IT would be enough to make any self respecting Royal break out in a cold sweat. if they could, that is.
For it seems that the Duke of York’s excruciating television interview where he tried vainly to justify his friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has failed to win over the viewing public.
Nor, for that matter, his blue-blooded attempts to present himself as an entrepreneurial picture of innocence.
A survey by the respected survey group OnePoll suggests few Britons believe Prince Andrew was telling the truth during his disastrous BBC interview.
Only 16% believe his claim that he has no recollection of meeting Virginia Giuffre, then 17, whom he is alleged to have had sex with.
She is the fresh-faced teenager he is pictured with, his arm around her waist, for anyone struggling to remember.
The same figure believe his ‘alibi’ that he was at Pizza Express in Woking when Giuffre – then Virginia Roberts – alleged the incident took place.
Just 17% believe his claim that he cannot sweat due to a medical condition picked up during the Falklands War. More than half (54%) think his decision to do the interview had damaged the Royal Family’s reputation.
And almost two thirds (63%) said they thought Prince Andrew had done victims of sexual abuse “a disservice” by describing Epstein’s offending as “unbecoming”.
More than half (58%) of the 1,000 UK adults surveyed by OnePoll think Andrew should now volunteer himself to the FBI to be questioned as part of the investigation.
The poll also revealed 63% said they felt sorry for the Queen after the 93-year-old following her son’s relationship with the convicted sex offender and his Newsnight interview.
They are not the only ones taking a dim view. The Duke of York’s TV interview about his friendship was a “mistake”, according to ex-Downing Street director of communications Alastair Campbell has said.
Mr Campbell, who was former Labour prime minister Tony Blair’s press secretary, said he did not think Andrew’s weekend appearance on BBC’s Newsnight was “as bad as it is now being defined”.
He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the duke’s “manner was really wrong” and “he didn’t really have answers to some of the very, very difficult questions”.
“There is a danger of a, what has been a kind of low-running frenzy for some time, becoming a bit of a crisis for him,” he said.
“Now, as it happens, I think the interview was a mistake, I don’t think it was as bad as it is now being defined.”
He added: “I think there will be some people thinking ‘Is this quite as big a deal as we’re being told?’, but I think it was a mistake and I think partly because he didn’t really have answers to some of the very, very difficult questions and also I think the manner was really wrong and often the tone of an interview like that is what counts for people.
“I think, if I were him, I would do a little bit of show don’t tell, carry on doing what he does, yes, accepting there’s going to be all this noise around him.”
The Duke of York has been dealt another major blow after a sponsor of his flagship business project said it was not renewing support.
KPMG’s sponsorship contract with Andrew’s Pitch@Palace, a mentoring scheme for tech start-ups and entrepreneurs, expired at the end of October and will not be renewed.
The Outward Bound Trust, which the duke supports as patron, saying it will hold a board meeting in the next few days when members will discuss issues raised by Saturday’s interview.
The duke was caught up in further controversy when a newspaper columnist claimed Andrew used a racially-offensive word during a Buckingham Palace meeting in 2012.
READ MORE: Prince Andrew failed to show any compassion for the victims
Pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca told the Daily Telegraph it is also reviewing its future with the mentoring scheme: “Our three-year partnership with Pitch@Palace is due to expire at the end of this year and is currently being reviewed.”
Andrew’s appearance on Newsnight to explain his friendship with the convicted sex offender and deny allegations of having sex with an under-age teenager has been widely condemned, but the duke is said to being standing by his decision to put his side of the story.
The Queen and other senior royals are said to “back and believe” Andrew’s defence of himself in the BBC interview “100%”.
It also emerged that Virginia Giuffre has given an interview to BBC’s Panorama.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel