Prince Andrew went back on his word & let tragic Virginia Giuffre down – here's what he MUST do if he wants Royal return
PRINCE Andrew needs to 'step up' and deliver on his promise to support victims of sex abuse, royal insiders said last night.
With Virginia Giuffre's sudden death, many feel now is the moment for the Duke of York to take action - and he must act quickly.
3
3
3
And if he is brave enough to come forward and show compassion, to throw himself into charity work, only then can the prince truly achieve the redemption he craves.
Virginia, 41, who took her own life in Australia on Friday, was the victim of vile convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his enabler Ghislaine Maxwell.
She also accused the Duke of York of sexual abuse, claims he vehemently denies.
But she also had the strength to stand up to her abusers, expose unimaginable horrors and give a voice to the victims who suffer at the hands of the rich and powerful.
Her sad death does not herald any return for Prince Andrew, as he will never be allowed a front row seat again in the Royal Family.
But it does give the Duke of York a chance. He has an opportunity to be the "honourable" man he professes to be.
When he paid millions in an out of court settlement in February 2022, the King's brother released a statement saying he "regrets his association with Epstein" and "commends the bravery of Ms Giuffre and other survivors".
Words on his behalf added: "He pledges to demonstrate his regret for his association with Epstein by supporting the fight against the evils of sex trafficking, and by supporting its victims".
Yet there has been no such demonstration or seemingly any support.
If the Duke, who bravely served in the Falklands War and worked decades for the Royal Family, seeks a route back into public life, then he could find a way forward.
And Ingrid Seward, Editor-in-Chief of Majesty magazine, said the moment is now.
Ingrid says Virginia's death is not an escape for Andrew by any means.
But it is a chance for redemption.
'Now would be the moment for him to step up and be brave and say something compassionate,' she explains.
'Now is the time for him to honour the promise he made several years ago to help and support victims of sexual abuse.
'In doing so it mustn't look like a publicity stunt, it has to come from the heart, from a place of genuine compassion.
'The fact Virginia Giuffre has taken her own life is tragic, she had a family, she was very wealthy, but she was clearly haunted by the abuse she suffered as a teenager.
'And I'm afraid that if Prince Andrew doesn't step forward to react to her death he will be heavily criticised.
'This is his moment and he needs to grasp it with both hands.'
Ingrid, who believes Andrew didn't abuse Virginia, fears that if the Duke doesn't take his chance it will only serve as a further indictment on his character.
'If Andrew thinks Virginia's death draws a line under the whole affair then there's not much hope for him really,' she says.
'If he has half a brain he must show compassion, he must react to Virginia's death, and do it quickly.
'This could be the beginning of his absolution.
'But if there's nothing, the silence will be deafening.'
Some insiders say the scandal-hit Duke's travails mean it is impossible and unworkable for him to have any public or private role in charities or organisations fighting sex trafficking.
He could turn to his daughter Princess Eugenie, the co-founder of the Anti-Slavery Collective which fights against, among many things, trafficking of women.
But one royal insider said Andrew has so far been unwilling to try.
Who was Virginia Giuffre?
VIRGINIA Roberts - later Virginia Giuffre, 41, was an American-Australian campaigner and a prominent victim of the sex trafficking ring of Jeffrey Epstein.
She made claims against Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, as well as Brit socialite Ghislaine Maxwell - Jeffrey Epstein's ex-lover.
Giuffre alleged in court documents that she was procured by Maxwell, 63, the daughter of disgraced tycoon Robert Maxwell, as a teenage 'sex slave' for Epstein.
She released a manuscript just hours before Epstein's death, which added to more than 2,000 documents of a lawsuit pending against the former financier and his pals.
The legal documents were released in a defamation case involving Giuffre, who has claimed in court documents that Prince Andrew slept with her three times.
In 2019, Virginia Roberts claimed that she had sex with Prince Andrew in a toilet when she was 17, after a night where he had allegedly been plying her with vodka in a posh London club.
On February 15, 2022, it was announced that Prince Andrew settled the lawsuit - sparing him a humiliating court battle.
'The problem is that many people have tried to persuade Andrew to do some kind of charity work as a way forward,' the source said.
'There have been several proposals. But every time it stalls as he shows no willing. '
Now with Virginia's death, Andrew must surely see his chance. Royal expert and author Phil Dampier agrees.
