Prince Andrews slip ups(284 Posts)
he said LOADS of things during that interview, where he was telling the truth, and forgetting his lie.
the only one I can remember now though is when talking about visiting JE house in (Bahamas?? not the NY one anyway). a witness had said he went 4 times a year. He said something like; 'you have to understand, when you go into one of those places...'
that's not how you talk about a friend's house. what are 'those places'?
The channel 4 docu is on now. It shows the victims pov.
How have we created a society where we have so naiively and ignorantly let down so many vulnerable young people.
I'd be interested to see what a body language expert would make of the interview. You know, the kind of people who analyse the families of missing children to figure out if they're responsible.
I said something similar to dh @Wellmet I watch a lot of true crimes and those body language experts are interesting.
People like him look down on others and think that what they say will be accepted as gospel with no questioning on the part of the listener.
Do you mean his island in the Virgin Islands? To be fair it’s not just a regular house. He owned the island. Apparently some very sick and disturbing things used to happen there. The flight logs are available online.
There was lots of self comforting body language when being asked the difficult questions. Foot bobbing, hand rubbing.
I thought his facial expression when being asked about the literary agent who witnessed him having a foot massage was really weird. He was shocked face at the mention of his name. Although he should have been aware if that allegation and the name attached to it.
It’s very telling that he did not a acknowledge JE’s victims until 48 minutes into the programme. And it was 2 words, “quite rightly” when Emily had said the women’s voices were being heard. Too little too late. He should have started the interview by saying, “firstly I would like to express my sympathies with the victims etc”. The fact that he didn’t mention them to me indicates that he doesnt give a fuck about them. I think it’s because he feels entitled to do what he wants with them, that JE was entitled to do as he pleased and that all these silly plebs accusing him of things should go away. “I am HRH, I am a prince, I am a rich privileged white man. How dare you tell me I must explain my abusive entitled illegal behaviour?
@BlackCatSleeping, I understand it isn't a regular house, as I would be used to. but 'one of those place' 'a place like that' followed by whatever he said next doesn't sound like he was visiting a friend.
he also said he was breaking off the friendship with JE (which he also claimed wasn't actually a friendship) because he couldn't be seen with him. any right minded person COULDNT be friends with JE on moral grounds, because he raped children. not because of public image concerns
he said as well when he told JE they couldn't remain friends because of what had happened. very passive, as if JE was blameless. he doesn't consider it wrong at all does he. by 'what happened', he means getting caught and imprisoned, not raping children
i'm going to watch the interview again and make a note of all the slip ups, because there were many
@StealthPussy even at the end, when he was asked if there was anything else that needed saying, the victims don't even cross his mind
as an aside; I kind of know that the royal family are removed from real life, but I didn't realisebto the extent. they have a very very low standard for behaviour and integrity don't they. I didn't think, as prince Andrew does, that they had HIGHER standards of character but I thought they would be at aleast AS honest, honourable as your average person. I will pay more attention to the others now, with this in mind. are they all as bad?? I really don't know why we keep a royal family. can we continue to keep them, after this?
Well I suppose you can't tar them all with the same brush @babydog, ? I do wonder what will happen with Prince Andrew now , I think in years gone by he might have been sent somewhere to live quietly out side of the public eye but times have changed and in the days of Social media ,people can't just live reclusivly as they might have done in the last century .
I also don't think it's right to tar them all with the same brush.
However on Andrew I suspect he will be quietly retired from public life following this. Right now they don't have any other option. He can't appear anywhere or do anything without this being the sole focus.
Not that he did much anyway,
if they continue to support him, damn right you can tar them with the same brush. any other family that harboured/protected a sex offender, would be condemned
they are ALL prioritising their reputation over justice for those girls
I don't think you can underestimate the sense of entitlement many rich white old men feel. They are part of an elite circle who expect everything they fancy to be provided for them. Plus I think he's not known for intelligence, and probably doesn't take much effort to understand things he isn't interested in. I can actually believe criminal ignorance in his case. He should have known better, but he didn't. He chose not to know. Many people do that at every level. His was just more despicable than most.
Seeing as he always has security with him And they keep a record of it surely they would have had a record of where he was those nights she said he was with her. Why isn’t he releasing those records?
Do you mean his island in the Virgin Islands?
Yes the kind of place it would be quite dangerous for someone who doesn't sweat, they would have permanent heat stroke.
While I don't think any legal action will happen re: PA so realistically he has nothing to worry about except his reputation, I thought the interview revealed an awful lot about him.
Firstly, he's an unintelligent man who THINKS he is very intelligent. I'm sure he thought he could easily persuade everyone of his version of events and no doubt it sounded perfectly reasonable in his own head. I think at a certain point in the interview you can see a dawning awareness that it's not going down well. I think he has still persuaded himself that it was a success though.
Secondly, he is supremely self-absorbed and uninterested in all the 'lesser' people around him that serve to make his existence more enjoyable. I think it really never did occur to PA that all the young women constantly surrounding Epstein, providing foot massages etc. wasn't NORMAL! Anyone else would see red flags flashing everywhere after being around Epstein for five minutes but PA doesn't 'see' people, I think he 'sees' only peers worth talking to and everyone else are just flunkies not to be acknowledged.
He may not (although he may) have committed any crime but he is a spoiled arrogant who's has been embarrassing the RF for years.
they have security yes. what he was doing would have been well known. that is why the whole family are complicit. they should have told police the FIRST time he had sex with a trafficked girl
Yes the kind of place it would be quite dangerous for someone who doesn't sweat, they would have permanent heat stroke
equally, who would go clubbing, if they were unable to sweat?
I think PA is the fall guy in this situation. Why else would he do this interview? What else are they hiding from us. According to the internet sth much bigger is going on. We do not want to tar everyone with the same brush, but? There are practises that have been going on for centuries with elites.
When did 'human trafficking' first become widely recognised, do you think?
In 1990, a young girl who had sex with an older married man wasn't seen as groomed, they were seen as a temptress. These girls were introduced by other girls, and well paid, not kidnapped off the streets. OF COURSE IT WAS WRONG AND DISGUSTING.
However, when did the general attitude change, and people begin to understand how vulnerable the girls were? PA wouldn't have been at the forefront of understanding.
I'm speaking as a girl groomed as a teen, and roundly blamed for her involvement with an older man.
No he wouldn't have been at the forefront of understanding, but he sure as hell knew what Epstein was in 2010. There is absolutely no way that Andrew would not have known that Epstein had been to prison - yet he still went and spent 4 days with him!
There's being a bit dim and there's being deliberately bullheaded and arrogant. I suspect Andrew is the latter. He's led a privileged, cosseted life, cocooned in luxury and being able to do what the hell he wants.
The Palace has extensive staff covering PR and media. It is beyond naive to think that Andrew wasn't warned about Epstein.
I don't know Pickle but I think times and attitudes have changed tremendously since 1990 when I was at school.in the 80,s it wasent unusual for young girls to be picked up from school by their " older boyfriends " in cars these men would have been late teen,s early 20,s and the girls 14,15 and people didn't bother too much about it .
There were children as young as 12 trafficked to that island. How anyone can say they were there of their own choice to be used as play things for the adults sexual pleasure and orgies is incomprehensible. The Queen needs to step up and act now. PA needs to be removed as a representative of the RF.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Get started »
Please login first.