Prince’s interview called PR disaster
Andrew tells BBC he has no recollection of teen who says he and Epstein forced her into sex
LONDON — A public relations adviser to Prince Andrew urged him not to go ahead with a BBC interview on his links to late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, broadcaster ITV said on Sunday.
Jason Stein confirmed to ITV News that Andrew overruled his advice not to grant the interview, saying he later left his role at Buckingham Palace by mutual agreement.
Most British media and many commentators said the 60minute interview, aired late Saturday, was disastrous. One leading publicist called it a “car crash.”
BBC presenter Emily Maitlis questioned Andrew, 59, on claims by a woman who said he forced her to have sex with him while she was a teenager allegedly held in “sexual servitude” by Epstein.
Andrew said he had “no recollection” of meeting Virginia Roberts — now named Virginia Giuffre — who said she was forced to have sex three times with Andrew, including when she was 17.
Andrew, second son of the Queen, admitted that his most recent stay with Epstein in 2010, shortly after the late financier had completed his prison sentence, was not “becoming of a member of the Royal Family” and had “let the side down.”
“I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever,” Andrew said. Asked again to clarify whether he remembered meeting Giuffre, he replied, “No.”
On one date in 2001 mentioned by Giuffre, Andrew said he had been at a pizza restaurant with his family.
In a front-page headline, the popular Mail on Sunday tabloid said Andrew had uttered “not one word of remorse” in the interview as viewers watched him “squirm.”
The rival Sunday Mirror said Andrew showed “no sweat … and no regret.”
Its headline mocked Andrew’s claim that Giuffre’s account of meeting him must be inaccurate because it referred to him sweating and he did not sweat at that time due to a medical condition.
Mark Borkowski, a leading publicist, tweeted that Prince Andrew “(showed) how not to draw a line in the sand and move on.”
“For any student of public relations watching this interview … I’d call it doing all the wrong things really well,” Borkowski wrote. “Astonishing hubris! I’ve never watched a slow motion car crash until now.”
One exchange went like this: Andrew: “Do I regret the fact that he (Epstein) has quite obviously conducted himself in a manner unbecoming? Yes.”
Maitlis: “Unbecoming? He was a sex offender.”
Andrew: “Yeah, I’m sorry, I’m being polite.”
The interview was undoubtedly a coup for the BBC, who were in talks with the palace for nearly a year to secure it, and for Maitlis, whose interrogation has won widespread acclaim.
But royal watchers described the interview as ill-judged and excruciating.
“I expected a train wreck,” tweeted Charlie Proctor, editor of the Royal Central website. “That was a plane crashing into an oil tanker, causing a tsunami, triggering a nuclear explosion level bad.”
Celebrity lawyer Mark Stephens told The Guardian that Andrew’s strategy “only works if you’ve got a complete and full answer to every possible question, and here there are too many loose ends.”
“If he’d kept his silence he’d have been able to remain outside of the case, as he’s a witness and is entitled to diplomatic immunity,” Stephens said. “He was a private individual and now he’s waived that privacy.”
Catherine Mayer, co-founder of the Women’s Equality Party, tweeted that Andrew had appeared “too stupid to even pretend concern for #Epstein’s victims.”
Andrew is the least popular of the 15 leading British royals, according to pollsters YouGov last year.
He was defended by his exwife, Sarah, the duchess of York, who tweeted: “Andrew is a true and real gentleman and is stoically steadfast to not only his duty but also his kindness and goodness.”