Piers Morgan Uncensored - ‘EPSTEIN Shot That Picture!’ Shock Prince Andrew Revelations Shared By Giuffre Author

Episode Date: October 28, 2025

Prince Andrew’s continued residence in the 30-bedroom Royal Lodge has become a national outrage after emails unveiled he lied about severing ties with Jeffrey Epstein after his convictions, plus the publication of Virginia Giuffre’s posthumous memoir ‘Nobody’s Girl’, packed with ever more lurid claims. Amy Wallace, who spent years with Virginia and co-wrote the book with her, joins Piers Morgan to discuss some of the most shocking revelations contained within. Then Piers speaks to former royal protection officer Paul Page about the renewed focus on the claim that Andrew tasked staff with finding dirt to smear Virginia. Plus Uncensored is also joined by Molly Skye Brown, who claims Andrew approached her to discredit Virginia, royal podcaster Kinsey Schofield and journalist Michael Tracey, who thinks people have been too quick to believe Virginia’s allegations and to smear Andrew. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and supported by: Oxford Natural: To watch their full stories, scan the QR code on your screen or visit https://oxfordnatural.com/piers/ to get 70% off your first order when you use code PIERS. Superpower: No more guessing your health. Visit https://Superpower.com today! OneSkin: Get 15% off OneSkin with the code PIERS at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I have utter confidence that it's a genuine picture. She handed her camera to Jeffrey Epstein, and he shot that picture. You have hundreds of hours of tapes of Virginia's testimony to you, which you've hidden. They are proof. Do not break into my house. You will not find them there. Prince Andrew was the most difficult member of the royal family to work for. There could potentially be evidence on the police national computer. When the royal family reached out to me, I thought it was very pathetic. Queen Elizabeth's team should have shut this down and cut Andrew off.

off at the knees years ago. The evidentiary basis is not there. She says in the book that one of the people that raped her was a former high profile prime minister of a country. Are you in a position to say any more about that? Prince Andrews' continued residence in the 30-bedroom Royal Lodge has become a national outrage, a slew of revelations, exposing the former Duke's continued contact with Jeffrey Epstein

after his sex abuse convictions. convictions have made Andrew's royal privileges untenable, and the publication of Virginia Dufre's posthumous memoir, packed with evermore lurid claims, has brought uncomfortable scrutiny to the opaque funding system which keeps Andrew in luxury. The king was even heckled over Jeffrey Epstein on Monday. Yet more front-page stories now claim Andrew is ready to move out of his mansion, but only in exchange for two smaller properties on the Crown Estate. And there is renewed focus on the claim that Andrew tasked Royal Protection Officers, which are was finding dirt to smear Virginia Dufray.

Well, we'll get to all of these claims shortly. But first we begin with Amy Wallace, who's the co-writer of Virginia Dufre's memoir, Nobody's Girl. Amy Wallace, thank you very much indeed for joining me. Thank you so much for having me. You spent four years writing this book with Virginia, and it was finished before she took her life in April. Crucially, you have said that you know everybody who's named in the Epstein files.

He said, yes, I know who the names are. Virginia knew who the names are, but so does the FBI, and so does the Department of Justice. They have the names, and they've had them for more than a decade. And this really cuts to the heart of this scandal, I think. I interviewed David Boyes, who, of course, was Virginia's criminal attorney in the United States, and he represents other victims. He said that in his estimation, there were between six and a dozen men named in these files who probably should face criminal prosecution.

But it does all beg the question, why have these names not been made public? Well, I have just one little correction to what I have said in the past. I don't know everything in the Epstein files. I don't think anyone in the public knows everything in the Epstein files. I know what Virginia told me

that she told the FBI on numerous occasions. I know there's a scene in her memoir of Department of Justice officials taking a... several victims of Gillen Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein into a private room and thanking them from the bottom of their hearts. It's an emotional scene for all the help they've given and asking them to come forward some more.

And Virginia definitely did that. And she knew other survivor sisters, that's which they refer to each other as, did so as well. So I only know the names that Virginia told me that she shared. I had to know them. I'm a journalist. I couldn't write a book for her without knowing her. who we were talking about. So if the question is why the Epstein files are not being released,

you know, that isn't a question for me. That's a question for President Trump and the Department of Justice. Trump campaigned on a plank that he was going to release the Epstein files. I'm not sure what's gone on since, but that's a question for them. Yeah, I mean, it is fascinating,

because I think that David Boyes made it clear he'd seen nothing in any of the files that incriminated Donald Trump. I don't think you've seen anything. I don't think Virginia said there was anything incriminating about Donald Trump. So if there's nothing against him, it makes this decision to try and shut things down without full disclosure, slightly baffling. What do you, I mean, you must have thought about, I guess, why they haven't put it all

out there. What is your working theory? Well, you know, I'm following the coverage, both the sort of mainstream media coverage and how readers are reacting. And I think the going theory out there is that there are very powerful and wealthy people who are in those files who don't want them released. And you're right, Virginia, for the two plus years that she was with Gulen Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein in their world, she did not see Donald Trump take part in any illicit activity around the young girls that Epstein surrounded himself with. That's just a two-plus year period, but it's a significant one. So the question is, who's being protected?

