Queen Elizabeth won’t allow Prince Andrew’s rape trial to ruin her Jubilee party

While I hope that Virginia Giuffre refuses any and all settlement offers from Prince Andrew, I will not hold it against her if she chooses to take the money and walk away from these terrible people. Genuinely, I hope we’re not holding Giuffre to an impossible standard, that she has to “take down” Andrew and the British monarchy. She’s a victim, she’s spent years trying to get justice for herself and others, and she’s doing great. I was thinking about this as I read several pieces about how there’s a lot of pressure being exerted on Prince Andrew to settle: at some point, perhaps Andrew’s lawyers will come up with a sum and a carefully-worded apology which might be to Giuffre’s liking. If and when that happens, Giuffre should still be proud of what she accomplished and what she was fighting for.

Meanwhile, it sounds like the Queen and her courtiers are extremely annoyed that Prince Andrew plans to “fight” Giuffre in court. It also sounds like Andrew insisted to his mum and others that this case would never go to trial.

The Queen is determined not to allow Prince Andrew’s sex trial to overshadow her Platinum Jubilee celebrations, sources claim. Officials are reportedly continuing with Jubilee plans in June, as the Queen and the rest of the royal family “will do all they can” to not let Andrew’s legal woes ruin Her Majesty’s big year – marking 70 years since her accession to the throne.

Palace sources are said to have been left surprised at the Duke’s change of direction and “shift in mood” after he consistently told his family there was little to no chance of him facing a civil trial in the United States. Since Prince Andrew opted for a jury trial, insiders have reportedly tonight questioned the “counter attack” tactics, which senior royals are understood to fear could expose Andrew while causing irreparable damage to the monarchy and overshadow the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations.

In his legal filing, the Duke went on to claim he was not a “close friend” Maxwell, who is facing 65 years behind bars, despite knowing her for 40 years and inviting her to Buckingham Palace and the Queen’s Balmoral estate with her lover Epstein. One royal source said: “It’s the ultimate gamble. He is putting himself at the mercy of a jury and attempting to distance himself from people like Ghislaine Maxwell, when he is on record discussing their friendship and has known her for decades. This is certainly a huge shift in mood from previous suggestions that everything was ‘in hand’ and questions will certainly be asked about the wisdom of a bullish counter-attack defence so late in the day.”

Palace insiders plough on with the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations, one leading lawyer said the frenzied international interest in the civil trial could lead to questions about the “relevancy” of the royal family. Media lawyer Mark Stephens said Andrew will face detailed questions of a sexual nature when he gives evidence, whether in person or via video link, in the jury trial in the autumn.

He said: “I can’t conceive that the royal family will allow him to run this case and overshadow the Platinum Jubilee. It’s going to spark debate about the relevancy and appropriateness of the royal family and we’ve already seen that they moved very fast to strip him of his titles and that debate abated but the more detail that comes out the more there’s going to be a problem for the wider royal family.”

[From The Daily Mirror]

Yeah, is this the PR track Buckingham Palace wants to be on at the moment? “The Queen is focusing solely on her fancy jubilee party and not the fact that her favorite son is being sued in American civil court for raping a 17-year-old.” Like… maybe stop talking about the fakakta jubilee in the same breath as Andrew? Look at me, giving notes to the royal sources. But seriously, this is just kind of basic stuff. Incidentally, the Queen and her aides have never expressed one iota of sympathy for Virginia Giuffre or Jeffrey Epstein’s victims in any of their statements. It’s never “This poor woman has been through so much and while the Queen has sympathy for Ms. Giuffre, Liz feels… etc”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, WENN, Backgrid.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

55 Responses to “Queen Elizabeth won’t allow Prince Andrew’s rape trial to ruin her Jubilee party”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Izzy says:

    It’s not up to Virginia to bring down the monarchy, but either way, she may very well have started the ball rolling, so for that she has my gratitude.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      The monarchy canceled itself several times over. Even talking about a party with so much crap hanging over their head is so tone-deaf. In the UK children are starving. Food and energy prices have risen beyond control and people are out of work. Yet all they care about is celebrating the being that sits atop a white supremacist organisation.

