Eugenie has cut contact with Andrew

[KnittingPatterns]

It’s being reported that Eugenie has cut all contact with her father, she refused to visit him at Xmas and isn’t speaking to him at all. There was a discussion on Good Morning Britain about whether this was to protect her own image or whether it’s about her own feelings around what Andrew has done and his refusal to apologise.

Beatrice is still in contact with him apparently, so will this cause an issue between them as sisters?

Is Eugenie just doing this to protect her own image or has the penny dropped that Andrew is a disgusting man and she now believes him to be guilty?

What do you think?

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/royals/eugenie-ends-contact-disgraced-father-andrew-royals-windsor-beatrice-b1266997.html

So the Gala night was in 2023 and it raised a million, a lot more than it cost - so basically a successfull fundraiser?
All charities seem to draw criticism regarding priorities I'd say it comes with the territory. But - sheilding herself from what? Why would she need to shield herself?

She raised £1m, spent the best part of £300k on a shindig and dumped the rest in an interest bearing account (see link above).

It might be successful fundraising but so far it seems to be a one hit wonder eight years in the making and not demonstrated to be spending on stated objectives.

Useful though to cite it as a sound reason to distance yourself from a disgraced father accused of reaping the benefits of trafficking

I'm afraid that given they have benefited from being "Royal" their whole lives, and milked that to have ludicrously privileged lives, we the ordinary tax payers are entitled to be judge and jury on them now we are starting to see just how corrupt and disgustingly venal they all are.

Suspect Beatrice has got her head in the sand over what her father is. It was her idea to do the newsnight interview, maybe she thinks she can rescue him.

Eugenie appears to be less open minded and sees her father for the dirty old man he really is.

Leave her alone is my take.

i wondered whether Eugenie has been on the blower to Harry. He knows all about going NC, albeit for very different reasons.

It’s more accurate to say that they could have been all of the above: prostitutes AND trafficked AND abused. Why do we rank girls/women exploited by men with private jets as a higher status of victim than girls/women exploited by men without private jets? It’s all appalling.

That's a shrewd insight.

You don't know what B and E were exposed to in those meetings with Epstein. They could be victims as well.

Has she cut contact with her father in the same way that he cut contact with Epstein? i.e not at all

To put it another way, if your dad's consorting with a convicted nonce, you have a word. Then distance yourself from him - and the nonce - if he doesn't get the message.

And you do it at the time, not when the world gets wind of it.

Oh, and this is leaving out the bits about your mum being the nonce's mate, too, and getting you to do guided tours of the family pile for the nonce's mates.

No you are wrong.

Being sex trafficked comes about due to fear, coercion, threat, manipulation control and abuse - which makes you a victim of rape because there is no consent even if money changed hands.

Also no status attached or any less impact on the victim if they have been threatened, abused and raped on a private jet or across town in a taxi or a kebab shop - same horror and degradation.

The time to cut him off in a way that was effective was probably after the Matlis interview, from a PR perspective doing it now will come across as a bit cynical and too late.

Having said that, it is really hard to cut off family, even those who have done awful things. It's natural to believe denials from those you love. So on a human level I can understand their hesitation but the problem is that very few are going to give them that understanding and they would probably better advised to stay quiet on the whole subject.

But normal rules don’t apply here with this family.

AMW has had every movement planned, risk assessed, observed and logged 24-7 - so there is a vast documented evidence base available - that any member of his family can access - so no need to believe / or disbelieve him - the facts exist.

These inconvenient truths and uncomfortable facts however are / were a huge threat to the RFs revenue stream due to reputational damage - so it was in all of their interests to conspire and collude with AMW to silence and degrade his victims and they have done this throughout overtly and covertly until the public scrutiny became too much that after FIFTEEN years of this being in the public domain only recently have they taken action and have still not acknowledged Epsteins victims.

I was referring specifically to Eugenie, the topic of the thread and the timing of her alleged decision to cut her father off.

