Sarah Ferguson - just as bad as Andrew?

[TheHaplessWit]

So whilst Epstein was serving house arrest following his conviction for sex trafficking young girls, Fergie sent him messages - from the BBC:

Some emails in the latest release appear to be between Epstein and Sarah Ferguson, Andrew's ex-wife.
One email dated 4 April 2009, was signed "Love, Sarah, The red Head.!!"
It says that she was going to be in Palm Beach and wanted to have tea. The email goes on to discuss ideas for Ferguson's company, Mother's Army. The former Duchess of York refers to Epstein as "My dear spectacular and special friend Jeffrey".
She calls him a "legend" and says "I am so proud of you".
The financier was still under house arrest for his 2008 conviction when the email exchange was sent.

Ignoring the money she took and questionable business arrangements, ignoring Andrews behaviour even (that's in another thread). How can any woman, who knows this man is trafficking young girls, act like this?

Please tell me she no longers receives any sort of public funding/housing from the tax payer?

This kind of reaction is so depressing. He was a convicted sex trafficker of young girls, and still, people can't help themselves but try and justify why people stuck with him, and in so doing minimising his behaviour. It's so bloody sad that this is the gut reaction of so many, instead of calling out the shocking behaviour when the facts were there for all to see.

She has lived well beyond her means for most of her adult life and financially not paid her legitimate bills leaving honest people out of pocket. It’s clear the depths she was prepared to sink to on many occasion to secure grubby money to maintain her ludicrous spending sprees and settle outstanding debts that were causing embarrassment.

But eventually the past catches up and now she’s paying the price for people seeing who the real Sarah Ferguson is and what levels she was prepared to drop to in securing funding for her lifestyle. It’s tawdry in the extreme.

There’s no coming back from this and it’s all going to just get worse as more details become known.

It wasn’t right at the time. It isn’t now. She knew what he was. Lots of people knew. Everyone that knew covered up. That makes them culpable.

She was saying all that because she had her begging bowl out.
She wanted him to fund her project.

I doubt she knew the full extent of Epstein’s depravity. Andrew has been her ex since 1996.

Men who traffick girls for sex and the men who buy them don’t broadcast that to every woman of their acquaintance, and especially not their ex-wives.

I don’t think they’re justifying anything, it’s a fair comment that everyone didn’t know everything as far back as 2008.

He accepted a plea deal on two counts of prostitution, so he was never actually prosecuted. There was no trial. There was very little news.

Practically, the 2008 Florida plea deal produced a conviction on two state prostitution‑related charges, an 18‑month sentence with roughly 13 months served under work‑release, and a sealed federal non‑prosecution agreement that granted Epstein broad federal immunity for alleged conduct uncovered in that probe.

This was how the news story started though. People like me, who haven’t followed in detail, were aware of the first story about a 17 year old in an era when 17 yr olds were considered available. I’m afraid I was from that era, and 17yr old girls like me were viewed in ways that are totally unacceptable now. I don’t and didn’t at all condone the behaviour around older teenage girls, but have been very aware that at the time it was normalised. The difference in the way people talk about that behaviour now, and how it was viewed then, is rarely mentioned.

BUT- I hold my hands up in ignorance that by this stage he had been found guilty of crimes involving 14yr olds. Thats a totally different thing and would have been seen as despicable then, obviously. She had no business being there or allowing him around her daughters.

Andrew is said to have sent photos of his daughters to Epstein As bad as Sarah might be I don’t believe she would do that

I don’t have any support for Andrew or Sarah. By all accounts, Andrew is beyond odious.

But I just don’t understand this Epstein stuff at all. So confusing. Did Andrew not have some sort of security people or didn’t his office/staff know what he was doing and where? Surely the first rule of being a paedo is to keep no records. Why would they email about it? Was Epstein in it for the blackmail or power? Why did he want these things if henwas swimming in money. What the fuck is the matter with Ghialaine Maxwell - she also had loads of money. Why would she procure young girls for filthy men to have sex with? Why did she clearly love Epstein? What was the point in “killing” Epstein if he had millions of files of proof anyway.

horrible and strange

There is something in this, and I wonder if somehow the outing of Andrew with a 17yr old in the USA was manipulated to come out when it did, since many here would have shrugged it off (exactly as PrizedPickledPocporn did, because it wouldn't have been illegal here. Frowned upon yes, but not illegal). I think the press focussing on that case, because of the Andrew link, kept the younger victims of Epstein's slightly under the radar.

