often a micro-expression for lying (example: 27 minutes 45 into the program.

When asked about the photo of himself with Victoria in one of Epstein's properties, he claims that he has "no recollection" and that he "never went upstairs", despite the fact the photo shows him upstairs. Even if he claims the photo is a fake, how could he know what upstairs in Epstein's property looks like?

When asked if he met Victoria in the Tramp club. He denies this and says "he doesn't drink", even though a) that's not the question b) he wasn't asked if he drank alcohol or bought her an alcoholic drink, it could be non-alcoholic etc. for both and c) claimed he doesn't know where the club is, then 2 sentences later he slips out the words, "whenever I went there".

His bizarre claim to remember an outing in Pizza Express on 10 March 2001. I can barely remember the dates of meals from last month, let alone almost 20 years ago. This claim simply cannot be true.

His even more bizarre - and false - claim that he cannot sweat. Even if that were true, it wouldn't nullify the claims against him as a sex offender.

His general demeanour throughout the interview, discomfort at the questions, and general obfuscation with his answers.

I could go on, but it was a quite catastrophic performance on a gigantic scale.

To be fair, only the third point you made could be classed as valid evidence.
The rest is all conjecture.

I doubt we'll ever know the truth

omerin

I wonder were the questions given to him prior to the interview?

[Deleted User]

Prince Andrew was lying through his massive teeth.

Stating "I have no recollection", then going on to say, "That didn't happen". Both of those statements cannot be true. It's either one or the other.
Stating he worked closely with children's abuse charities etc., and knew what to look for, yet couldn't find an iota of suspicion - nothing, nada - with Epstein or in any of Epstein's properties.
Stating that he didn't want to be seen in public with Epstein (who wasn't a "close friend") after his release from prison in 2010, yet had to meet him in order to say that; and stay for 4-days, one of which was a dinner party, in Epstein's properties at the same time ("it was a convenient place to stay", as if a member of the Royal family would find it difficult to procure accommodation in the US). Weird way to split up a friendship and not be seen in public.
Showing no remorse for Epstein's victims, which says a lot about how he must view his own victims.
Throughout the program, he nods his head (a sign of agreement) whilst disagreeing with something Maitlis is saying; that's often a micro-expression for lying (example: 27 minutes 45 into the program.
When asked about the photo of himself with Victoria in one of Epstein's properties, he claims that he has "no recollection" and that he "never went upstairs", despite the fact the photo shows him upstairs. Even if he claims the photo is a fake, how could he know what upstairs in Epstein's property looks like?
When asked if he met Victoria in the Tramp club. He denies this and says "he doesn't drink", even though a) that's not the question b) he wasn't asked if he drank alcohol or bought her an alcoholic drink, it could be non-alcoholic etc. for both and c) claimed he doesn't know where the club is, then 2 sentences later he slips out the words, "whenever I went there".
His bizarre claim to remember an outing in Pizza Express on 10 March 2001. I can barely remember the dates of meals from last month, let alone almost 20 years ago. This claim simply cannot be true.
His even more bizarre - and false - claim that he cannot sweat. Even if that were true, it wouldn't nullify the claims against him as a sex offender.
His general demeanour throughout the interview, discomfort at the questions, and general obfuscation with his answers.

I could go on, but it was a quite catastrophic performance on a gigantic scale.

ruwithme

Shame emily didn't wear something racy and bring her seat closer to the Prince. get the blood circulating and test that sweat claim

anewme

What not to do in Rule 1 of PR for Dummies.

Came across as a complete arrogant toad. No mention of any of Epstein’s victims.

I remember seeing that photo of Andrew with his arm around Virginia years and years ago.

Proof that chickens always come home to roost, no matter how long.

anewme

1641 wrote: »

Pizza Express in Woking have had some interesting very recent reviews on Tripadvisor!

They are hilarious.

1641

Pizza Express in Woking have had some interesting very recent reviews on Tripadvisor!

[Deleted User]

Paddy Cow wrote: »

It was all over twitter a few months ago. He cheated with one of their country friends. The press were starting to hint at it and William brought in the lawyers to shut them up. You can't stop twitter though.

If you stop and think about it the whole family have/are cheating ,bonkers lol.

Paddy Cow

Deleted User wrote: »

Really?I never heard about him cheating.
I'm no expert in body language but Andrew seemed to be under severe pressure and going around in circles with vague non direct answers, I didn't believe him tbh.

It was all over twitter a few months ago. He cheated with one of their country friends. The press were starting to hint at it and William brought in the lawyers to shut them up. You can't stop twitter though.

[Deleted User]

Really?I never heard about him cheating.
I'm no expert in body language but Andrew seemed to be under severe pressure and going around in circles with vague non direct answers, I didn't believe him tbh.

Paddy Cow

Billy86 wrote: »

I would say Harry to be honest, once he got over his teenage phase with things like the Nazi Halloween costume he has gone on to be easily the best walking, talking PR machine for the royals since his mom died.

As for Andrew I guess I wouldn't be shocked if it is true, but as people have said this trial by media/guilty until proven innocent nonsense is nothing short of a blight on modern society.

How quickly the tide turns. Since marrying Meghan he's become a sap and his popularity has plummeted. Although I do think Harry and Meghan have become scapegoats to take attention away from other royal indiscretions *cough* William cheating on Kate *cough*.

Twister2

I'd be more worried about the people he's associating with there:D

[Deleted User]

micar wrote: »

Medical reason why he doesn't..... I mean didn't sweat.....what nonsense.

I've love to educated in reading body language and the use of language.

https://twitter.com/MorsStupebit/status/1195861088329457664?s=20

micar

Medical reason why he doesn't..... I mean didn't sweat.....what nonsense.

I've love to educated in reading body language and the use of language.

Richard Hillman

You can tell her majesty hasn't taken it too well. "A constant sore in the family", then saying "the whole family knew him" .

I reckon he has been unofficially cut from the family and his argument is "You all knew him too".

DEFTLEFTHAND

Being a Prince in the British Royal Family is the ultimate pull card. I'd say Andrew rode all around him back in the day. He'd a reputation for being a 'horndog' as somebody mentioned above.

Prestige, power, wealth.

Galwayguy35

He was a bit of a horndog back in the day so it's no surprise really that it's coming back to bite him now.

tdf7187

Let's face it, who among us has not been compromised in a manner that involves fraternising with notorious sex pimp traffickers while being a member of a royal family because we were simply TOO honourable.

Bobblehats

Rate his gurn

[Deleted User]

https://twitter.com/danleburrowhole/status/1195661444668416000?s=20

*Shudder*

tdf7187

Coillte_Bhoy

ILoveYourVibes

I never knew he existed until this I don't know a lot about royals. Its awful. He seems horrible.