But to refer to the rest of your post, do you really believe the whole royal family has access to police logs about Andrew? That isn't how security works. Any close protection officers who had concerns reported to their superiors in the police, reports which seem to have been ignored which definitely something the police need to address. Police don't report to the monarch.

A few years ago RAVEC changed how they organised close protection officers and rotated them more. There were reports in the press at the time that members of the family were unhappy not having familiar officers around any more but they couldn't do anything about it.

I don't know who knew what and when but this assumption that everyone in the Royal family knew everything about Andrew, had reports from the police and saw everything in the Epstein filled years ago and did nothing has simply no basis in fact at this point. .

And any assumption that none of them knew - especially QE2, KC3, Sr Palace civil servants and governments is absolute hog wash - as his activities and movements had associated security and reputational risks to them all.

B&E as fully grown adult women, now in their late thirties, would have had the opportunity to ask questions regarding the available facts and evidence of his behaviours, activities and associations if they so wished when it became public fifteen years ago - maybe they did - I don’t doubt they found it uncomfortable but they both chose to stand by him - Beatrice to facilitate the disgraceful and offensive NewsNight interview and Eugenie to create a disingenuous fake, fig-leaf anti-trafficking charity which has taken cash, ‘delivered’ initially it’s reputational aims for her (fundraising gala) but never implemented any accountability to a single action to actually support a victim or trafficking. The gross audacity of the pair of them.

There’s a belief among some that prostitution is a Pretty Woman-like lifestyle choice by liberated women.

How about a woman who gets addicted to drugs and ends up in prison for soliciting on street corners. In her life there will have been abusive and manipulative boyfriends and family members, pimps, drug dealers, loan sharks, children she cannot care for and get removed by social services. Yet she’s a prostitute, not a trafficking victim, and she is somehow less of a wronged person because - what? - the tools of her control weren’t promises of designer clothes and college fees being paid, and she wasn’t taken to a Caribbean island?

Many girls are targeted, predated on specifically due to their vulnerability with no one looking out or caring for them. They are initially groomed with gifts, ‘boyfriends’ before they are introduced and plied with drugs to activate and addiction that then necessitates them to fund it, their pimps and dealers via sex work. No consensual independent life choices going on here. It’s a male run toxic system with international networks at all levels of society.

The cynical part of me feels like this is PR. I can imagine associating with her father would be bad business for her husband.

But another part of me thinks it just took time. I can't imagine what my internal monologue would be if if was my dad. It would take time to process. Also since they've been bringing Epstein over to the girls since they were young, I'm sure that adds another layer.

I watched The Epstein Files and yes, the majority of the girls were vulnerable and from challenging backgrounds.
Anyone who still questions AMW’s guilt should watch it.

I don't really give a shit about the royal family but I do think this thread is full of people who have literally no idea what it is like to grow up in a dysfunctional family or be brought up by dysfunctional people. If you have loving, sane parents I am glad for you but try to remember that these women's formative years were created by these people and rejecting them is partly rejecting yourself. I'm not saying it's not possible but it's not easy, just as it wouldn't be easy for you if you discovered your loving, sane parents were actually utterly mental shits would it.

I never understand how people can say 'I would definitely do x' when they have never found themselves in a remotely similar situation. You don't know what you'd do. It's rarely binary.

They shouldn’t be involved with those charities. And where were those charities when Virginia Guiffre was fighting for these criminals to be held accountable??

I remember when Andrew and Beatrice came to Australia right after the allegations were all over the news. I remember Andrew smiling his disgusting smug smile as if he got away with what he did (he absolutely has gotten away with it).

This is all PR. I’m disgusted with the entire Royal family. Andrew isn’t the first pedo that the Royal family has supported. There is something wrong with those people.

It’s time to dissolve the Crown.

I agree AMW’s victims would have most likely been so vulnerable to him and his predatory network as they would have had dysfunctional, chaotic and unreliable care-givers.

Wtf these girls were not prostitutes! They were trafficked.

Well B & E need to ditch him to survive. But they may have their own anger and disgust mingled with love and misplaced sympathy.