  2. vs says:

    She is a focused on a party at this time? Kicking these people to the curb is one of the best decisions our ancestors made!
    She is only there because she came out of the right uterus………..for the US Americans CBs, would you like a rf in the US? if there ever was, I will be on the street
    We can elect and fire stupid presidents but these people can’t even be fired and are never responsible….it is always the aide’s fault somehow! the royal is never aware of anything! what is their purpose?

    • Selene says:

      People should make peace with the fact that the queen never comments on anything. That is the take she was taught and all the times she’s commented (recollections may vary) it’s more likely The Firm taking matters into her own hands, it’s never her. She’ll never show us her displeasure at Andrew or any personal opinion, whether good or bad. Charles is the one who will break (and has already) that mold, because QEII’s way is the Victorian way: never complain, never explain. However, I think we are overestimating her love towards Andrew, when she has never and will never choose her family over her position.

    • Colby says:

      In reality, in the 21st century, their purpose is to generate stories for newspapers to sell ad space on.

      Now if you ask then what their purpose is, you’ll get a wildly different answer.

    • HeyJude says:

      We *have* a royal family in the US.

      They live inconspicuously in a residential neighborhood in a house they paid for themselves, pay all their bills themselves, do nothing but work giving back and advocating for positive causes that help everyone, and look like a Calvin Klein ad while they do it. All hail the truest of Kings and Queens in Montecito!

      ; )

    • I’ve actually been pondering this recently….do we have anything similar here? We do have a few wealthy and well-known families (the Kennedys, the Bushes, the Trumps) whose members have been in trouble for everything from insider trading to sexual assault, but who rarely if ever get anything beyond a slap on the wrist.

      But at least they’re not heads of state and at least they don’t have the same unholy alliance with the media.

  3. Chloe says:

    they know he’s screwed lol.

  4. Lucky Charm says:

    “…and we’ve already seen that they moved very fast to strip him of his titles and that debate abated…” Say WHAT?! I guess when you move at an iceberg pace, a few years could be considered very fast. They sure moved at lightning speed to strip them from Prince Harry, though.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Right! Say What! The old gent with his walker in the beginning of Office Space along with the backed up traffic moved faster then they did.

  5. Cessily says:

    I really would like to know from the British posters if you are as concerned and consumed with the future Jubilee event as the press makes everyone out to be? Just curious 🧐

    • SarahCS says:

      You may want to sit down and brace yourself for this, I am….

      NOT BOTHERED AT ALL.

      Shocking I know.

    • anotherlily says:

      People are happy about the two extra public holiday days.

      Looking back to the Diamond Jubilee there wasn’t much noticeable enthusiasm prior to the day. However when things started with the sail down the Thames on the (badly designed) royal barge the mood changed. The day started with a light drizzle which turned into a downpour. The Queen was meant to sit at the front of the barge with Prince Philip but the perspex screen at the front was too low which meant the rain was blowing directly into the Queen’s face, and beautiful hat. She opted to stand at the side for the 3 hour trip. She was partly sheltered and had something to hold onto but there was concern and admiration for an 85 year old woman standing so long. She stood so that people could see her from both sides of the Thames.

      • equality says:

        There are thousands of people in the 85 plus category in the US and the UK who are still in the workforce out of necessity. Sorry but I don’t see admiring one woman who can vacation at will for standing up for 3 hours so people can applaud her.

  6. MY3CENTS says:

    For the jubilee they can pass out buckets full of sand to all royal subjects and everyone can all just collectively stick their heads in the sand.
    That would be the most fitting end for her legacy.

  7. Rocķy says:

    They “moved very fast” to strip Andrew of his titles? Really? It took years. They stripp Harry of his in weeks.

  8. Jay says:

    Oh good, I was so worried that Andrew’s trial for rape of a trafficked minor would somehow lesson the Queen’s ability to throw herself a celebration. Glad to hear that her favourite son’s upcoming trial and shame will not dampen her enjoyment in the least!

    Also lol that they are surprised by Andrew’s case going forward, despite*his*reassurances that it wouldn’t. If there’s one thing we know about Andrew, it’s that he has THE WORST judgement. The man thought his interview with Emily Matlis went well, and lobbied hard to wear a brand new honourary uniform after his father’s death, reminding everyone of his new promotion.

    Forget crisis managers, the RF should start by asking Andrew for media advice and then steadfastly doing the opposite.

    • Couch potato says:

      I’m not not familiar with different options for trials, but “Andrew opted for a jury trial” reads to me as another huge judgement in error. Maybe it just means he won’t settle, and thinks the jury members are going to be so impressed by him being a prince, they’ll ignore all the evidence against him. If he thinks that, he’ll be in for a surprise.

      • fluffybunny says:

        Virginia opted for a jury trial. Andrew had no choice in the matter after his request for the case to be dismissed was denied. Virginia does not want to settle and there’s been no indication that Andrew has offered to settle so a jury trial it is.

      • windyriver says:

        What fluffybunny said! (By the time I hit save, that comment was posted, mine said basically the same).

  9. Tulipworthy says:

    To late, it’s already put a stain on the jubilee.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Yup, and TQ had better get used to scandals as she has been dealing with them for decades!! We all remember how abhorrent she was in regards to Diana’s death. Now she has a PM that is an absolute train wreck but she refuses to fire him! Not only did he break his own protocol with regards to the pandemic, the entire country is facing shortages of food, fuel and other necessities. The NHS is in complete disarray as well as the staff not having been paid a decent salary in years, but yes Baldingham and CopyKeen DESERVE a new castle because it’s too claustrophobic in Apartment 1A!!

  10. Harla says:

    Oh FFS, this stupid jubilee hasn’t even started yet and I’m already sick and tired of it.

    I truly believe that the queen has not a sliver of sympathy for Virginia or any of Epstein’s victims. In her eyes, like her sons, there are 2 types of women, those who are expendable and meant to be used, while women like her and her granddaughters are meant to be protected and cherished. This perception, held by so many needs to change and change now.

  11. Jan90067 says:

    “Incidentally, the Queen and her aides have never expressed one iota of sympathy for Virginia Giuffre or Jeffrey Epstein’s victims in any of their statements. It’s never “This poor woman has been through so much and while the Queen has sympathy for Ms. Giuffre, Liz feels… etc””

    That’s because to them, anyone not in their “sphere” (Aristo crowd) are LESS THAN NOTHING to them. Only a means to do things for THEM. To SERVE THEM. Period. TQ doesn’t care that Pedo has child trafficking friends, or that they sat on her throne (Maxwell & Spacey), or even that they were staying/sitting on the porch of her favorite cabin on the Balmoral Estate. SHE IS ONLY PISSED THAT HE WAS “CAUGHT”. End of.

    I SO hope Virginia’s legal team gets a chance to tear Pedo apart. We all know he has the brains of a gnat, and can’t keep track of his lies. Someone in my Twitter feed put out that Pedo is busy hiding all of his assets and making appointments with his doctor to get all of his “sweaty areas” Botoxed so he won’t sweat on film in a deposition 😂😂😂 Yeah, I could see him actually doing this!

    • Lionel says:

      This! And, in addition, I think Andrew and his family truly believe that women throw themselves at him all the time, so how was the poor prince to know? That’s why he has to distance himself from Maxwell, because there is so much evidence that they were close friends, and that HE KNEW.

  12. Merricat says:

    The “ignore it and it might go away” approach worked well in the past, before technology produced news at the speed of light. Lol. Are they really so willfully thick?

  13. Emma says:

    She doesn’t feel any sympathy. She looks like a sweet old grandma but she REALLY isn’t.

  14. Tursitops says:

    Imagine being so obtuse and ignorant of *your own family’s history* that this is the position that you take. These people have access to the best educational institutions in the world, yet it’s as though they never cracked a history textbook that would have warned them of the perils of isolationist policies that attempt to insulate royals from the realities of their surrounding population (I’m deliberately avoiding the term “royal subjects). Indeed, the greatest praise of Betty Windsor is that she can “compartmentalize” events so that they don’t bleed into her consciousness when she doesn’t want to think about them. Some talent.

