Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit

I'm just watching this. Oh my god he just comes across as a massive fucking liar!

Going for a walk in Central Park to tell someone that you can never been seen together again!?!?!
That was another weird aspect of it. I'd guess most people would simply stop contact with someone convicted of sex offences and not fly across the Atlantic to say so face to face. Just stop answering calls, etc. That can't be difficult for a member of the royal family to do surely.
 
One thing is for sure, hanging about with a convicted perv was idiotic. Apart from that, I'm inclined to believe he was part of the whole thing, not just because the interview was a string of lame excuses, but he claims to know nothing about something he was photographed being part of. The photo in itself is nothing, but it becomes a lot when you take the rest into account.
Even if the woman is lying about him raping her, he's very likely to have been at it with others. I don't trust his word to the point I would accuse him of being a liar.
 
One thing is for sure, hanging about with a convicted perv was idiotic. Apart from that, I'm inclined to believe he was part of the whole thing, not just because the interview was a string of lame excuses, but he claims to know nothing about something he was photographed being part of. The photo in itself is nothing, but it becomes a lot when you take the rest into account.
Even if the woman is lying about him raping her, he's very likely to have been at it with others. I don't trust his word to the point I would accuse him of being a liar.
I suspect he wasn’t introduced the the young lady as being a trafficked sex slave, and presumably mr Epstein knew a thing or two about grooming, but celebs assuming anyone put in front of them is “gagging for it“ will always be an area to tread carefully where consent is concerned.
 
why the fuck did he carry on hanging out with epstein after his conviction? thats what i find baffling. his advisors/the spooks must surely have been warning him off. Its almost wilful. im sure the duke of nonce had plenty of other, more discreet, ways of indulging his taste for underage girls without hanging out with a convicted pederast. It really must be a deeply ingrained belief that he can do what the fuck he likes and - more even disturbing - he didn't see anything wrong with what epstein did.
 
Prince Andrew: Calls for royal to say sorry and speak to FBI

the cunt's now toxic.

businesses and charities were under growing pressure to review their links to the prince and his pitch@palace initiative for entrepreneurs, which stages events at Buckingham Palace and around the world.

although apparently he thought the interview had gone very well. not sure he's thinking that now.
 
God, no, I don't doubt this - but it was pre-recorded, wasn't it?
So how do you balance getting it out, letting him dig his own grave - with considered questions that no fucker could object to - against having the whole thing pulled?
I'm still amazed it went out as it was.
I thought it was interesting that he talked about social media, too - are they all wringing their hands now 'fuck, we HAVE to talk!'?

I do not mean more questions shouldn't and/or couldn't have been asked (although, as has rightly been said, those should clearly be saved for a legal grilling anyway) - just within the fucking structures we have, I thought it was quite well judged (and tbc, I don't even mean that I'm sure they *wanted* it to go as badly as it already did).
This might sound like me being unwilling to compliment Maitliss and her team, but the thing is I'm wondering if they expected him to be so dreadful and hang himself or whether they just got lucky? With her demeanour and as you say, repeating those questions to him with masses of scorn, Maitliss reinforced that his answers were both vile and obvious lies. But I wonder - and this might be me being uncharitable to them - how it would have gone if he'd performed better or come up with better/more presentable lies? Suppose it's in that kind of scenario that a bit of extra evidence would have worked out as plan B.

Anyway, he made none of that necessary. :thumbs: Every lie, literally, managed to combine misogyny, gross entitlement and contempt for his audience. Well done you cunt.
 
why the fuck did he carry on hanging out with epstein after his conviction? thats what i find baffling. his advisors/the spooks must surely have been warning him off. Its almost wilful. im sure the duke of nonce had plenty of other, more discreet, ways of indulging his taste for underage girls without hanging out with a convicted pederast. It really must be a deeply ingrained belief that he can do what the fuck he likes and - more even disturbing - he didn't see anything wrong with what epstein did.
I suspect it's exactly this.

No doubt covered in the last 49 pages, but I've always wondered about the level of entourage he travelled with on his nonce trips. He was travelling in a private capacity I presume, though that isn't entirely clear as there was some talk of nipping over to Boston for some kind of shindig within the 4 day 'we can't be friends any more' trip. Presumably he used epstein's servants at the mansion, but I struggle to imagine him setting off from Heathrow without a bodyguard. Ditto some kind of protection staff as he moved from NY to Boston. So even when he was off on nonce holidays there would have been someone official to confirm or deny parts of his story. Tellingly, there hasn't been a queue of royal protection officers lining up to say 'I definitely drove to Pizza Express', but neither have there been tales of the Met refusing to back him up.

Edit: and here's the former head of a large royal protection team calling him a liar:
Prince Andrew must be investigated by police after TV interview, ex-top cop says
 
Last edited:
I suspect it's exactly this.

No doubt covered in the last 49 pages, but I've always wondered about the level of entourage he travelled with on his nonce trips. He was travelling in a private capacity I presume, though that isn't entirely clear as there was some talk of nipping over to Boston for some kind of shindig within the 4 day 'we can't be friends any more' trip. Presumably he used epstein's servants at the mansion, but I struggle to imagine him setting off from Heathrow without a bodyguard. Ditto some kind of protection staff as he moved from NY to Boston. So even when he was off on nonce holidays there would have been someone official to confirm or deny parts of his story. Tellingly, there hasn't been a queue of royal protection officers lining up to say 'I definitely drove to Pizza Express', but neither have there been tales of the Met refusing to back him up.

Edit: and here's the former head of a large royal protection team calling him a liar:
Prince Andrew must be investigated by police after TV interview, ex-top cop says

... which in turn makes me wonder about the official secrets act, which he presumably signed. Not sure what he said actually breaches it, but you'd imagine bods like him would be in the habit of keeping schtum about everything. Maybe the Mirror's shilling was too bright.
 
As Buckingham Palace dealt with the backlash from Prince Andrew’s interview with Emily Maitlis in which he failed to express any sympathy for victims of the billionaire paedophile, he was even said to have told the Queen that his appearance on the BBC Two Newsnight special had been a success.

A success?
 
This might sound like me being unwilling to compliment Maitliss and her team, but the thing is I'm wondering if they expected him to be so dreadful and hang himself or whether they just got lucky? With her demeanour and as you say, repeating those questions to him with masses of scorn, Maitliss reinforced that his answers were both vile and obvious lies. But I wonder - and this might be me being uncharitable to them - how it would have gone if he'd performed better or come up with better/more presentable lies? Suppose it's in that kind of scenario that a bit of extra evidence would have worked out as plan B.

Anyway, he made none of that necessary. :thumbs: Every lie, literally, managed to combine misogyny, gross entitlement and contempt for his audience. Well done you cunt.
I think they did get lucky, but the luck wasnt in these specific responses: it was in him agreeing to the interview at all. However he responded to the very straightforward questions, asking him to account for the things we already know - lies or the truth - was going to be extaordinary.
 
Hopefully the remarkable widespread condemnation of Andrew leads to a greater willingness to look into the entire institution of Monarchy, which is rotten to the core. Maybe this is the beginning of the end for them. I hope so.

And if that institution can fall, which others can?
 
Back
Top Bottom