Counterpoint to that: assume I’m Andrew and only care about my legacy. I don’t think that applies to Andrew; I think that, while he’s alive, he wants to be out of the spotlight, as unaffiliated with this as possible, not to be prosecuted, and not to potentially piss off old Epstein buddies who might have deeper dirt on him. But assume.
If I do nothing, I’ll be a footnote in the history books. People will most often see me on some list devoid of context as part of the royal family. My crimes will be explored in as much depth as possible in any extensive biography, but who’s really going to be reading one of those? And to the extent they do, surely there’s some room for an overly skeptical person to doubt it. Meanwhile, my name is going to be overshadowed by other figures like Trump for anyone reading history about the Epstein case.
If I confess, then Epstein is not only the absolute foremost thing I’ll be remembered for, but my name is going to come up at the top of and all over any account of what’s easily going to be one of the most scandalous criminal conspiracies of the 21st century. Even the dumbest, most overly skeptical idiot won’t be able to deny my involvement – of which I’m sure I’m going to have to go into gruesome specifics under oath to be permanently documented. Sure, maybe the five people who read a biography about me might see how I stood up and brought down the conspiracy and think, “Wow, he sure was slightly less of a monster for doing that!”, but the reality is that I’m probably making it much worse for the incurious general public who would otherwise, at best, see and forget me.
My crimes will be explored in as much depth as possible in any extensive biography
Probably not. Without any investigation it will all be speculation. Biographies are written for a commercial audience. Who’s going to buy a biography of Andrew? People who like the royals, not people who hate them. If he’d actually appeared in court, the biography would have to address it. But, with it all just speculation, they can mention the speculation and move on.
It’s possible that some of the people who met with Epstein did it because they knew he could introduce them to other rich and powerful people. They might not have known about the child sexual abuse. Or they suspected something, but thought that Epstein was always seen with barely legal 18-year-olds, and that that was the extent of it.
I personally don’t think that Epstein introduced himself to billionaires by saying “Hi, I’m Jeff Epstein, I rape children, are you interested in raping children too?” I don’t believe that being a billionaire automatically means you not only enjoy raping children, but are excited to share that hobby with other people. Epstein probably sounded them out, investigated them, and only went into details with the ones who weren’t going to expose him. And, most likely, he got blackmail material on anybody who he did share his “hobby” with. He probably kept anybody who he thought might expose him at arms length, and he only let them see him with girls who were 18+.
So, while that plausible deniability exists, I’m sure Andrew wants to be able to claim that he was buddies with Epstein, but was so clueless that he never knew about the child sexual abuse.
He’s also got a wife and kids who are high profile, his selfishness will extend to them, he wants them to be able to have legacies too or else he’s going to die hated by the few people who still love him. Sarah is absolutely telling him not to go even near an open window right now, stay in the dark for the rest of time. He seems to actually listen to her a bit, too.
She’s in the files too. Little doubt she knew what was going on, and yet she chose not only to not speak out, but she profited from Epstein money and contacts. She might as well have been holding the girls down. Inaction is a chosen course of action and all who knew and did nothing are guilty.
Counterpoint to that: assume I’m Andrew and only care about my legacy. I don’t think that applies to Andrew; I think that, while he’s alive, he wants to be out of the spotlight, as unaffiliated with this as possible, not to be prosecuted, and not to potentially piss off old Epstein buddies who might have deeper dirt on him. But assume.
If I do nothing, I’ll be a footnote in the history books. People will most often see me on some list devoid of context as part of the royal family. My crimes will be explored in as much depth as possible in any extensive biography, but who’s really going to be reading one of those? And to the extent they do, surely there’s some room for an overly skeptical person to doubt it. Meanwhile, my name is going to be overshadowed by other figures like Trump for anyone reading history about the Epstein case.
If I confess, then Epstein is not only the absolute foremost thing I’ll be remembered for, but my name is going to come up at the top of and all over any account of what’s easily going to be one of the most scandalous criminal conspiracies of the 21st century. Even the dumbest, most overly skeptical idiot won’t be able to deny my involvement – of which I’m sure I’m going to have to go into gruesome specifics under oath to be permanently documented. Sure, maybe the five people who read a biography about me might see how I stood up and brought down the conspiracy and think, “Wow, he sure was slightly less of a monster for doing that!”, but the reality is that I’m probably making it much worse for the incurious general public who would otherwise, at best, see and forget me.
Probably not. Without any investigation it will all be speculation. Biographies are written for a commercial audience. Who’s going to buy a biography of Andrew? People who like the royals, not people who hate them. If he’d actually appeared in court, the biography would have to address it. But, with it all just speculation, they can mention the speculation and move on.
It’s possible that some of the people who met with Epstein did it because they knew he could introduce them to other rich and powerful people. They might not have known about the child sexual abuse. Or they suspected something, but thought that Epstein was always seen with barely legal 18-year-olds, and that that was the extent of it.
I personally don’t think that Epstein introduced himself to billionaires by saying “Hi, I’m Jeff Epstein, I rape children, are you interested in raping children too?” I don’t believe that being a billionaire automatically means you not only enjoy raping children, but are excited to share that hobby with other people. Epstein probably sounded them out, investigated them, and only went into details with the ones who weren’t going to expose him. And, most likely, he got blackmail material on anybody who he did share his “hobby” with. He probably kept anybody who he thought might expose him at arms length, and he only let them see him with girls who were 18+.
So, while that plausible deniability exists, I’m sure Andrew wants to be able to claim that he was buddies with Epstein, but was so clueless that he never knew about the child sexual abuse.
He’s also got a wife and kids who are high profile, his selfishness will extend to them, he wants them to be able to have legacies too or else he’s going to die hated by the few people who still love him. Sarah is absolutely telling him not to go even near an open window right now, stay in the dark for the rest of time. He seems to actually listen to her a bit, too.
She’s in the files too. Little doubt she knew what was going on, and yet she chose not only to not speak out, but she profited from Epstein money and contacts. She might as well have been holding the girls down. Inaction is a chosen course of action and all who knew and did nothing are guilty.