And I don't know. The tragic death of Virginia obviously ended her life and ended her ability to reveal any more publicly than everything she's told you. Do you believe there were things that she held back even from you? No. And I would go further. I mean, she and I worked for four years, as you say, together. The purpose of her writing this book, the real motivator for her, was not to make a list of names, but to help victims of sexual abuse of all kinds,

not just Maxwell and Epstein, but anyone who's been coerced into a sexual situation they didn't want to be in, male or female. She wanted those people to feel less alone. She wanted them to understand that she knew their suffering and their continued shame because she felt it every day and it made it hard for her to get up in the morning some days. So that was her motivation. And, you know, we worked hard to portray her as a woman in full as not just a person who had had terrible things done to her, although she definitely did, but somebody who escaped from that horrible world and after being traffic to dozens of men, potentially dozens, and then becomes a mother and is open-hearted and learns to trust again. And then decides when she has her own daughter that she needs to make

the world a better place, not just for her kids, but for all of our kids. And she does so. She advocates, she steps forward. She never stopped talking about who she'd been trafficked to. She was threatened. She had death threats against her life, credible death threats. The FBI calls her at one point while she's living in Australia and says we have a credible death threat, take cover. And her husband rents a camper van and they go driving off with their three small children into the wilds of Australia and stay for three weeks and then realize, what are we going to do? Our kids have to go to school so they say go home. They don't have a private security detail.

So this is a woman who is constantly balancing the costs and the benefits of coming forward. And she over and over again bravely came forward to make the world a better. better place, as I say. She's a hero in my view. Do you have any doubt that she did have sex with Prince Andrew? No. Absolutely no doubt. Repeatedly. And she didn't just have sex with him. She was forced to sexually service him. That's maybe a distinction without a difference to some, but there's a difference to me. And we're looking as you speak at the infamous picture of her on the first floor of Gilein Maxwell's London home. Gillane Maxwell's in the background, Andrew, in the foreground here, with Virginia when she was just 17. There's been a concerted attempt

to try and discredit the veracity of that picture. David Boyes said to me he had absolutely no doubt that it was a genuine photograph. Again, you know, you must have, as a journalist, I've been cautious about making sure this picture is genuine. How much confidence do you have that that is a genuine picture? I have utter confidence that it's a genuine picture. And I'll tell you how we track that down. Much has been made of the fact that Virginia no longer had the photograph, so it must be fake. And it's true.

She no longer had the photograph. Why? Because she gave it to the Federal Bureau of the... investigation the FBI and they never returned it. However, before she did that, she gave an interview to a British paper and they sent a photographer and they sent a writer and the photographer took a picture of the picture, which she still had in her possession. He took a picture of the front and he took a picture of the back. The back had an imprint on it that showed exactly the date and the time and the location of the place that she took that film,

film to be developed. And it was right next to her house in Florida when she got back from London on that trip. We reached out to that photographer who lives in New Zealand, and he verified that he held that photograph in his hands. He took those pictures, and he sent us, because we didn't have a copy. We wanted to use it in the book. He sent us a copy of his picture. So we know for sure that that's a real picture. And it was taken on what used to be called a fun saver, which was these disposable cameras. Nobody has them anymore because we all take pictures on our phones. But they had actual film in them. So they had to be developed.

And it was a real picture. It couldn't have been doctored. It wasn't a digital picture that could be doctored. So I have utter confidence that it was a real picture. And also what's often asked is, who took that picture? Well, it was Jeffrey Epstein. Virginia handed her fund saver, which he always traveled with, to Jeffrey Epstein, because she thought, I'm meeting a prince.

And I grew up watching the movie Cinderella. And I believe that princes are good people. And my mother would never forgive me if I got to meet somebody of royalty and didn't get a picture with him. So she handed her camera, her disposable camera, to Jeffrey Epstein, and he shot that picture. I did not know that.

Is that something you've said before? Today's show is sponsored by Oxford Natural, makers of the optimum day and optimum night, all natural supplements. Thousands of Brits and Americans are already taking them with incredible results. Optimum day boosts your energy and supports weight loss throughout the day. Optimum night helps you relax and get deep, refreshing sleep. They have countless success stories, including from some very familiar faces.

