If The Glands Don’t Fit, You Must Acquit: Prince Andrew Advances Curious Perspiration-Based Defense To Epstein Allegations

It was a defense that would make Johnnie Cochran proud. In an exclusive BBC interview, Prince Andrew insisted that he could not have had sex with an underaged girl arranged by Jeffrey Epstein because he does not perspire and she referenced his “sweating all over me.” This ultimate “no sweat” response is unlikely to convince many given the infamous pictures of the Prince with his arm around Virginia Giuffre at the home of Epstein. It is bad enough to be considered criminal without adding comical in the eyes of your critics. Hence the New York Post headline “His Royal Dryness.”

Andrew told Emily Maitlis that the account of his sweating on the dance floor was the key flaws to prove his innocence:

“There’s a slight problem with, with, with, with the sweating/ Because I have a peculiar medical condition which is that I don’t sweat, or I didn’t sweat at the time … because I had suffered what I would describe as an overdose of adrenaline in the Falklands War when I was shot at. And I simply — it was, it was almost impossible for me to sweat. And it was only because I have done a number of things in the recent past that I am starting to be able to do that again . . . So I’m afraid to say there’s a medical condition that says I didn’t do it.”

He also said that the photo with Giuffre was likely faked because he is not a hugger: “I’m terribly sorry, but if I, as a member of the royal family, and I have a photograph taken — and I taken very, very few photographs — I am not one to, um, as it were, hug. Public displays of affection are not something that, that I do. So. That’s the best explanation I can give you.”

What? I don’t sweat or hug? That may be the most lame defense since Roy Moore claimed that he could not have pursued young girls because he turned down underaged prostitutes in Vietnam. It is certainly comforting to know that Andrew can perspire again, but there remains that other proclivity that remains in doubt.

Andrew, 59, eventually returned to the tried and true defense of having “no recollection” of meeting Giuffre.

He continues to refuse to testify under oath in the U.S. cases.

103 thoughts on “If The Glands Don’t Fit, You Must Acquit: Prince Andrew Advances Curious Perspiration-Based Defense To Epstein Allegations”

  1. When someone does not come forward at the time of an assault, evidence is lost over the years.

    This is of course a problem in cold cases.

    In this instance, if we take the story as true, what was described was not a sexual assault on the part of Prince Andrew. She gave no indication she did not want to be there. It sounded like a one night stand (or 3-night stand) casual sex that Ghislaine put her up to. There may be more information that I have not read yet, but she did not say that she was threatened in any way. I read that Ghislaine told her she wanted her to do for Prince Andrew what she did for Epstein. Was there some sort of leverage or force used that was not covered in the news yet? Because she sounded like a groupie who was groomed to become a prostitute, and I’m not sure she was even paid.

    If she was 17 at the time this occurred, the legal age of consent in New York is 17, and it’s 16 in UK. That means that statutory rape did not apply.

    This means that Prince Andrew is probably not guilty of any crime. As long as Virginia Giuffre did not tell Prince Andrew that she did not want to be there, what did he do wrong? He slept with a woman who appeared available. If the photo is real, one can see that she actually looks thrilled to be there.

    What seems likely is that at some point, Virginia Giuffre realized that she wasn’t part of the jet set at all. Not matter what famous names she encountered, she was just being used. Perhaps she was groomed for the job. Persuaded. Influenced. She may have gone along with it, but at the end of the day, she felt bitter and used, as she should have. Epstein didn’t respect her. He used her. Allegedly. Past predicts future, so I certainly believe most stories about Epstein which he can’t refute, because he’s dead.

    However, what I can’t understand is why Giuffre is going so hard after Prince Andrew. Why does she believe he should be in jail if she was over the age of consent? Did she tell him no? Did she tell anyone no? Did she behave in any way that made it clear she did not want to do this? She did not say that Prince Andrew forced himself on her. She said he was diffident, and sweet, and thanked her afterward. So why is she ruining his reputation decades later? Perhaps she did have a one night stand with him that she later regretted. If he didn’t force himself on her, why destroy him or say he deserved to be in jail if she agreed to it?

