Prince Andrew

He wasn't very convincing. Still I suppose a nice scoop for the Beeb. Shed loads of money and expensive lawyers to dig him out if needed!

sw I have contributed.

Not good to use it emojis to mock someone's post.

TV presenter Carol Vorderman tweeted: '#PrinceAndrew So I didn't speak to him for 4 years because it wasn't appropriate, but when he was released from prison for sex offences I didn't ring him..no.., I flew to America to tell him in person that I STILL wasn't going to talk to him...RUN THAT BY ME AGAIN.'

At no point in the interview did Andrew say “I didn’t do it.”
I think he has been advised not to say “I didn’t do it.”
Because he clearly did. More then once.
He wriggles out by saying I don’t remember.
That’s his defense? Unbelievable.

He tells us his biggest weakness is “his tendency to be honourable”. In my opinion that’s the one thing he’s not guilty of. If he didn’t join in with the abuse he must have known or suspected it was going on. At the very least it shows very bad judgement. Its all a bit sleazy.

If only he had said that he condemned the actions of his friend just once. It was pointed out on the radio that he had meant " loyalty " instead of honour. The Pizza place he is reputed to have gone to is now getting spoof trip advisor reviews saying how a visit there makes you loose your memory etc.. He never once said he refuted the claim that he had sex with this young girl just said he did not remember him. He was not ill advised to do this interview he did it against lots of advice to the contrary .

@floradora he couldn't condemn the actions of his "friend" though, could he, because that would give weight to a friendship that wasnt, according to PA, a friendship at all.

He seems to me to be distancing himself from Epstein, who is conveniently dead and can't contradict the account.

By saying he didn't do it, he'd be open to accusations of lying. By saying he can't remember, he can't be accused of lying.

I agree he's had sound legal advice, and is fudging.

Why can't he prove where he was or was not?
Surely the Royal staff keep diaries.

There must be instructions somewhere in writing regarding who is rostered on as Prince Andrew's security staff, whilst in the US and at home.

Prince Andrew mentions his 'security people' in the interview.

If he went to the pizza parlour as he said with his daughter, then surely he would have had a security personal with him and the visit recorded in the security officers notes.

If there was an emergency the
the royal machine would have to be put into motion quite quickly. and obviously have to know the whereabouts of all the Senior Royal Family bearing in mind that P A was further up the Royal Line at the time

You can be at a birthday party early evening in Woking and then at a party in Belgravia later that night. It wasn’t as though he’d have to use public transport. This is a red herring and a ridiculous alibi

Hope you’re all being careful about the laws of slander?!
I watched this interview last night and thought why on earth did he agree to do it? He was never going to come out of it well, no royal ever does.Now the body language experts will have a field day with it I bet.
His big mistake was to continue the friendship with Epstein and not to say this in the interview ( that it was his mistake )
Because not being apologetic and sorry, and appearing to be arrogant, ruins the point of his ‘coming clean’ interview IMHO.

Actually, it’s libel, not slander, isn’t it, being written down.

lemon- his big mistake was to enter into a friendship with Epstein who made no secret of his lifestyle. Networking is one thing, where many people have business acquaintances they wouldn't see as friends because their business dealings or personal lives are sleazy. JE was totally sleazy, obvious to anyone with a brain .......

I couldn’t give a flying fig about the laws of libel. For one thing I think the truth is even worse than we know already and the idea that he would sue and let the truth come out?

The problem Iam of course is that PA is a bear of very little brain and thinks only through his penis

Yes, Iam64 I agree.??

suziewoozie you should give a flying fig for the laws of libel....we all should, as GN is a public forum not a cosy cafe chat somewhere between friends.

HQ have warned us about the laws of libel in the past. I remember a thread about PA being deleted a few years ago.

I was referring only to PA lemon.

Well let them if they think there’s a problem on here <shrug>

He's innocent til proven guilty and needs to testify under oath.

He's not going to do that, is he?

So we'll never know. Pointless getting our knickers in a twist.

Just for interest I looked at my posts - nothing libellous. However, VR has been seriously libelled by some of the PA apologists. Funny no one has warned them off.

He has never seemed the brightest coin in the mint . The interview must have been difficult, he should have taken the advice he was given , to shut up.

I doubt there will be a court case, the woman may try a private prosecution but she has to get him to America .

It's all thoroughly unpleasant stuff. The lack of condemnation of Epstein or sympathy for his victims is deafening and the justification that a lot was learned and useful contacts made is deeply distasteful.

I didn't watch the programme but have seen some of the clips on the news a couple of times. PA says "It didn't happen". If nothing happened, I think it would be more natural to say "That didn't happen". The use of "It" sounded like "It" was a thing which very much did happen.

Who is ‘VR’? Sorry to be dim suziew

If you end up in the clink I’ll come to visit you with a nail file hidden inside a cake.

Scandals and dead cats

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1195985171427856385.html

Rants, Brexit and shoe horning!