England legend Michael Owen, we lost £40,000. AFTV's Robbie, we lost more than £100. To watch their full stories and many more, scan the QR code on your screen, or visit Oxfordnatural.com slash peers. And here's the best part. Use the code peers and get 70% off your first order. You get 70% off with the code peers. It's in the book and it's been said before, but it is the truth.

Who else would have been there? Right. Fascinating. Well, yeah, we don't know because obviously Andrews says he can't remember any of this. When you watch the now notorious interview with Emily Maitliss at BBC's News Night, What did you make of the way he responded to all the questions about Virginia? I mean, the man is clueless about how he comes off. He not only denied what I believe to be true, that's a given. But he did not express any empathy for the young girls and young women who were in this trafficking ring.

And he basically just said, know nothing about it. And this whole famous phrase that he says that the reason that he went to Manhattan and stayed in Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan Townhouse Mansion for four days was to break off the relationship, break off the friendship, because it would have been dishonorable to do anything but to do that in person. So now we know from emails that have been coming out over the past weeks that actually he didn't break off that relationship. And frankly, if I was ever going to break off a relationship with somebody,

I don't think I'd need to stay in their house for four days. There was a party thrown during that visit. So, I mean, it all, obviously, it all doesn't add up. And Virginia talks about this in the book, where Emily Maitliss's interview is crucial. They were already getting ready to sue Prince Andrew for rape and battery. That's what they sued him for in New York. And it just, I think the phrase she uses in the book is it just put jet fuel on that lawsuit.

Because he was clearly, like, didn't even understand the impact of his own words. Well, one thing's for sure. He's been exposed as a liar through these leaked emails. Clearly, the timeline of his relationship with Epstein went on a lot longer than he told Emily Maitlitz who has tried to pretend was the reality. The only question remaining now is how much else has he lied about? his whole veracity has been called into question by the emphatic statements he made in that interview, which have now started to unravel. What people say when they try and smear Virginia and her testimony

about Andrew, they cite the case involving Alan Dershowitz, the lawyer, has been a guest on the show many times. And it was when she dropped her allegations against Dershowitz saying that she may have made a mistake in identifying him. She previously claimed Epstein trafficked her to Dershowitz multiple times between 2000 and 2002. He always denied the allegations, said they're completely untrue. The fact that she dropped that and acknowledged she may have made a mistake in identifying him has given succor to those who say, well, you know, how can you take anything she said seriously when she made such enormously serious allegations against somebody, but then says it may not have been him.

Yes, I will say one thing about her settlement with Alan Dershowitz and one thing only. It's basically to repeat what you just said. What Virginia said in the statement that was agreed upon after that case was settled, that was a public statement, was that she may have made a mistake. Now, more generally, I will say, in general, not speaking about Alan Dershowitz, her memory was remarkable. there is a scene in the book where her lawyers are trying to figure out

who are the identities of all the men she's been trafficked to because remember some of these girls often they were sent into these darkened massage rooms dim and a naked man was lying there and they'd been told to sexually service that person they had not been politely introduced to that person they just went in and there was an old man lying on the table and many of them were, one man was 56 years older than Virginia. So how to then hold these people to account? So the lawyers were very careful.

They came up with three buckets of photographs. One bucket was well-known men. We've all seen their faces. Familiar. Another bucket was Epstein Associates that were Epstein Associates during the years that Virginia was with him, the two-plus years. And then thirdly, Epstein Associates,

who were known Epstein Associates, but she couldn't have known because they came after she was gone, had moved to Australia. They mix them all up on a table. They ask her, look at the faces, pick out ones that you think you've been

trafficked to. They said she never made a mistake. She never picked from the wrong bucket. The thing she always said to me is this. I may not get every date every time, every day of the week, right? But when you have a man on top of you, his face,

six inches from your face, and he is raping you, you remember that face. She says in the book that one of the people that raped her was a former high-profile prime minister of a country. I mean, that's an astonishing allegation. Are you in a position to say any more about that? Well, people who read the book will see that the man was a sadist, not just a rapist. If you're asking me if I can name that person, the answer is no, and I will explain to you why.

As I've said, every victim of sexual assault, ways, cost, benefit, I want to hold them to account. What's it going to cost me? My privacy, obviously. In Virginia's case, physical safety and threats. and she received them. So that gentleman, she was afraid would kill her. And in the week since the book has come out,

I've had people get in touch with me and say, we know who that guy is, and he would kill her. He has the ability to do so. So that's one. Then she also had threats of people indirectly or directly getting in touch with her and basically saying, take our names out of your mouth.

Or else. And what did they mean by that? We have the wherewithal to keep you in court for the rest of your life, repeating, repeating, repeating, repeating, repeating, the worst things that have ever happened to you. And remember, this woman has three children. She had to protect her family. And so she made decisions, which readers of the book will see,

she discusses the way she made the decisions, how she wanted to scream the names, all of the names from the rooftops. But she had, in the end, she's a mother. She needs to protect her family. They had had threats. And frankly, those children are still alive. Virginia, sadly, is not. She should be sitting here where I'm sitting.