He says the Duke needs to step up and throw his energy into charity work.
'Prince Andrew has never delivered on his promise to help victims or sex trafficking which he had made,' he said.
'He needs a road to redemption and what better than working in that field.
'Now is the time'
'His daughter Eugenie is already involved in a charity connected to anti-slavery and perhaps a way in is to support that.
'Andrew's problem is finding a charity that will accept him - I can't see a way back for him to work for the Royal Family. '
But while some say it's not the end of the sorry chapter for Andrew, others believe anything the Duke does would be 'too little too late'.
Lawyer Spencer Kuvin, who repped several Jeffrey Epstein victims, said: 'If Prince Andrew was waiting for when he was not under the threat of criminal prosecution, then yes, now is the time,' he explained.
'But unfortunately I think it would be too little, too late. The time to help victims of sex abuse is when they are still alive, to help them process the suffering they have been through.
'I don't believe Prince Andrew will get any redemption at this point, and he shouldn't.
'The time for redemption has gone.'
"It is both saddening and not surprising that she ultimately chose to end her life to alleviate her suffering.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
All the times Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been savaged by popular TV shows
They say imitation is the highest form of flattery. But is this true for mocking members of the Royal Family on television? Prince Harry and Meghan are no strangers to criticism. As early as 2016, when the couple had just started dating, Channel 4 comedy The Windsors mocked the couple by depicting Harry as telling Meghan that he had offered a producer a knighthood in exchange for helping her find work. The Duchess of Sussex's character is upset by this, telling Harry that if she 'is to make, I mean really make it, it needs to be because of who I am, not who I know'. She then storms off and says she's going back to Los Angeles. Animated TV show The Prince, with its cast including Sophie Turner and Orlando Bloom, mocked the couple's job prospects in 2021. Harry asks: 'What are we going to do? Can you get another show? I mean, not one that you act on, darling. I know people don't want to hire you for that anymore.' Meghan replies: 'HGTV did call my agent last week about us but, at the time, I thought we were too good for them.' Following the release of Harry's memoir Spare in 2023, the American show South Park - known for its satirical and surreal humor - made a jab at the Sussexes Creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone's episode follows the young royals, the Prince and Princess of Canada, flying around the world on a 'Global Privacy Tour' to promote his autobiography 'Aaargh'. The show has used Canada as a stand-in for other countries before. In season 19, the new Canadian president - who carries more than a resemblance to Donald Trump - looks to build a huge border wall to keep the Americans out. The Prince and Princess of Canada are seen at a large state funeral, where they are booed by the rest of the royal family - accused of bashing the Canadian monarchy. Against the backlash, the couple appear on breakfast television to demand their privacy. Arriving on the set of Good Morning Canada with a book to promote, the prince holds aloft a placard reading 'we want privacy', while the princess's banner reads: 'Stop looking at us.' The host asks whether, in reporting on the royal family for his new book, he has now become a journalist himself. 'We just want to be normal people - all this attention is so hard,' the prince replies. Another cartoon with a cult following - Family Guy - took a dig at the Sussexes' Netflix deal, which is reportedly worth $100million. Family Guy's third episode in its 22nd season, which aired in October 2023, shows the main character Peter Griffin going on an adventure to become a TV extra. 'I'll go it alone, just like Meghan Markle and Prince Harry,' he says. The scene then cuts to animated versions of Harry and Meghan, lounging by a pool, when their butler comes with a check. 'Sir, your millions from Netflix for… no one knows what,' the butler says. Harry replies: 'Put it with the rest of them.' The Sussexes have produced three series for Netflix since they signed an £80million deal with the streaming platform in 2020 And it's not only cartoons using satire to mock the royal couple. At the 65th Grammy Awards in February 2023, host Trevor Noah made fun of Harry for his notorious line about his 'frostbitten penis' in Spare. The prince claimed he was suffering from the shocking condition during William and Kate's wedding, after he undertook a 200-mile expedition to the North Pole in March 2011. While welcoming James Corden to the stage, Noah said: 'James Corden is a 12-time Emmy winner and the host of The Late Late Show. 'He's also living proof that a man can move from London to LA and not tell everyone about his frostbitten penis.' For many celebrities, being mocked on Saturday Night Live is a right of passage. Earlier this year the Sussexes were at the centre of a savage SNL quip as Colin Jost delivered a breakdown of the week's major news stories. The presenter addressed the UK-US trade deal between Sir Keir Starmer and Donald Trump, joking: 'President Trump also announced a new trade deal with the UK that will re-open British markets for American companies. 