And to @usaywhat , I think part of the reason for it all is simply power and control. The hold both Gislaine and Epstein would have had over their 'punters' would have made them incredibly powerful.

I dont understand why they were asking Epstein for financial advice and for money itself when they surely would have been given it by Queen ? She paid for Giuffre's 'claim '- £12,000,000 (?). But S F went on and on telling J E how wonderful he was - presumably because he gave her money and she still wanted more - even though Queen was still alive - why didn't she know their financial situation? He was her favourite child. Also Andrew must have inherited from QE2 so why can't he buy a decent house for himself now instead of going to Marsh Farm?

She just took them for a personal visit instead.

Ferguson lost the plot decades ago.

She and Andrew mix with tyrants pervs and crooks cos they give them the bags of cash they think their royalty deserves.

Andrew’s a sex addict who is gifted prostitutes too.

Guilty AF but don’t forget Epstein was a liar and doubtless underplayed the conviction.

She is an Andrew enabler. Defended him publicly until it became untenable. Car crash of a woman.

The Queen cut Sarah Ferguson off financially years ago when she was divorcing Andrew. The Queen settled Ms Ferguson's debts a few times then said she regarded that as the end of her obligation financially.

...his mother...

If that's what you believe, then you're not familiar with the US press at all.

agree with all this.

Harry is totally self interested. His book concentrates on bleating about his own grudges. He doesn’t seem at all concerned with the misuses and abuses going on in his own charities.

Apparently SF is surprised they don't want to publish her latest crap Budgie book! Her lack of self-awareness is breathtaking. She might be a different type of scumbag than her predator ex Mountbatten-Windsor, but she's still a scumbag.
I think the paperback of 'Entitled' will have them both quitting the UK, if not before.
Either King Charles will have hushed her a huge cheque or she'll be scribbling away (or a ghost-writer will, she's far too lazy) on a tell-all. Watch this space. I certainly wouldn't put a single penny in her pocket, although I'm sure many will...'Entitled snouts gotta trough.'

Her friends are apparently ‘concerned for her’. She’s been complaining that the situation with her housing isn’t good for her mental health. The breathtaking lack of self awareness!!

I do think there will be more to come, and the nail will be boys as well as girls

She is completely awful and she has always had poor judgement, but I doubt she was having sex with the girls and creating a market for trafficking. So not as bad as any of the men who were doing that.

Trafficking people, for sex or any reason, of any age, male or female, child or adult, is ILLEGAL.

Ignoring the money she took and questionable business arrangements, ignoring Andrews behaviour even (that's in another thread). How can any woman, who knows this man is trafficking young girls, act like this?

Because they were not the type of girls her girls socialised with. They were/are lesser beings there for service / entertainment / to be thrown away.

I'm far from defending anything, but I will say there was a disgusting attitude towards young women in general and I think we've forgotten how strong the prevailing misogyny was just a mere 15 years ago. We had images of topless young women in the NEWSPAPERS (not your smutty gossip mag, the actual newspapers meant to give us our daily digest of regional and international news) up until way past 2009, if I remember correctly. Female celebrities were weighed on television for fun and sexual innuendos were made by TV hosts when they did interviews. Old rich famous men openly boasted about dating women young enough to be their grand children.

I haven't forgotten, but it seems lots of people have. America was ahead of the UK in terms of how it perceived the sexual vulnerability of young people at least on paper (and I would say I agree with the age of consent being averagely 18 in America as opposed to 16 here) for many years. So yes, quite aside from the class snobbery that instantly renders lower class victims as complicit, I can see many people in England thinking at the time that it's just American society being a bit OTT with the Epstein charges. He's a rich man, women will lie, yada yada.

Fergie always comes across as ernest, but not necessarily bright.

I think people are forgetting that the proximity of Ghislaine Maxwell to Epstein would have made it all seem to be overblown too. Maxwell as a very respected british socialite, provided the cover of authenticity and appropriateness too.

As to the question. I don't think she's worse than Andrew because as far as we know to date, she hasn't abused any children. Fergie became a prisoner of her own excessive need for money, however.