    As for the veracity of her claim, no one has any idea except the two of them, barring a video or a stained dress. She has made an allegation that is impossible to disprove, and she waited so many years that all evidence is gone. There is no specific date, and therefor no defense. This is a very problematic accusation.

    Is the photo real? That’s definitely Prince Andrew’s face. If he had anhidrosis, that could be proven, as well as the dates of the condition. That would then disprove her complaint that she found him too sweaty in bed. Maybe she’s mixing up a memory of all the other rich guys she slept with. Famous people get their photographs taken with thousands of people they will forget all about. It’s possible the photo is real, but they had no real interaction. Did anyone see the photo decades ago? Is it a recent fake, because it’s been pointed out that the technology to alter photos was not that advanced at the time. The negative could be examined. It’s true we don’t see photos of Prince Andrew hugging anyone, but this was inside a private home.

    Possibilities:
    1. Andrew slept with Virginia Giuffre and lied about it. OK. She did not say he forced her. She said Ghislaine asked her to, and she complied. We should all be mad at Epstein and Ghislaine for grooming girls. The girl herself has some responsibility to say no or get out. I live in CA. I have had all manner of propositions and offers from men and women, some wealthy, domestic and abroad. I didn’t take anyone up on it. I learned who to avoid where other girls seemed susceptible to the wrong kind of interest. Those wealthy playboys aren’t looking for a girlfriend. Girls might feel bad about it later, but if they agreed to something they later regretted, why do they bear no responsibility? This is obviously different from the accusations of sexual assault. Influence is more insidious. It’s persuasion rather than force. So if this is true, Prince Andrew had a consensual one night stand with a girl of legal age, and lied about it. She later regretted it. Virginia Giuffre is telling the truth and Prince Andrew is lying.

    2. Andrew never slept with Virginia Giuffre, but the photo is real. He took one of thousands of photos with a girl he didn’t know. Virginia Giuffre is lying.

    3. Andrew never slept with Virginia Giuffre, but the photo is fake. Virginia Giuffre is lying.

    4. Andrew slept with Virginia Giuffre, but it was so long ago and a blur of casual encounters that he forgot all about her. No one is lying.

    Now, I may have missed some testimony, here, but I have never read that Giuffre accused Prince Andrew of sexual assault. She was over the age of consent at the time. All I read is that Ghislaine asked her to sleep with him, so she did. Why is that “force?” Why is she going after Prince Andrew? Why not leave his name out of it and complain about Epstein and Ghislaine? What else happened to her? What she described was not a sexual assault, so I don’t understand why she is out to get Andrew. She certainly may have claims against Epstein and Ghislaine, but Andrew? If someone asks you to sleep with a guy, and you willingly do, that’s not the guy’s fault.

    In each of the 3 scenarios, I see no reason to publicly degrade Prince Andrew at all. If anyone has further information that sheds light on the matter, please share.

    The emphasis should be on teaching girls how to avoid the process of grooming impressionable young girls to be taken advantage of. Those accused of influencing Giuffre are Ghislaine and Epstein, not Andrew.

    1. Karen S – if you are drugged up enough so you are compliant, which seems to be the story of some of the victims, can she really say “Yes”?

      1. Date rape drugs remove all possibility of consent. Getting girls addicted to drugs, and then convincing them to become prostitutes, was a common grooming and control method of pimps.

        All of the articles that I’ve read about Virginia Giuffe are quite light on the details of her allegations. All I’ve heard her say is that she was sleeping with Epstein, and then Gislaine asked her to sleep with his friends, too. She’s used the words that she was forced to have sex with his friends but I haven’t been able to find any description of force. That is why I’ve wondered if it was coercion, grooming, or persuasion that got her into that life. Has she said that she was drugged and then Prince Andrew raped her?

          1. Thanks for the link, Paul. I find these stories so incredibly frustrating. I don’t understand the magic hold that these predators get over girls. It’s like they take total control of their minds.

            Take your article, for example.

            Courtney Wild, living in FL trailer park. Is propositioned to go, all by herself, to give a strange man a “massage” for $200. She was not a physical therapist. She said he molested her. ‘I remember afterwards how I felt walking down the stairs. I felt so dirty, like a piece of me had been taken. It was like my dirty little secret, you know.’

            So then she went straight to the police to put the dirty old man in jail. No, of course not. She recruited 50 more underage girls for him all on her own. After feeling so dirty and used, she turned around and betrayed 50 more girls for the guy who disgusted her. ???? How do you ever reconcile your conscience? She was a bad guy in this scenario, just like Ghislaine. There are circumstances where there is no sisterhood. You read about this in prostitution rings. The unwilling girl gets worked on somehow, leveraged, until she agrees to become not only a prostitute, but a recruiter. Because misery loves company? Same thing with the NXIVM scandal. Girls who were sexually abused went straight out and procured more women, lying to them, knowing exactly what he would do to them.

            This seems to be a recurrent theme. You get harmed, so go help your abuser harm more women.

            So how did he hook Virginia Giuffre? Somehow when she was 15 or 16, she met Ghislaine, who told her, “I’ve got a person that I know who’s actually looking for a travelling masseuse and if you want I can get you an interview with him. If he likes you, we can get you educated, you’ll be a real masseuse and you’ll get to travel and see the world.”

            ‘She made it sound like it was a dream come true and it wasn’t.’

            Why does this sound like a bonafide legitimate proposition? She has zero training to be a masseuse or physical therapist. The entire proposition was if this strange man likes how you look, he will send you to massage training school, and then you can travel with him, unchaperoned, to foreign countries. What the heck does this sound like?

            Granted, there is pressure on women to give more and more. Emily Ratajkowski became famous for dancing topless in a Robin Thicke music video. It is crazy the bold offers people will make to women. Here in CA, girls will be asked to be nude models at parties, wearing only body paint. Or be a naked sushi model. That’s where they serve sushi off the body of a naked woman for total perverts. Let’s see, what else? The offers to be in rap music videos, or come to a man’s apartment for modeling shots. (This one is also used by serial killers.)

            OK, so at some point in the evening, Ms Giuffre figured out that Epstein was not looking for a legitimate physical therapist. How do these predators manipulate women into remaining with them? Putting up with it?

            She said that Epstein raped her when he took her to New York. She remained with him so that he could keep doing it. In her mind, did she start thinking of it as a relationship? She said she was trained in NY and FL. Somehow, these girls get so cowed they go along with what they don’t want to do. Or they go numb. Or maybe they get fed drugs.

            And then when she was 17, Ghislaine told her to sleep with Prince Andrew. By her own account, she did. She has never mentioned saying a word about not wanting any of this. To think that help is right there, so many people she’d pass, but she never told anyone. Maybe she felt she didn’t deserve to get out of the life? Was too ashamed to go back?

            1. I forgot to finish my thought about all the strange offers for women to engage in sexualized activity with total strangers, like the body paint models.

              So many girls do this, it can sound like they’re looking for pretty girls that are window dressing, but not going to be harmed. It is so incredibly dangerous to take people up on these offers. Women get raped, kidnapped, killed. Modeling offers are almost as common as duct tape in abductions.

              I hope they do a documentary on how he groomed these girls to make high school girls savvy about what to look out for.

    2. Here’s are the problems for Prince Andrew:

      Epstein was a prolific sex abuser and user of young women and girls. Orgy Island was infamous. There are allegations with girls as young as 12, although I’m unsure if they were part of his plea deal. The guy was as dirty as the floor of a New York taxi. He was a pimp with a never ending appetite for females. He got an extraordinary number of girls to be used. The girls he flew in from other countries on so-called modeling contracts would have been in a very vulnerable position.

      With that kind of a tawdry history, we tend to believe allegations against him because they fit the pattern.

      Because of this, Virginia Giuffre’s claims sound believable. She has a photograph of her standing in front of Ghislaine. From what I’ve read, any female within 50 feet of Epstein was at risk of being roped in to giving favors to him and his friends. And there she is with Prince Andrew.

      Whether the photo was real or not, Prince Andrew not only had a longstanding close friendship with Epstein, but he maintained that contact after the allegations came out, and after he pled guilty to having sex with minors. In the early days, Epstein gave great parties, and the glitterati loved him. However, once he pled guilty to such crimes, he should have dropped him like a hot potato. This isn’t tax evasion, or some process crime where a friendship could endure. This was sex with minors. The allegations that came out were egregious and terribly sad. Continuing to associate with someone like that taints your own reputation. Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas.

