Prince Andrew interview is a PR nightmare and a national joke




It hadn’t been reported inside the British press. How was a Prince to know?

That is merely certainly one of many excuses Prince Andrew supplied the British people on Saturday night time time. In an unprecedented BBC TV interview recorded on Thursday, the Queen of England’s second-born son tried to defend his relationship with the convicted intercourse abuser. Other excuses? “It would be a stretch” to say that he was ever “close friends” with Epstein, who was solely the “plus one” of the British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell. (Maxwell has herself been cited in a variety of lawsuits as a proactive accomplice to Epstein’s sexual offenses. She has beforehand denied all allegations in opposition to her related to Epstein.)

But Andrew was concurrently such a good buddy that it was a matter of honor to go to Epstein in New York, after his jail launch in 2010, to interrupt the friendship off specifically particular person. “I admit fully that my judgment was probably colored by my tendency to be too honorable,” acknowledged the prince.

He moreover acknowledged that Epstein “conducted himself in a manner unbecoming.” “Unbecoming?” responded Emily Maitlis, the BBC’s interviewer. “He was a sex offender.” “Yeah, I’m sorry, I’m being polite,” replied the honorable royal.

The prince’s lack of humanity or perspective as he answered the questions put to him was astonishing.

Even when invited to provide a closing assertion, Andrew didn’t present an expression of sympathy to Epstein’s victims. Throughout, he centered on the small stuff. He didn’t handle a occasion for Maxwell on the royal residence of Sandringham, merely “a straightforward shooting weekend.” He didn’t attend a get collectively to rejoice Epstein’s launch, merely “a small dinner party, only eight or 10 of us.” He wouldn’t regret his friendship with Epstein, as a results of the particular person’s “extraordinary ability to bring people together” gave him incredible networking alternate options. Where else could a prince decide-up networking alternate options?

Andrew wouldn’t have noticed victims of people trafficking populating Epstein’s houses, as a result of although “I don’t wish to appear grand,” he is used to having “staff” spherical. He wouldn’t recall meeting 17-year-old Virginia Roberts (now Giuffre) in London, who claimed she slept with Andrew beneath orders from Maxwell and Epstein, which he denies though there’s an apparent image of them with Andrew’s arm around her at Maxwell’s London dwelling with Maxwell inside the background. (“You can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not,” acknowledged the prince.)

Andrew says Roberts is an unreliable witness, as a results of the claims that Andrew “sweated profusely.” On the other, Andrew tells us, heroic navy service inside the Falklands War left him with a scenario that limits his sweating. “So I’m afraid to say that there’s a medical condition that says that I didn’t do it.”

If you have bought acquired this far, then positive — this truly is a litany of excuses made by a senior member of the British Royal Family on a licensed interview, reportedly given with the Queen’s permission, with the BBC. The interview is being uniformly reported as a PR disaster. For British viewers, the incident has already change into a national joke.

But there are clearly bigger factors at play.

At the center of this story are the experiences of a group of youthful, working-class girls allegedly sexually exploited by a wealthy elite. At one considerably uncomfortable second, Andrew instructed the BBC’s Maitlis that he’d keep in mind any intercourse act, as a results of “if you’re a man it is a positive act to have sex with somebody. You have to take some sort of positive action.” The implication was that he understands the female sexual experience as inherently passive — not a good sign beneath the circumstances.

But this is not like one other #MeToo story. Prince Andrew’s extraordinary selection to offer this interview to the BBC has endangered the standing of the constitutional linchpin of the British state: the British monarchy. It comes at a time when Brexit has already plunged the nation into a political catastrophe.

It’s always robust for non-Brits to know the peculiar perform the royals play inside the United Kingdom. In the favored creativeness, the Queen herself is practically personally acknowledged with the British nation. (Andrew was cautious in his interview, as all royals are, to distance the Queen herself from his private errors.)

To criticize her is to criticize Britain. But the unearned privilege the royals have the benefit of is practically inconceivable to justify in an egalitarian age. Royalist constitutional theorists have always responded to this criticism by arguing that to be raised royal is to endure a distinctive educational course of that by definition instills benefit and accountability in people who experience it. To help maintain this façade of Aristotelian benefit and noblesse oblige, the royals are usually cautious certainly not to let television cameras get too close to their precise selves.

