Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Prince Andrew

999 replies

SunsetBoulevard3 · 16/11/2019 00:07

I haven’t watched the interview, but heard reports of the content. I just find it unbelievable he claims he can’t remember meeting a woman he had his arm around! Despicable. Does anyone believe him?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Bluerussian · 16/11/2019 17:01

No they are not above the law, bean. However I don't think Prince Andrew has actually broken a law, unless I've read things wrongly.

lolaflores · 16/11/2019 17:05

Ig he hasn't broken a law, how come he is running around denying everything and ot remembering and looking very much like a man who has broken the law? There may be a question of a person who has been trafficked. Trafficked internationally. Was Virginia in a place to give consent? Or was she told to have sex with a man she didnt k ow?

BreadSauceHmm · 16/11/2019 17:08

We'll never know. His dad is in the funny-hand-shaking club apparently.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

The royal family
Puzzledandpissedoff · 16/11/2019 17:11

If only someone had told him about hotels ...

Grin Grin

And it was my fault for putting it badly, beanaseireann ... I didn't mean to imply the entire RF were above the law in theory, just that the Queen will almost certainly make sure her family aren't inconvenienced by it

The Queen herself enjoys something called Sovereign Immunity, though: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity

stucknoue · 16/11/2019 17:20

Do I completely believe him, no, do I think to a certain extent he was duped by Epstein, yes. He probably did have sex with the complainant, but did he realise she was 17, possibly not (and the age of consent in the U.K. is 16 anyway) it's creepy but men do stupid things like that, the reason he doesn't remember is because she wasn't the only one.

Hes not the only man to be stupid, to believe his friend was wrongly convicted perhaps. He's just very high profile!

RhinoskinhaveI · 16/11/2019 17:24

I think to a certain extent he was duped by Epstein
I get the impression that getting powerful people compromised so that he could control them for his own gain was pretty much Epstein's modus operandi?

CatherineOfAragonsPrayerBook · 16/11/2019 17:32

do I think to a certain extent he was duped by Epstein, yes.

Of course you're entitled to your opinion but I sincerely doubt this. It's very hard to be around an epic sleeze like Epstein in a social capacity (parties etc) and not see any highly questionable activities or share information.

What did he think? That a young girl who had never seen him in his life just had the hots for him and couldn't wait to get her knickers off?

No. Providing girls was part of the hospitality.

BoneyBackJefferson · 16/11/2019 17:44

CatherineOfAragonsPrayerBook
What did he think? That a young girl who had never seen him in his life just had the hots for him and couldn't wait to get her knickers off?

Given the egos of some men

and this one being one of the most eligible bachelors of his time with his wealth, ego and upbringing, in all probability yes.

Look at how many sports men think the same way

heath48 · 16/11/2019 17:44

Nobody has mentioned his nickname was “Randy Andy”,way back before Sarah Ferguson.

He has always been creepy and thoroughly unpleasant.

Looking at the clips from that interview,his body
Anguage speaks volumes,he is lying through his teeth.

Big mistake on his part doing this,it will backfire on him spectacularly,good.

TruthOnTrial · 16/11/2019 17:53

Men not caring enough to be sure who they are even fucking. Deserves all he gets.

I'm sure many men do not even know the names of the bodies they fuck, he clearly didn't!

merrymouse · 16/11/2019 17:59

Hes not the only man to be stupid, to believe his friend was wrongly convicted perhaps. He's just very high profile!

He is not just 'high profile', he is an active member of the royal family and "Personal Aide-de-Camp to The Queen".

Wouldn't it be better if we set the bar a bit higher for people who represent our country?

Sarah Ferguson says

"Andrew is a true and real gentleman and is stoically steadfast to not only his duty but also his kindness and goodness of always seeing the best in people"

as though that isn't equally true of millions and millions and millions of other people who don't get paid salaries by the Queen and somehow manage not to be duped by people with private jets.

NewName73 · 16/11/2019 18:05

I really don't think Fergie's comments are going to help.

The Buck Pal PR team must be wringing their hands in horror.

Bluerussian · 16/11/2019 18:16

I laughed at the 'randy Andy' description, I'd forgotten about that label but we do have to remember he married at 26 so didn't have that many years to pass it about, if indeed he did. I know he had one long term girlfriend he was keen on before Sarah.

Andrew was also very popular as a young man and well thought of after the Falklands.

Epstein fooled a lot of high profile people, he was clever and influential in some areas, notably the scientific research community.