      I have not heard Prince Andrew accused of criminal activity, but this has severely damaged his reputation. It’s a shame, because he is known to be a nice person. It’s also incredibly heartbreaking when you think of the sheer number of girls whom Epstein took advantage of, sharing out amongst his friends.

      Giuffre could save vulnerable, at risk teenagers from a similar fate by going public with how she got involved in this terrible mess. She should be giving speeches at high schools and get together with other victims to make a documentary.

      1. What follows was not just one incident, but a composite among many: all having the same common thread. It is not unique to me, but everyone who has worked in the profession eventually experiences the same story.

        A school teacher comes along a young girl sulking away from other children in the playground. Having found months ago her trust, the girl embarrassingly confides that she was touched and molested by her mother’s live-in boyfriend, a man not her father who had left the family years ago.

        The sheriff’s office gets the call and an investigation is made. The girl’s story is as credible as the boyfriend (having a prior for a sexual assault) is suspect. In interviewing the girl, she responds the molestation began about two months since the boyfriend came along. It happened while the mother was at work, and the boyfriend was drunk. When the confused girl finally told the mother about the touching the mother at first refused to believe her and after a week of the girl persisting to ask questions she slapped the girl and told her not to tell anyone. That was months ago.

        When the boyfriend is yarded into an interview room, he eventually breaks his denial and claims that he “did” the daughter because the wife “was working all day and wouldn’t give him any because she was tired.” Oh, and the girl seduced him as well…if you believe that line of crap. But no matter, his lie was a confession in of itself.

        So when we execute the search warrant of the house to find the digital camera he used to further the indignity and innocence destruction of our young victim, we find a defiant mother angrily protesting that we, as the villains of this story according to her, had no proof of the boyfriend molesting her child. We were to her the disruptive force that challenged her world view and little shell of safety complete with the delusion that this man loved her and he was incapable of anything bad. While deep down she knew both we and the girl were correct in our probable cause of his guilt, she would protect him at all costs. I would often wonder who was the more despicable person, the child molester or the foolish, contemptible mother.

        In many respects here we see the same type of devotion and sympathy for that supreme jackass and son-of-a-bitch Epstein. It is because there are powerful, and connected people that many people blindly surrender their morals to, all for similar baubles, love, and table scraps that celebrities and politicians sprinkle over the masses. The followers have become the mothers aforementioned above. They will protect Epstein and denounce the child-victims because the “love of their life” politician or celebrity could do no wrong.

        As for the Bill Clintons, Prince Andrews, and all the others associated with being the Johns or hang-arounds of this Den of Debauchery they are all guilty…with guilt ranging from willing association to actual rape of a child. They knew exactly what they all were getting into, and they all wanted a piece of the action. Whatever they actually get in the end is limited to how much the public is willing to allow them to be punished. Right now there are far too many of the “mothers” out there for any real justice to be exacted.

        Much of the truth will involve cracking the weakest nut in the bowl, in a manner where one of these princely suspects finally realizes their ass is in the sling and no amount of lies or fantastic stories will save them. When they face the choice of 50 years in prison as Bubba’s new wife, or turning state’s evidence and ratting out the other rats in the ship the dam will burst and a cascade of sleaze will burst out taking all the other rats down the river. That will be the only justice in this whole affair, seeing everyone go down like common criminals do every day in the real world.

        1. The mother who refused to protect her child is a common theme in the deaths by child abuse of so many kids. There would be all these red flags, but the mother just won’t quit that man. Then the kid’s dead, and they’re both in jail.

          I don’t get it. The suspension of conscience.

          I’ve always felt that the parent who knew something was wrong but hid it, enabled it, and blamed the child was always the villain of those stories. That kind of harm takes a team effort.

          These people seem to be master manipulators. The stories about the psychological hold that Epstein appeared to have over innumerable young women is mind boggling. They had so many opportunities to stop him, but not only did they not, he got them to recruit for him. He was so confident in his control over him that he was reckless. And he was right. It went on for years and years and years. Is it the destruction of their self worth? They think they don’t deserve better than this? Don’t want to tell their families?