Prince Andrew’s option to speak in confidence the cameras this week blew that argument out of the water. He denied explicit allegations that he slept with any girls trafficked by Epstein. It is important to stage out that the age of sexual consent in Britain is 16, whereas even when Andrew had slept with Roberts all through Epstein’s journey to London, as she claims and he denies, she would have been 17.

But Andrew bought right here all through all via the interview as a man who is used to being waited on by ever-present “staff”; who wouldn’t ask questions on how his glamorous buddies obtained their wealth or why they’re surrounded by underage girls; who is quicker to specify the exact standing of a social occasion than to condemn a intercourse trafficker.

Not all the British royals, it appears, are bred to be paragons of benefit. They are if Andrew is one thing to go by, entitled man-children, incapable of understanding penalties.

Even now, Andrew is unlikely to face any extreme penalties for his habits. The British police not usually press charges in opposition to royals. Not being democratically elected, or appointed on profit, Andrew can’t be voted out of the office or sacked. He is more likely to be successfully instructed to steer clear of touring to America. But he’ll always be a prince of the United Kingdom.

Ironically, season three of “The Crown” launched on Netflix this weekend with a warning Prince Andrew would have achieved successfully to heed. The fourth episode of the season particulars a precise occasion inside the late 1960s when Prince Philip decided to indicate the Royal Family to TV cameras, inside the hope that a fly-on-the-wall documentary regarding the royal family could humanize them inside the eyes of their British subjects. It was a disaster: the royal family bought right here all through as stuffy and over-formal.

But a minimum of no person, on that occasion, frolicked making excuses for hanging out with an alleged intercourse trafficker.

“The Crown”‘s fictional mannequin of Prince Philip hopes that a documentary could current the British people who the Windsors are “perfectly normal people.” But as Prime Minister Harold Wilson is left to remind the Queen, royals aren’t common British people. Attempts by the Windsors to say the frequent contact have always failed.

Perhaps primarily essentially the most out-of-touch second in Prince Andrew’s interview bought right here when he insisted he had an alibi for the night time that Virginia Roberts claims to have been sexually trafficked to him after being launched at a London nightclub.

At “four or five” inside the afternoon he’d taken his daughter to a teenage get collectively at “Pizza Express in Woking.” Pizza Express is a mid-chain restaurant recognized for being protected nonetheless unsophisticated. Woking is a commuter metropolis outdoor in London. (And for the file, it is straightforward to get from Woking to London inside the early night time in time to hit a nightclub.) If you’re American, take into consideration a prince citing as an alibi a go to to a Long Island Olive Garden, or a Jacksonville Applebee’s, and even (for the Californians) a Modesto division of Chipotle.

Why did Prince Andrew don’t forget that particular night time so clearly, when he had a hazy memory of so many nights in luxurious with Epstein? “Because going to Pizza Express in Woking is an unusual thing for me to do. A very unusual thing for me to do.” One would possibly practically see the royal scion shaking on the memory.

That, higher than one thing, is how the British people will keep in mind this interview. The question of how a lot Andrew knew about Epstein’s illegal actions might certainly not be satisfactorily answered. But we have been re-introduced to a man for whom a chain-restaurant in a commuter metropolis is an unusual and memorable experience, nonetheless, a journey to a private island owned by any person later convicted of intercourse crimes is utterly unremarkable. He was comfy to ask Epstein to his daughter’s 18th birthday — nonetheless then as soon as extra, Epstein solely targeted the daughters of the poor.

British people have been described as “British subjects,” not “British citizens,” until 1983. The deference to royalty is nonetheless deep inside the national DNA.

In the closing moments of this BBC interview, the corporate’s star interviewer Maitlis acknowledged goodbye to him as a kind dictates a commoner should converse to a Prince: “Your Royal Highness, thank you.” Whatever his culpability, irrespective of his poor judgment, Prince Andrew ought to always be thus addressed by his hereditary title, a mark of some supposed genetic superiority. That superiority is lastly beginning to be questioned.




Be the first to comment on "Prince Andrew interview is a PR nightmare and a national joke"

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*