'All that Britain demands in return is that we keep these two,' as a photo of Harry and Meghan appeared on the screen behind him. Jost made a brutal joke about the couple, claiming the recent UK-US trade deal included a clause which meant they must stay in America It was reported as another sign that America is turning its back on the Sussexes, who stepped down as working royals and left Britain for a new life in US in 2020. Harry once again threw the breakdown of his relationship with his family back into the limelight with an explosive interview after he lost his court battle over the levels of security he and his family are entitled to when in the UK. Earlier this year he lost his attempt to overturn the Home Office's decision at the Court of Appeal - a ruling he has since furiously described as a 'good old-fashioned Establishment stitch-up'. Harry's bombshell interview with the BBC was met with a wave of criticism after he complained that his father, King Charles, 'won't speak to me ' and claimed he 'doesn't know how much longer he has left'. Just days later, a YouGov poll revealed that Harry is the second most popular living member of the Royal Family among Americans - behind only his brother Prince William. But William, Harry, Kate and King Charles were all more popular than Meghan - the only US citizen on the list. Harry has spoken at length about the constant pressure of being in the spotlight and the strain this has on his relationship. At the beginning of the year, a close friend of the prince told the Mail the barrage of criticism serves only to intensify his loyalty to Meghan. Earlier this year he lost his attempt to overturn the Home Office's decision regarding his family's security entitlement - a ruling he furiously described as a 'good old-fashioned Establishment stitch-up' 'It's horrible for him to know that people don't like his wife,' said Harry's friend. 'He adores her and doesn't think she deserves any of the backlash or criticism that has been thrown at her over the past few years.' Satire is seen as an important tool with which to poke fun at those in positions of power. It is a simple fact that as long as the duke and duchess are in the public eye, they will be held to a high standard and mocked for any perceived shortfall of this. There is a reason shows such as South Park and Family Guy have continued to produce episodes into their 20th seasons.
The Herald Scotland
4 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
A hate crime on Arran? No, just a sign of where we are now
My second thought about the flags was more complicated however. For a start, flags have never been my favourite form of expression, an aversion made worse by the referendums of 2014 and 2016. And by 2023, I was also struggling – still am – with how I feel about LGBTQ+, trans, gender, and self-ID, and Pride flags in particular. There was a time, in the 90s, when I would've felt overwhelmingly positive about the flag, but in 2023, it was starting to change. The fact that my views have changed was underlined at the weekend when I heard that the police on Arran are investigating an incident with this year's Pride flags. The flags were on the main street in Brodick, as they were in 2023, but they were taken down some time overnight before the main Pride event on Saturday. There were reports on social media that some of the flags were later found dumped on the beach. The Pride event itself was not affected and went ahead as planned, but Police Scotland announced they were investigating what happened. 'Between 2am and 7am on Saturday, 31 May, flags and banners for the island's LGBTQ parade were pulled down,' they said. 'This is being investigated as a hate crime.' There are a few things that should worry us about that statement. First of all, the police should have said they were investigating a possible hate crime as they can't be sure who took the flags down and why. Secondly, it looks like the police still haven't realised that the idea of a hate crime defined and enforced by government is highly contested, thanks in part to the debacle of the SNP's law on the subject. And thirdly, even though we cannot know for sure what the motivation was, there's an implication in the statement that anyone who'd remove an LGBTQ Pride flag must be motivated by hate rather than just opposition to what the flag represents. All of this need to be challenged. Read more The best building in Glasgow, and what we can learn from its tragedy I walked Glasgow streets with a 'heritage detective' and found clues to city's future The Argyle Street Gap – what does it say about Glasgow? One man who has challenged the concepts behind Pride and hate crime is the writer and broadcaster Andrew Doyle, who has a rather good new book out, The End of Woke. Andrew admits there will be some who object to the word 'woke' and/or deny it exists, but his working definition – a cultural revolution that seeks equity according to group identity by authoritarian means – is supported by 550 pages of evidence on the beliefs that form the core of 'woke' and the individuals whose careers have been damaged or ended because they do not subscribe to them. He also outlines his evidence that the end