    It’s the same with the shenanigans and machinations of the various palaces. Had they bothered to look back in time (not that far – even the events of the 80s would have been instructive), then they would have realized that these divisive leaks eventually turn into floods over which they lose control.

    Ah well, those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Well said!!!! It’s a perfect example with this entire bunch of lazy do-nothings that are living off of the backs of the CW.

  15. ArtHistorian says:

    It is not a “sex” trial, it is a RAPE trial. I hate how the BM reports on this issue. Sometimes they do write that he is sued for sexual assault but mostly they just refer to the whole thing as a sex trial or sex scandal.

    • Couch potato says:

      I noticed that to. They’re no doubt doing it deliberately.

    • Debbie says:

      Yeah, I saw the soft press handling too. They don’t even refer to is as a “bombshell sex trial” like they always called H & M’s interview with Oprah. I’d settle for one “scandalous” or “unprecedented.” Hell, I’d take an “incandescent.” Where are all the superlatives?

      Let’s face it, the queen and the rest of the royal family are responding to the press’s casual attitude when they continue talking about the jubilee or William and Charles ignore questions about Andrew’s bombshell rape trial. Scandalous!

  16. Becks1 says:

    They’ve never expressed sympathy for her because they have no sympathy for her. She’s a troublemaker, she won’t just shut up and be grateful that a prince of the realm paid attention to her, etc (yes I felt a little sick typing that, but you know that’s how they’re thinking.)

    So I get why there is no sympathy for her from the royals on the one hand but OTOH….there is NO ONE there to have told them at any point over the past few years “hey, Betty, this looks REALLY bad, you need to put out a statement supporting the victim” or something similar? No royal staffer realized how bad this looks? It doesn’t matter what they actually think about her, they couldn’t say SOMETHING sympathetic?

    As we have said before on this site, for a family all about PR, they really are remarkably bad at PR.

    • Dee (2) says:

      Even if someone had mentioned that I think they would, 1. Be out of a job before their lips met, 2. Be summarily ignored. I think what is more likely is they have purposefully weeded out and excluded anyone who doesn’t think that literally being born is an accomplishment that makes you better than someone else. At least royalty of old were expected to be good warriors, i can’t get my head around this in the 21st century. Every single royalist should ask themselves, if we had some dystopian hunger games-esque future would any of these royals contribute anything to society, other than being able to “rule”?

      • Becks1 says:

        @Dee2 – have you seen the Windsors on Netflix? Because there’s an episode about that LOL.

  17. Jais says:

    Saying he is not a close friend of maxwell’s at this point just proves him a liar. There are pictures of her at balmoral! How can a jury believe a word he says?

    • Becks1 says:

      Didn’t he say in the Newsnight interview that he was a friend of Ghislaine’s? Wasn’t that how he explained away his relationship with Epstein? He wasn’t really friends with Epstein, he was just such good friends with Ghislaine that he had to associate with Epstein as a result?

      • Jais says:

        Yes, yes he did say that. Which again makes this so ridiculous. How can anyone believe anything he says?

  18. Charm says:

    Are there only stupid people in media in the UK? Why are they presenting PeDrew’s legally required ANSWER to Virginia’s filing as him “demanding” a jury trial? And then, based on this fallacy, proceed to act shocked and horrified at this supposed change of mind “……after he consistently told his family there was little to no chance of him facing a civil trial in the United States.”

    To trial or not to trial was NEVER Pedrew’s demand to make or not make. Its out of his hands. If plaintiff (Virginia, in this case) demands a trial, a trial is what he/she gets. It is their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.

    As legal experts in the US say, the respondent, in his/her Answer can say whether or not he/she will participate in the trial but a trial is what he’ll get anyway.

    • Eurydice says:

      The media aren’t stupid; they’re liars. Telling the truth is boring – lying generates outrage, which generates clicks, which generate profits.