          If there could be a way to render girls immune to this manipulation, coercion, grooming, and influence, it would save so many lives. These girls have their entire lives absolutely ruined, but they can’t seem to break out of it. The most heartbreaking, to me, is when the abused girls turn around and recruit others. Lying to them and leading them to their fate. It’s like this horrid circle. They become the mothers in this scenario.

    3. Incorrigible girls are beyond morality and statute and are culpable.

      Girls who are abducted and forced are pitiful victims.

  2. If the DOJ had prosecuted Jeffrey Epstein, the DOJ would have convicted Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton et al.

    If James Comey had prosecuted Hillary Clinton, James Comey would have convicted Barack Obama.

    America gained the Communist Deep Deep State “Swamp” and lost justice and freedom.

    1. It was a fifty minute interview which had him walk through his association with Epstein – how it came about and where and when the Prince had seen him. That remark consisted of about two sentences in response to a question as to whether he’d met her in a particular nightclub, bought drinks for her, danced with her &c.

  3. Prince Andrew travels with security and around that time had a sinecure where he was sent on trade missions. Presumably there are diaries recording his movements. In the interview he gave, he made several remarks which suggested he’d consulted records (though he did not say explicitly he had). The record of his movements can be compared with contentions in the depositions.

    1. That’s true. Records could prove or disprove whether he and Virginia were on the island at the same time, or in NY at the same time. If the photo is real, and he just forgot her as one among thousands who asked for a photo with him, it still does not prove they slept together.

      And if they did, she did not say that he forced himself on her. Rather, she apparently agreed to sleep with Epstein’s friends but later felt used. I’m still not sure why she’s going after Epstein instead of those who influenced her to sleep around with rich guys.

      Some girls are like Heather Graham’s character Daisy in Bowfinger. She literally sleeps with everyone who can further her career, man or woman. In the days before the Weinstein scandal, the casting couch ladder to success was such an open secret, that it was a plot point in a spoof movie. Some girls get very successful that way, although they do pay a price from their soul.

      Other girls don’t get anywhere. They don’t become successful. Don’t get a rich or famous boyfriend or husband or movie part. They just wake up one day and realize they’re groupies who were used and dropped. And they feel really upset that they agreed to this loveless transaction that didn’t get them anywhere.

      Today, there is all this pressure to engage in a hook up culture or be deemed a prude. Women are supposed to have one hookup after another, with no trust or emotion between them. Girls have apps now. Similarly, at the end of a few years, they realize they’re just being used and it’s an empty life, only there is no Ghislaine to blame.

      Epstein was accused of being a pedophile, having sexual contact with little girls as young as 12. That is specifically criminal activity that is very different than getting a 17 year old to agree to casual sex with him and his other rich friends. It’s still wrong. It’s still reprehensible behavior to groom a young woman like that. But unless force was involved, then this was a toxic relationship at a different level than the criminal allegations against him, in addition to what he pled guilty to.

          1. Cindy Bragg – I know it is subtle, but I love when the illegal alien camera men start reading the premiere art film magazines. 🙂

            1. Paul C….yes…hilarious! That film was released in 1999, and I had just worked on an indie film in ’95 in Austin…..that was one reason I loved Bowfinger!!!….reminded me of the making of our film…low low budget….never knew what $ we had day to day. Permits? What are those again?
              I was craft services and a PA (who wasn’t?! ) The film was so bad it was good. And was actually reviewed in ’96 in Variety (LOL!) at South By…..in Austin And made it into Slam Dance at Park City in ’96 (Slam was only a year old then)
              I had the time of my life working with those kids. I was 20 yrs older than all of them.. So fun.
              Of course the wrap party was at our house 😍
              But, Bowfinger…….what a scream! So glad Karen referenced it.

              1. Cindy Bragg – do you watch Red Letter Media’s Best of the Worst, where they review really, really bad films?

                1. Paul …no, but I’m sure our film is on that list!……that’s why it’s hilarious that it was reviewed by Variety!! Apparently they review anything.
                  I will say our 2nd AD had worked on “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape”…..that was our street cred…LOL

                  I’ll check out Red Letter…..thank you!

                  1. Cindy Bragg – while you are there check out Mr Plinkett’s reviews of Star Wars. He single-handedly ended George Lucas’s career. The reviews are funny and brutal. After watching them, you would never allow George Lucas near a camera again.

                    1. Paul C……just checked, it’s not on there, sadly. I don’t have copy and paste abilities on this tablet or I’d link the Variety article.. I will check out Star Wars review.

                      By the way, one of the kids in the film was a real sweet young guy named Johnny Hardwick. At the wrap he said he was heading to California…had a job. That job was for the yet to be produced King of the Hill.
                      Johnny was the voice of Dale.
                      Sadly, Johnny does not list our film on his imdb page! lol! Smart kid!

                    2. Cindy Bragg – did you watch all 7? Glad you like it. Mr Plinkett has done reviews for all the new Star Wars films, as well as a few others. Usually, Mike and Jay of Lightning Fast DVD Repair (who have been repairing Mr Plinkett’s DVD for the last 10 years) review regular movies. And then Mike, Jay, and two others will review three very very bad films and then try to pick both the best and worst. They film themselves watching the film, which is half the fun watching them react.

                    3. Paul C. ….yes! Thank you …..I watched all 7 but it took awhile locating them. How hilarious.
                      My favorite line was “if I get a brain aneurysm reviewing this movie can I sue the producers?”…LOL
                      And, btw, I have never seen any of the Star Wars movies….and much preferred watching these reviews to actually seeing the film!
                      Thank you, Paul………a great find.

                    4. Cindy Bragg – the dead wife(s) and the girl in the basement play out over the next reviews. He drops little tidbits (accidentally). Mr Plinkett has gone on to do the sequels, as well as other films he hates. There is usually a long review and if it is bad enough, we hope for a Mr Plinkett review. 😉

            1. Karen S – they start out as unskilled illegal aliens and end the film as skilled artists in the film industry. 😉

  4. The prince proffers what is referred to in the forensic interview sciences as a “total crock of shit”.

    In the profession, interviewers struggle with this type of defense tactic. It is difficult to maintain composure as detectives either burst out laughing or they fail overcome the desire to instantly shackle the suspect into a restraint chair for insulting their intelligence.

    1. Darren Smith – I think we need testimony from his ex-wife as to how “unsweaty” he was during sexual intercourse.

      BTW, I use a kitchen gadget with variable sizing to open all lids. If you are interested, I will track down the name for you.

      1. Thanks for the offer Paul, but the method seems to work well enough and without having yet another appliance / tool to clutter the kitchen further.

        1. Darren Smith – clutter, what clutter? My wife thinks anything we bought 30 years ago should still work. 😉

          1. If you bought anything 30 years ago, it probably still does work. Everything seems to be made too delicate today, especially appliances with computerized components.

            That jar opening technique is pretty cool. Even the lid opener tools require wrist strength. Plus, I never remember to bring it when we take the horse trailer out with the living quarters. The kitchen area is super tiny.

  5. I remember those 16-17 High school girls who were being hooked up with Hollywood celebrities through connections of their parents. Hot steamy nights in Malibu, Ca. When those teenage girls returned, they did a tell all in the High school girls gym locker room. Then they taunted the 16-17 boys…… “I slept with real real man, & rich too.”

    1. Gigolo Joe – Aren’t Epstein’s victims claiming they were on drugs all the time to make them compliant? That is a little different than the case you are stating.

      1. It was little Joe actor “Michael Landon” who was porking those 16-17 under aged girls.
        He died of pancreatic cancer. He leaves a legacy of love and laughter.

      2. What GI Joe is talking about is more than a little different from the Prince Platypus case.

        However, I am glad he mentioned it bc CA, specifically, LA is weird in this sense. I like to hang out at a Starbucks in a nice neighborhood where there is not a bunch of drama, I.e., drug addict locking himself in the bathroom and police having to scream and threaten to bust the door.

