Prince Andrew 'fails to cooperate' with FBI

[CathyorClaire]

www.thesun.co.uk/news/10832298/prince-andrew-provides-zero-cooperation-after-fbi-ask-to-interview-him-over-epstein-links/

No surprise there, then.

Do we think he'll hold out for the threatened subpoena or will the renewed public spotlight mean he jumps before he's pushed?

BlueRussian Just because others were more of a sleazeball (to paraphrase) isn’t a great argument though is it.

I guess he's weighed it up and the fallout from speaking out is worse from the fallout from not cooperating?

His last tv interview did not do him any favours. I suspect he has been very strongly advised never to open his mouth on the subject again for fear he would completely hang himself.

Because he’s too stupid and too arrogant to know when he is incriminating himself or others.

H & M clearly got out of the oncoming shitstorm while they have a chance. It's looking like a very, very wise move.

Useless, cosseted lump hiding behind mummy's skirt.

I don't think he has spoken to the FBI, I haven't seen mentioned anywhere if he has.

Can Prince Andrew be forced to testify?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51283976

He's got something to hide. His story just doesn't hold water. If he was innocent, even if he had consensual (from his point of view) sex with a young woman, he could tell his side of things honestly. He was much younger then and I suppose a free agent?

I always thought that MM was protecting the brand. The MM brand. Which suggests she's learned that PA is what he is, and beyond even professional royal PR rehabilitation when the shit hits the fan.

I'd like to also hope that M&H personally loathe him. I know that former RN personnel who served on Britannia certainly do.

It’s more complicated than that yellow even if he is entirely innocent his truthful version of events will almost certainly implicate others who will go to great lengths to keep that from happening. PA will not simply be asked “did you have sex with this woman?” He will be asked about loads of different dates and times and to name who was present, what they did, who they spoke to, who knew they were there etc. JE was running a sex trafficking ring and lots of very powerful people were his clients (paying him for access to the girls- I don’t just mean business clients.) even if PA innocently said “I met JE at a party” he is opening the floodgates to “who else was there” and then he has to name people.

nor would they fixate on Andrew when so many others in high places were far more involved.

There were thirteen contact numbers for Andrew in Epstein's little black book. That doesn't give the impression of peripheral involvement he'd like to sell us plebs.

and then he has to name people.

So? It’s his moral and civic duty to help the investigation.

So? It’s his moral and civic duty to help the investigation.

Agreed. But he isn’t interested in civic and moral duty. Self preservation is the name of the game.

But he isn’t interested in civic and moral duty. Self preservation is the name of the game.

But if he has nothing to hide then no problem.

Refusal to cooperate looks dreadful. At a time when patience for the royals is wearing very thin.

Aside from who he had sex with and whether it was consensual , what PA has to hide includes some markedly poor decisions. From a publicity and moral point of view, if not a legal one. He regularly had Epstein over to the Queen’s property so it reflects badly on her too by association.

This is from The Telegraph:

“In May 2006, an arrest warrant was issued for Epstein for the sexual assault of a minor. Two months later, Epstein attended the masked ball 18th birthday party of Princess Beatrice, the Duke’s daughter, at Windsor Castle.”

So PA invited someone arrested for sexually assaulting a minor to his teenage daughter’s party. And Beatrice is the older of his two children, so Eugene was under 18. Not forgetting the fact that Beatrice’s friends would have been there. You can imagine the MN thread if someone asked “AIBU for being furious with DD (17)’s friend’s parents for not telling me there would be someone charged with having sex with minors at their party which my child went to?”

Good point Dandy. Being such a high profile public figure, there's no wiggle room for hiding. It's possible to chart exactly where he was and when, which makes it tricky to rewrite history and paint himself in a better light.

But if he has nothing to hide then no problem.

Even if he has nothing to hide, there will be others who will be incriminated by what he says and for him- they hold bigger sway than any concept he has of civic or moral duty.

And if not incriminate then, call into question their own version of events given.

*I'm not defending Prince Andrew, he may well have been a bit of a sleazeball but so have many others, even more so, and at least he was single. He wouldn't have known how old any woman was (if he did partake), and certainly not that they'd been trafficked. He was probably just partying and thought no more of it.

He's learned his lesson.*
Christ.

Even if he has nothing to hide, there will be others who will be incriminated by what he says and for him- they hold bigger sway than any concept he has of civic or moral duty.

Everyone knows what he should be doing.

If he doesn’t start putting his own credibility ahead of his mates desire for his silence, he’s going to face increasing suspicion and disgust from the people - and he needs their goodwill to survive.

I get that it’s a difficult position to be in. But there’s only so long he can resist the FBI with any credibility. He said he’d cooperate fully. He isn’t.

Has his famous ‘honour’ deserted him?

He's learned his lesson

What would give you that idea? He expressed no regret at all in the interview.

He will eventually. He’s holding out until he has no choice about it, most likely under legal advice. Say nothing until you have to, and then, say as little as possible.

He will eventually.

How much good will towards the royals will he piss away in that time?

He is caught between a rock and a hard place. But entirely of his own making.

I don’t think preserving the good will towards the RF should be any sort of motivator. I personally, don’t care if they lose all public good will for this or any other reason.

It doesn't matter that she was over the legal age of consent, she was trafficked into the country and coerced into having sex is the problem