  19. Amy Bee says:

    This is just proof that the Queen, her aides and the family don’t live in the real world.

  20. SourcesclosetoKate says:

    I hope people bring ‘andrew is a rapist’s’ signs that’s the only way I want that jubilee to happen.

  21. Call_Me_Al says:

    They’ve got to put the Jubliee to rest. She’s had so many. Just lay low, y’all.

  22. Lizzie Bathory says:

    I think all the time about how it does no one any favors to insulate people from the consequences of their actions. There’s a congenital condition that makes people unable to feel pain. It’s dangerous because babies & toddlers can get seriously hurt without having the warning of a pain signal, so they could put their hand on a hot stove or bite through their tongue without stopping themselves. From a behavioral standpoint, I think not letting someone experience consequences is very similar. It’s dangerous to them but also everyone around them.

    Andrew has been allowed to abuse people to varying degrees for his whole life, just because of who he is. And now the entire institution is being rocked because his behavior & their indulgence of him has finally, disastrously caught up to all of them.

  23. Debbie says:

    “Queen Elizabeth won’t allow Prince Andrew’s rape trial to ruin her jubilee party.” Well, I for one am happy to see that the queen still has her priorities in order. In that same spirit, I hope the queen lives long enough to see her rapist son humiliated, and the British royal family smeared.

  24. Lili says:

    So it occured to me, in a thousand years what will this queen be remembered for, I did a search and she is no 9
    #9: Queen Elizabeth II
    1926 –
    As constitutional monarch to sixteen realms of the British Commonwealth, the reign of Queen Elizabeth II is largely ornamental. Nevertheless, Elizabeth has managed to maintain her dynasty’s popularity. And since the tragic death of her daughter-in-law, Diana, the queen has demonstrated the surprising ability to adjust her role to the changing expectations of her subjects. One of the longest reigning monarchs in history, Elizabeth II proves that you can most certainly teach an old queen new tricks!
    It say a lot that her leagacy was adjusting her role due to expectations on the death of her much loved daughter in law, that isnt saying a lot about her as a person, a woman and a queen. she shows no empathy towards others, and the perfomative aspect of working royals engaged in charity. Trafficing humans is a big issue in this day and age and yet she is silent, on the notion that her beloved son is alleged to have raped and taken advantage of a teenager. what is the point. and what are we celebrating 70years of doing nothing to change the course of human history, just standing still and occupying a chair. She is not the first queen and mostlikely will not be the last. Her grandson has said she is given sme bad advise,but where is her own critical thinking ablities where does her life experience come out to play. it took her 10 years to strip Andrew of titles for his alleged activity. She has lived through aparthied and met surviours and yet when presented with an oppurtunity with a biracial woman she did nothing to stear the country to a better understanding , compassion and compromise. She stood by and allowed herself to be tricked in to allowing her country to be cast adrift from its neighbour in order that they have a false sense of independence with out a safety net,but she has lived through the great depression and other crisis. So what are we celebrating 70years of what?

  25. The Recluse says:

    I’m betting that Virginia is holding out for a public apology.

  26. Jennifer says:

    On the one hand, it’s extremely impressive to last 70 years at this and sure, throw a party.

    On the other hand, we have covid, we have the queen in poor health and I’m not even sure she might make it to the February anniversary, much less June, and covid will probably still be raging in June and ruin any good party you might want to throw…

    And then oh yeah, feuding family members, discrimination, lack of security and a jury trial.

  27. Deeanna says:

    Does anyone else get the feeling that the whole “let’s plow on with the plans for the Queen’s Jubilee parties” is somewhat akin to Marie Antoinette urging “Let them eat cake!” as the tumbrels could be heard rumbling down the street outside the palace walls?

    Pardon me. I’ll just be sitting over here, attending to my knitting.

    • vs says:

      Exactly……you are 100% right! that’s the way it feels and reads!
      Who cares about the jubilee of a woman whom I am sure if you sum up the work she has done, not sure it adds up to 10 years (to be generous)