Is Prince Andrew's protestation too little too late?

jura
I think it is vitally important because HM is our Head of State, apolitical yes, but nonetheless part of of the British system of government.
As long as Andrew attempts a cover-up with mealy-mouthed official statements the more damaging this is and the Queen should urge him to do the right thing, answer questions in America, now France too, and not support him so openly in public.
What she says to him or does in private is between mother and son and could break her heart if there is the slightest foundation to this, but the institution is far more than that one person, Andrew.

Saville was a vile loner but Epstein networked and drew the rich and powerful into his malevolent web with the help of Maxwell.

Some have Lessismore

Saville took in a lot of people - however Epstein was a convicted sex offender, I think Andrew continuing his friendship with him is what a lot of people can't understand

Annie, I was not commenting on whether or not a whole family should be damned because of some members.

My thoughts are that they should be very careful and very honourable and vigilant......some members of the RF manage that brilliantly.

Lessimore it was reported Saville spent time advising Diana, it was reported there was a connection with Charles through charity work. So two members of a large family.

I agree after Epstein served a prison sentence Andrew continuing to mix with him is disgusting. He cannot claim not to know of Epstein’s crimes when the man had been found guilty in a court of law. In my opinion Andrew should stand down from all royal duties.

suzie why not church ?

Saville wasn't outed until after his death, Epstein was well known as a paedophile

On the way to church ?

The royals spent time with Saville didn't they? I suppose a lot of people were taken in by him. I genuinely couldn't abide him and found his TV programme to be very creepy.

regarding PA, he knew the guy was dodgy and yet continued to be friends with him.

gilly if you had a sibling of low morals you too should be judged the same ? This is what you are doing to an entire family, parents, siblings, nephews .

There is an old saying,"birds of a feather stick together"
Andrew knew all right i am sure,
He couldn't have been in a house with toose young girls and not known there was something dodgy going on, and now someone on "This morning" is saying the photo of Andrew and the girl is photoshopped,yeah right

My exact words were as follows Annie. no "accusations" as far as I can see.

Are the rf going to wiggle themselves out of this one? Probably

Lets not forget that these are the people we are supposed to look up to. the people that we as tax payers keep in the lap of luxury. The people that we give fancy meaningless titles to.

suzie. he hasn’t brought shame to me , I am not responsible for the morals of another. And no way will I criticise any mother for sitting in a car with a son .

As I have said before, he must have been aware of young girls coming and going (he was after all staying at the house), he knew Epstein was a convicted sex offender - even with his limited brain power alarm bells should have been ringing. He should have, at the very least, severed contact with Epstein. Personally I think he should have (a) confronted him and (b) contacted the police.

Whether he had sex with the young woman is now a question of his word against hers, but he still needs to answer questions about what he saw and why he continued the friendship

Some would say jura it’s all part of the same problem

Your posts try to act as a deflection annie because you think that’s it’s relevant whether his behaviour is criminal or not as far as many of us are concerned. It matters that he has behaved in a morally reprehensible way that brings shame on us and I’m afraid his mother has shown poor judgement too.

today is the day British Democracy dies, and we are on the edge of a catastrophy and civil war - so I don't give a monkeys' about Andrew tbh.

gilly you have accused an entire family of trying to ‘wriggle out ‘,

And again, who has defended the friendship?

I would like to see those who knew what he was really up to, to be made accountable (withholding evidence, condoning criminal behaviour...etc.) for their actions or non-actions. Whether this results in a criminal trial/conviction or not. Just because airmiles is the queens son he is not above the law or indeed beyond moral duty and that goes for presidents, ex presidents and whoever else kept his dirty, not so little secrets

One could be forgiven for ending a friendship and distancing themselves once things became apparent but that didn't seem to happen did it?

I'm puzzled how anyone defend a friendship with Epstein.

gilly you want everyone who spent time with Epstein prosecuted ?

I don’t get excited about conspiracy theories, just look at the facts.

Questioning what is a criminal offence and not a criminal offence is not defending anyone .

I haven’t read one post which defends the friendship.

gilly was spending time with Epstein a criminal offence?

Of course one can choose the company one keeps Annie and if one decides to keep company with paedophiles and the likes one shouldn't be surprised if one gets caught up in the sh*t that goes with it.

By choosing to spend time with Epstein, airmiles has left himself totally open to all kinds of accusations. Only a trial will get to the bottom of it. Having said that, we know what happens to those who know too much, speak out etc.

Are the rf going to wiggle themselves out of this one? Probably .

Despite some protestations to the contrary, Andrew, tge Queen’s (yes as in Queen) son carried on a friendship with a convicted paedophile. This is a fact and nothing short of a complete and utter disgrace regardless of anything more he may or may not have done. He is morally guilty at the very least. And I’ll repeat that I thought less of the Q for staging a photo op going to church with him. I agree with gilly completely and think very little of those posters opinions that seem to want to defend the RF whatever and don’t seem to understand the concept of moral culpability regardless of legal culpability. As I’ve said before, I can usually take or leave the RF but they should damn well behave themselves

gilly was spending time with Epstein a criminal offence?

The woman claims she was forced to perform sex acts with many men, yet for the press yesterday she named only one , why not the well known prime minister, the foreign president, the hotel chain owner from France .