In a much-trailed speech in Davos at a reception at the World Economic Forum the resilient royal “reiterated and reaffirmed” the categorical denials made by Buckingham Palace issued on his behalf over accusations that he was repeatedly intimate with an alleged underage “sex slave.”
Andrew, still fifth in line to the British throne and Queen Elizabeth II’s second son, carefully and wisely avoided mentioning the name Virginia Roberts (Jane Doe 3 in filed U.S. court papers) — the woman at the center of the sordid claims. He also did not repeat the specific allegations made against him.
For the record those allegations are that Miss Roberts, now 31, was “trafficked” to be used as an underage prostitute and was forced to sexually “service” the prince — who she knew as “Andy” — by her wealthy boss financier, and convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein.
She says she was 17-years old at the time of her first encounter with Prince Andrew, which is under the legal age of consent in Florida.
She claims in court papers that Andrew’s Scotland Yard protection officers left her alone with him the first time he had sex with her and that she was later involved in an orgy with the Prince and approximately eight other girls.
Five photos were also submitted, including one which Miss Roberts said showed her aged 15, when she says she began working as a “sex slave” for Epstein.
She insists she is telling the truth and wants Prince Andrew to repeat his denials on oath.
–
Why? Because there are still simply too many unanswered questions about his role in the scandal engulfing him; not least what was the nature of his relationship with Epstein, a man convicted of procuring underage woman for prostitution, why did he visit him AFTER he was released from prison and what was the nature of his association with Virginia Roberts (Jane Doe 3) who he was photographed with when she says she was a teenager.
This combined with the fact the ongoing civil court case in the U.S. against Epstein and three women could just keep turning up new embarrassing allegations about the Duke.
However, it is important to remember the prince is not facing legal proceedings over the U.S. claims. He has simply been named in court papers.
He has not done anything illegal until someone proves he has. To date he has not been charged with anything either.
It may be wiser for the media to show a measure of fairness and restraint when reporting allegations that are — no matter how salacious and good copy — after all just that, allegations.
Perhaps, the only way, perhaps, Andrew can hope to move on is by him given a detailed rebuttal of all the allegations that have been made against him in a sworn affidavit.
