‘Disappointed’ Emily Maitlis slams Prince Andrew for Newsnight interview ‘contradictions’
BBC journalist Emily Maitlis posed tough questions to Prince Andrew in her Newsnight interview after a sex trafficking scandal astonished the world. However, she is now left wondering why the royal, who was so adamant that there had been no wrong-doing on his part, did such a dramatic U-turn and opted out of defending his reputation in court in favour of a reported £12 million payout.
“I won’t lie – a bit of me is journalistically disappointed we won’t get to see how this story played out,” Emily told the BBC in the aftermath of Andrew’s decision to make an out of court settlement.
“It now means that the words he said in that Newsnight interview, over two years ago, may come to be the only testimony we have.”
She added that there would have been “huge satisfaction” in “an ending – any ending”, although all she is left with now is a question mark.
“At the heart of the settlement is the biggest question of all: why is a prince who told me he had ‘no recollection of ever meeting this lady’ now paying her what we understand to be upwards of £10m?
READ NOW: ‘Absolute state!’ Huw Edward fumes at responses to his Covid update
“I distinctly remember putting Virginia Giuffre’s accusations to him directly: ‘She says she met you in 2001, she dined with you, danced with you, you bought her drinks in Tramp nightclub and she went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia.’
“And I have the Prince’s reply in front of me now. Three words only: ‘It didn’t happen.’
She mused: “Either he was lying in that response – and remembered her well.
“Or he genuinely had no recollection – and was adamant they hadn’t met – only for his memory subsequently to be jogged.
“Or [it’s] that he maintains his innocence, but feels the weight of legal and public opinion against him now make settling the easier option, albeit without accepting any liability.”
It has been claimed that Andrew decided to bow out of a court trial purely to save his family from embarrassment, and to avoid over-shadowing his mother Queen Elizabeth’s Jubilee celebrations by his actions inevitably filling the newspapers with court coverage.
Furthermore, claims from a woman alleging to be one of Andrew’s former masseuses have also filled American gossip columns, increasing coverage surrounding the case.
Andrew has still not suggested any wrongdoing on his part, but has stated the money is an acknowledgement that Virginia suffered abuse and public attacks, and is being paid as a way to “demonstrate regret” for his association with the late Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted paedophile, who died in jail.
DON’T MISS…
Jane McDonald bids farewell as she returns to ‘cold’ Yorkshire [UPDATE]
June Brown health: EastEnders star predicted death ‘soon’ [INSIGHT]
Helen Mirren confessed her true feelings about Meghan and Harry [BREAKING]
The public statement provided by his lawyers included the words: “Prince Andrew has never intended to malign Ms Giuffre’s character and he accepts that she has suffered both as an established victim of abuse and as a result of unfair public attacks.”
Emily has pointed out: “See how careful [the statement] is to put distance between an acknowledgement of Giuffre’s pain – and any responsibility he may or may not have had for it. “When he calls her “an established victim of abuse” is he perhaps inferring that her own horrendous circumstances were established long before their paths crossed? He still doesn’t, to be fair, acknowledge they ever met.”
The Duke of York also stated that he will make a substantial donation to Virginia’s charity for victims of sex abuse, in order to “demonstrate his regret for his association with Epstein by supporting the fight against the evils of sex trafficking”.
Yet, in the Newsnight interview, Andrew was adamant that he did not regret his friendship with Epstein, claiming it had given him an “opportunity to learn”.
He had also claimed that staying at Epstein’s Manhattan home after his conviction for sex abuse of minors had emerged was, despite public condemnation, still “the honourable and the right thing to do”.
A confused Emily Maitlis concluded that his stance now and his decision to drop the case has “contradicted” the answers he’d given her that night in his interview.
For all the latest Entertainment News Click Here
For the latest news and updates, follow us on Google News.