is coming, including the Supreme Court ruling on the word woman, the ban on puberty blockers, and leftist politicians, including the beloved AOC, quietly removing pronouns from their social media profiles. I hope he's right. The critique Andrew offers of modern LGBTQ Pride and the concept of hate crime in the book is particularly applicable to the Arran situation. As Andrew points out, many conservatives have always opposed same-sex relations on moral or religious grounds, and it may be that the person or persons who took the flags down in Brodick were just old-school conservatives who don't much like the gays. Such people haven't gone away just because the Pride flag is ubiquitous. However, it's equally possible that the flags on Arran were removed by someone who supports gay equality but objects to the particular beliefs with which the modern flag has become associated: gender-affirming care for example, or trans self-ID; as Andrew says in his book, this group of people includes many gay people. Andrew also points out that by flying the Progress Pride flag as it's known, corporations and government bodies are taking a side in a highly contentious cultural debate that alienates as many gay people as it attracts. A Pride flag in Brodick (Image: Newsquest) The point about Arran is that the response of the police – the portentous announcement that the removal of the flags is being investigated as a hate crime – indicates they do not understand, or are even aware of, the case Andrew is making. The Pride flag is contentious and someone disliking it, or even removing it as they did on Arran, may be driven not by hate but by opposition to what the flag represents. The police are perfectly free to pursue the person for theft or damage, but by using the term hate crime, they are suggesting that objecting to, or removing, or damaging the flag is more than that: it's hateful. They have taken a side. Andrew Doyle's case is that the wider points in the debate are also poorly understood. In a free society, he says, we are entitled to think and feel as we see fit and so long as that does not interfere with the liberties of others, it includes the right to hate. He also points out that the European Court of Human Rights has admitted there's no universally accepted definition of the expression hate speech and as we saw with the SNP's attempt at a hate law, the lack of clarity renders the law useless or dangerous or both. We do not know the motivation of the person or persons who removed the flags on Arran. But no evidence of hatred is required for it to be seen or recorded as such, and a legal system that requires no evidence is a legal system we should be worried about. I suspect the police investigation on Arran will come to nothing in the end, as so much of the furore around hate crime does. But I also fear we'll take the wrong messages from the fact that someone took the flags down. Some people, including the police it would seem, will believe it's evidence of hatred for LGBTQ people, but it's much more likely to be evidence of how divisive and contentious the debate over the T in LGBTQ has become, including for many gay people. So the question in the end is: was it a hate crime we saw on Arran at the weekend? No: just a sign of where we are now.
Telegraph
21 hours ago
- Telegraph
Duke of Sussex ‘asked Diana's brother if he should change his family name to Spencer'
Prince Harry asked Princess Diana's brother about changing his family name to Spencer, according to reports. During a rare visit to Britain, Prince Harry is said to have sought advice from his uncle Earl Spencer, about whether to assume his mother's surname. It would have meant dropping his current family name, Mountbatten-Windsor, which is used by his children, Prince Archie, six, and Princess Lilibet, three. The Duke, 40, was advised against the move by the Earl, 61, because of the legal hurdles, according to the Mail on Sunday. 'They had a very amicable conversation and Spencer advised him against taking such a step', a friend of the Duke told the newspaper. Mountbatten-Windsor is the surname available to descendants of the late Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip. It combines the British Royal family's House name of Windsor and Prince Philip's adopted surname of Mountbatten. The Duke's apparent desire to abandon the name speaks to the growing rift with his family. An interview with the BBC last month, in which he made a series of comments about the Royal family, is understood to have deepened the divide between Buckingham Palace and the Duke and his wife, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. On their birth certificates, the couple's children are Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. However, it was revealed last year, they had started using 'Sussex' as the official surname for their children. The Royal family name of Windsor was confirmed by Queen Elizabeth II following her accession to the throne in 1952. But in 1960, the late Queen and then Duke of Edinburgh elected for their direct descendants to carry the name Mountbatten-Windsor. This meant that when the Queen's children needed to declare a surname, it would be Mountbatten-Windsor. Mountbatten-Windsor first appeared on an official document on Nov 14 1973 upon the marriage of the Princess Royal and Captain Mark Phillips.