I'd think it unlikely that any people who went to his parties knew that the women involved were coerced and certainly not that they were virtually owned by Epstein. Even after his conviction they would have believed what he said about 'not realising' a girl was underage (there was a report of one girl who came into his clutches at 14! Nasty), and if he seemed like a good fella in other ways, well, they probably thought he was basically OK. When it all came out (or some of it), it must have been quite a shock to most. People like Epstein are very plausible.

I am not by nature someone who delves into unsavoury things but I admit to being very interested in the interview due to be aired tonight. However in the end, people will believe what they want to believe.

Prince Andrew has been singled out because he's a royal but even if we don't like what he did eighteen years ago, there was nothing illegal from what I've read. I do not have any bias in this btw.

CatherineOfAragonsPrayerBook · 16/11/2019 18:28

but we do have to remember he married at 26 so didn't have that many years to pass it about, if indeed he did.

Maybe he was pressured to marry because of the extreme randyness. Well attractive babe magnet that he was.

Bluerussian · 16/11/2019 18:36

Maybe so, Catherine :-), that's a novel idea but somehow I don't think so. He was fairly free and in those days he was good looking and well liked. A lot of them have been given nicknames over the years, not always deserved.

Interesting Guardian article, Newname. Anyway when we've seen the full interview we can make our own minds up (or not).

Puzzledandpissedoff · 16/11/2019 18:47

The Buck Pal PR team must be wringing their hands in horror

No doubt, but spare them a thought ... if they want to keep their jobs they're going to have to assure him how terribly clever the whole idea was. Can any of us seriously imagine doing that with a straight face?

merrymouse · 16/11/2019 18:54

and if he seemed like a good fella in other ways, well, they probably thought he was basically OK.

It seems far more likely that some of them were being blackmailed, some of them were prepared to overlook his sleaziness if they could use his private jet and others just liked having access to young girls. I don't think anyone thought he was a 'good fella'.

3rdNamechange · 16/11/2019 19:01

I don't believe hi , he's a slimey fucker but he'll get away with it because of who he is sadly.

Original poster
SunsetBoulevard3 · 16/11/2019 19:02

What time is it on?

OP posts:
minou123 · 16/11/2019 19:05

SunsetBoulevard3
What time is it on?

9pm bbc 2 on newsnight.

merrymouse · 16/11/2019 19:16

I'd think it unlikely that any people who went to his parties knew that the women involved were coerced and certainly not that they were virtually owned by Epstein

Prince Andrew has been chair of the 'Outward Bound Trust' since 1999. It is a charity linked to the founder of Gordonstoun that runs outward bound courses that are supposed to instil leadership qualities in young people.

However, apparently when he comes across young girls giving sexual favours to men at Epstein's parties, you think it's normal for him to see no discrepancy between these girls and the girls he is encouraging to go abseiling? Are they supposed to be a different kind of girl? Is a little light prostitution something one might do on one's gap year?

Remember that during the time he knew Epstein his daughters were teenagers - but you think it's excusable for him to draw a clear line between the way (I assume) he would expect his daughters to be treated and the way these girls were treated?

Bluntness100 · 16/11/2019 19:24

The poster who said he was well respected after the falklands, my husband served with him. He said he basically was obnoxious and ignorant, wanted everyone to know he was superior consistently, did little and even during a game of rugby they had to call him sir on the field. He was there for appearances.

They were even chucked out a pub just after he married Ferguson, because he didn't want photographs of him in there, he didn't want any one to know. They were told to leave by his security detail and threatened when they objected.

So whomever respected him after the Falklands, I can assure you it wasn't the men he served with, and I'm married to one of those laid back men who likes everyone, but he's not got a good word to say about Andrew.

Original poster
SunsetBoulevard3 · 16/11/2019 19:26

I don't think anyone has a good word to say about him apart from Fergie and his daughters quite honestly. Even within his own family I don't think he's very well regarded, apart from his mother.

OP posts:
rookiemere · 16/11/2019 19:30

What I don't understand is why - instead of giving a weaselly non answer- he just admits that he does recognise her but thought she was a willing partner and over the age of consent and gives a grovelling apology.
Given she was over the age of consent in the UK which is where it happened, and that I can't imagine there are many folk that don't think he slept with her, then wouldn't that be the best way to handle it ?

Instead by giving a weirdo interview with half denials , he's actually stoking the story as presumably he wouldn't do it unless there's much worse to hide.