        What’s more is an older gentleman was telling me how the young h.s. and college kids of this celebrity of sorts….act as bonafide prostitutes….and think its cool. So bizarre. I couldn’t believe it. I still think he is making it up.

        Anyway, plastic surgery on the daily. Everything fake. Some random guy is always there, claims he is Clinton’s buddy. Rambles for an hour about his life without a second to chime in…just wants you to listen. I saw him today walk behind a 6-foot tall plastic anoxeric model who towered over him and just stare at her up and down and then smile at her and told her she had nice legs and walk out. More strange behavior.

        But sounds similar to what GI Joe is describing in Malibu. I most recently saw a women ~25 looking in the highest heels and shortest mini skirt….and she was aimlessly looking for her date (and she did look like an escort), and a man, ~70 approached her and she looked at her phone and asked him if he was so-and-so, and he replied in the affirmative. Then, they promptly went off in his Lambo together.

  6. This is part of the large pack of Brit itShay which is published around the world. The Royal family is lame brain and many of us have no interest in seeing the Prince or the Queeny et al. Or at all. Who cares if he porked a teen? The Brits need to leave Europe and throw out the Royal family.

    1. You know things are looking mighty bleak when they pull out the old “who cares if he porked a teen” defense. Remind me again, is that a statutory defense, or is it from the common law?

  7. This non-sweating defense is not as nutty as it sounds. I suffered from eczema all through my childhood in the Upper Midwest. But here in California the condition is easy to control. Yet my skin remains quite dry. Therefore I only sweat amid the heaviest workouts or hottest temperatures. So Prince Andrew could conceivably be telling the truth.

    1. The old “conceivably could be telling the truth” standard. Works every time. If you’re a Progressive.

  8. As I recall, the woman in the photograph was actually in her early twenties and was not “underage.” Her father worked for Donald Trump and she had worked for Trump’s hotel, which is where Epstein met her. You mention Roy Moore, but bear in mind that the young women Roy Moore dated were just that, young women and were not underage. One of his accusers was under age but her story is suspect for a number of reasons. The no sweat claim is definitely plausible. Getting shot at definitely affects a person’s biological factors. I know, I’ve been shot at numerous times.

  9. “He also said that the photo with Giuffre was likely faked because he is not a hugger: “I’m terribly sorry, but if I, as a member of the royal family, and I have a photograph taken — and I taken very, very few photographs — I am not one to, um, as it were, hug. Public displays of affection are not something that, that I do. So. That’s the best explanation I can give you.”
    ****************
    As an Italian and consequently an inveterate hugger, I find this character flaw damning.

    1. He was not there as a member of the royal family, he was there to get his pipes cleaned. That takes some hugging.

  10. The old “I didn’t sweat much at the time because of a war injury” defense. Works every time.

  11. The claim strikes you as incredible that a member of the British Royal Family isn’t tactile with people. You have a bizarre sense of what is and is not plausible.

  12. What? I don’t sweat or hug? That may be the most lame defense since Roy Moore claimed that he could not have pursued young girls because he turned down underaged prostitutes in Vietnam.

    There’s a reason Moore’s enemies were presenting blatantly doctored inscriptions as evidence, Professor. Don’t know how you missed that.

    And there is something odd about that picture. Her arm is akimbo in a peculiar way given the context. It’s as if whoever was there was swapped out and an image of her from another source swapped in.

  13. First, it is clear from this picture and other travel logs is that lots of Liberals, lots of Democrats and Bill Clinton socialize and party with a serial sex offender like Epstein and Ed Buck. However, there is absolutely nothing about sexual encounters that can be surmised from this picture and any intelligent person knows this.To suggest that ” pictures of the Prince with his arm around” someone is in any way PROOF of a sexual encounter is of course absurd. If this was the basis for fact, we could then surmise that billions of people must have had sex with the person their “arm is around” by merely reviewing Facebook and Instagram posts.

    What we can surmise from the pictures with Epstein is that a lot of liberals, Democrats and progressives are very comfortable being friends with and socializing with a serial pedophile named Jeffrey Epstein. Based on this, we can certainly point to their lack of values, inability to discern right from wrong, and their willingness to be influenced by a sexual pervert and offender.

Leave a Reply