Andrew MW ‘s shiner

Annie, what do you think Skye (and possibly me) believe AMW to be guilty of. Or more simply, what are you unsure he might / might not, be guilty of?

Skye I don’t know if he is guilty or not guilty,you think Him guilty

Me too. I’d never want to be friends with someone after that.

Skye 17, I’d go further and tell my daughters they could not see him an we’d break our friendship because of his conviction, he admitted that crime but could have been charged with ma ny more

Anniebach

You have more trust in the parents than I

That’s strange, as you think Andrew is being demonised and I don’t.

I have a low opinion of Andrew and Sarah. But I still think they might have told their daughters Epstein had been in prison before Sarah took them to visit him. If they didn’t, that would have been quite deceptive.

He was locked up some of the time.

//After serving fewer than four months in jail, Epstein was granted a special arrangement that allowed him to leave custody for up to 16 hours a day, six days a week, as part of a work release program …

This continued for the next nine months until his release to a year of supervised house arrest in July 2009.//
www.cbsnews.com/news/jeffrey-epstein-plea-deal-jail-term-doj-files/

There wasn’t a lot in the UK news about it. The Guardian reported it.

But he wasn't actually locked up though was he?
Don't know how aware they would have been.
When did we, this side of the pond, start to take notice?

You have more trust in the parents than I

Their parents knew Epstein had been imprisoned (he was given first a jail work-release programme and then house arrest): days after Epstein’s house arrest ended in 2010 Andrew emailed him: “How are you? Good to be free?”
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/01/key-revelations-latest-epstein-files-release-andrew-sarah-ferguson?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Would they really not have told their daughters before Sarah took them to see him?

That he was a convicted paedophile.

I don’t know what they knew of Epstein almost 20 years ago

Anniebach

Was there much in the news about Epstein at the time the daughters were 19 /20 ?

You’d think having been locked up would have given them the heads up.

Was there much in the news about Epstein at the time the daughters were 19 /20 ?

Yes B and E were nineteen and twenty years old when they, and their mother had lunch with Epstein in the US just a matter of days after he had been released from prison. Extraordinary.

Maremia, I think they were 19 and 21! Old enough to say NO to mummy dragging them along!

Hopefully it was his ex, Sarah, who belted him. He's been known to be very verbally abusive to her over the years, including calling her a fat cow in front of dinner guests, but she's right-handed, as is her Eugenie.

Someone would be a left-hander to do that on his right, so possibly Princess Beatrix, who is a leftie!

Whoever did it, human or horse, it was VERY well deserved!

Would his 'being found guilty' at that time be at all obvious?
He was out and about, and still running his empire, while serving that sentence.

Depends on how old they were at the time.

It's also disgusting that Beatrice and Eugenie accompanied their mother to meet Epstein to beg for more money. After, I think, he'd first been found guilty. They are both adults so surprised they chose to meet him. Perhaps that's why some of the royal family are ostracizing them.

Silence for one year

A lot to pay out though wasn't it?
If it wasn't for silence, why pay such a lot?

Silence for a year is not total silence

If not for silence AnnieB, what do you think the payment was for?
Reparation perhaps?
Another reason?

Anniebach

If money for silence was paid why write it book ?

The $12 million payment was for a no-disclosure agreement for one year only. This was to avoid the case detracting from the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations in 2022.
www.thetimes.com/article/6751f5cf-1b60-4019-96ec-fc091d0ae880?shareToken=1ed6c10f7f693587aaa7dc508d3512b0

Virginia Guiffre’s account of meeting Andrew in 2001 was confirmed both by the photograph of them and by an email from Ghislaine Maxwell that recently came to light. It is very likely that Guiffre’s other accounts are also true.

Plus, the biography of Andrew that contains many accounts of discreditable behaviour (Entitled) does have credibility, as it is by a man who has a history degree from Cambridge and a Master’s history degree, is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, and is also President of the Biographers’ Club. He should have some idea about basing his claims on reliable historical sources and about accuracy.

I am pro-Royal Family, but there is no defending Andrew.

I agree with your posts @ 15.12 and 15.40 MissA.