Prince Andrew the Duke of York has been accused of sexually abusing sex trafficked victim Virginia Giuffre (also known as Virginia Roberts). Epstein’s mentor, Epstein’s pilot and palace security might just prove Virginia as a truth teller.

Above is a picture of Prince Andrew (left) and Virginia Giuffre (middle) and Ghislaine Maxwell (right). Prince Andrew’s legal team has attempted to question the authenticity of the photograph. However, the FBI have not raised the authenticity of the photograph once in their investigation.

We all know how it is in Great Britain, we love our pubs, we love our football and we love our Queen. So it is an outrageous statement to say Prince Andrew our Queen’s son is guilty of rape! But is it? One must judge the evidence without bias, courts of law have been known to dismiss members of the jury if they show too much bias.

According to the NZ Herald and the Sun, Epstein’s mentor and one of his closest friends Steven Hoffenberg, who helped Epstein mastermind one of the biggest Ponzi schemes in history has made the jaw dropping claim that Prince Andrew is guilty. Excerpts from the NZ Herald include:

Jeffrey Epstein’s former “mentor” has revealed how the disgraced paedophile would boast to his friends about how he was going to sell Prince Andrew’s secrets to Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad.

He revealed Epstein’s plane was known as the “Lolita Express” and there was a roster of underage girls for the parties Epstein threw for his friends, including Prince Andrew.

Everything was recorded at those parties so that Epstein could then use it for some kind of financial gain, and also given to Mossad, which Maxwell was linked to, Hoffenberg said.

“He told me that Ghislaine Maxwell was going to be the breakthrough to bring him into that orbit – to be able to part of the agency in Israel – and that’s what did occur,” he said.

“They created the plan of installing the honeypot cameras and had taken over the house in Manhattan [given to him by his billionaire client Les Wexner] to blackmail the politicians.

“He then took over the house in Florida and put in cameras. The cameras were to record rapes, it wasn’t just about gathering intelligence, but compromising the politicians.

So what is the likelihood of Hoffenberg lying about these sensational claims? I for one cannot see the angle, what does Hoffenberg have to gain to make such claims? Going up against the incredibly wealthy and powerful Royal family is a daunting task.

Now many of you die hard patriots may instantly believe Hoffenberg just had some sort of grudge against Andrew but just wait because Epstein’s pilot has made some intriguing admissions. The New York Post reported on this story and excerpts included:

Prince Andrew flew on Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet — at least twice — with the disgraced money manager’s alleged 17-year-old sex slave Virginia Roberts on board, the pilot claimed.

Buckingham Palace forcefully disputed the pilots’ claims, in a statement obtained by the Sun. “This evidence statement was submitted in a case in which the Duke was not a party and in which any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue,” the statement said. “The statement shows a number of inconsistencies between the Duke’s alleged location and his actual location when checked with the court circular. In some cases he is on different continents.”

Again the question raised is why would the pilot lie? Prince Andrew is a big celebrity, he is extremely hard to get confused with someone else. Often witnesses get dates wrong that happened years ago. The Palace evidence does not prove the pilot’s claims wrong beyond reasonable doubt.

What’s more the Daily Mail actually published an article headlined:

Flight logs prove Duke of York’s Epstein girl WAS at key locations and on each occasion Prince Andrew was never far away – so now will he help her lawyers?

The flight logs certainly makes Virignia’s story plausible. The evidence continues as the Daily Mail also reported:

  • Officer contradicted Prince Andrew’s account of movements on March 11, 2001
  • He believes the Duke may have returned to Buckingham Palace in the early hours
  • He recalls Prince arriving by car and hurling abuse at guards over police radio
  • The Duke was allegedly shouting: ‘Open these bloody gates, you buffoons!’
  • Ms Roberts claims earlier that night she was coerced into having sex with him

‘Having considered Prince Andrew’s alibi with my own recollections, it is my belief that the abusive confrontation with the royal could have been in the early hours of Sunday March 11, 2001,’ said the officer.

‘To be 100 per cent certain I would like access to my duty roster for that month. I believe I have a right to know my own shift patterns.’

So why can’t he have access to his roster? Why isn’t the court making the Palace release this information? The frustration is that the Palace is not cooperating and this is further proven. See former commander of the Palace security Dai Davies admit there are incredibly anal security records of Andrew’s movements. Yet these records aren’t being shown.

So when it comes down to it the argument is that Andrew is innocent until proven guilty but his lack of cooperation and his abuse of power is hindering a proper investigation. Many rape cases are brought to court where it is just the victim’s word against the accused. It seems the vast majority of people would at least go to court and why have no court orders for evidence been issued? With Andrew’s car crash BBC interview convincing people he’s at least guilty of covering up for Epstein, just maybe he will be taken to court and quite rightly so. Andrew has had to step down for the time being from Royal duties but it seems the world would be fairer if the police force were allied to the law and not the crown.

By Tyler Durden