She should be talking to you. But her family is still alive. And some of these folks are scary. So Virginia made decisions, and my stance as her ghostwriter, her collaborator, is to give her something that I wish she had received more of during her lifetime when she was with us, which is respect. She made decisions that I respect, and I'm not going to breach them.

And frankly, law enforcement needs to do his job. She named names in depositions that have become public. You can find them on Google. Anyone who's watching this right now can find those document dumps. There are four of them on Google. There are names in those. But more importantly, she and other brave survivors of this sex trafficking, trafficking ring, went to the FBI repeatedly, talked to Department of Justice officials repeatedly.

Their names are in the Epstein files, and nothing has been done about it. So that's why there's a clamoring in the United States right now to release the Epstein files. And it's not a partisan clamoring. It's a human issue. It's not a Democrat-Republican issue. It's a human issue. Poor people should not be treated by wealthy people in this manner and get away with it. Why does one group live by a different set of rules than another?

That's not fair. So people are tired of it. And the Epstein Files has become a symbol of that. You have hundreds of hours of tapes of Virginia's testimony to you, which you've hidden. Do you fear for your own safety? Have you had threats? I've taken precautions. And you're right.

I have hidden those tapes because they are proof of the veracity of this book in a place that nobody can find them. So, as I've said in other interviews, do not break into my house. You will not find them there. I'm being careful. I mean, but here's what protects me, I hope, is that Virginia's voice is now out there. You can't shut it up. You can't box it up. You can't do that by hurting me.

Now, maybe some of these people are vindictive enough. They just want to mess with me. I can't know that, and I'm trying to be very careful. But this book gives her voice staying power, and it's electrifying both sides of the pond. It's the number one book in the U.K. It's the number one book in the U.S. right now. And people are angry. They are angry.

And that in itself, I don't know that it protects me. I'm not taunting anyone to come at me. But it's important to me that people know that this woman was brave. She and others like her have been called sluts. They have been called tramps. They've been called money-grubbing horrors since they came forward in the beginning. And that's going on. Virginia came forward publicly in 2011.

13 years of her life. She was only 41 when she died. So think about that. Constant, constant, constant, being dragged through the mud. So to put up with that and to still step forward on all of our behalf, it is amazing. And I'm happy to do whatever I can to continue to make clear that that is her legacy. And the book is the ultimate proof of that. Like most of you, I've been through the ringer with health scares. affecting loved ones. And I've had the wake-up call about a system which is reactive, not preventative. Simple checkups can miss the big picture, things like hormones, inflammations and nutrients. Today's sponsor, Superpower, digs deeper, decoding your biology

to spot issues early so we can live longer and better. One lab test scans for thousands of diseases and more than 100 biomarkers for heart, liver, thyroid, metabolism and vitamins. No more guessing about low energy or brain fog, you'll get a personalized action plan in their app, plus a dedicated medical team guiding you. These are athlete level insights for just $199, half of what others charge for less. Head to superpower.com to learn more, avoid health crises, and lock in the special price of $199 while it lasts. After you sign up, they'll ask how you heard about them, so be sure to mention Piers Morgan Uncensored, and support. our show. Your biology, decoded, your health blueprint, activated. Go to superpower.com.

And Amy, final question. What do you think should happen to Prince Andrew now? Well, I'll throw out an idea. I don't have high hopes of it happening. But, you know, he continues to deny. He did it again when he, you know, voluntarily did away with two more of his titles last week, that he had nothing to do with this. Okay, fine. Stipulated. Let's just leave that aside. You settled with Virginia for a large amount of money. I don't know how much. But fine. You didn't, you're going to assert that. I don't care. You claim that you care about these victims. You claim in public statements, perhaps written by publicists, but you've claimed that you care about the welfare, the way these women were treated. And you have two daughters. So here's something you could do, Prince Andrew. You said at one point that you would come forward and help U.S. investigators.

You made a big show of it at one point. And strangely, it never happened. Well, you could still do it because you were on the island, you were in the mansions, you were in the private jets, which, by the way, it weren't just jets that you imagine with seats. They were reconfigured to have bedrooms in them. They were flying sex trafficking devices, those planes. And Prince Andrew was in all of those places a lot. And he saw who was there.

He saw girls taken to cabanas with old men on the island. And he could validate those women's experience who have been so maligned over the past two dozen years. They've been so maligned. He could help with that if he really cares so much. I would love to see that. Amy Wallace, I really appreciate you joining me. Thank you very much. Thank you so much for having me.

I appreciate it. Well, join me now to discuss this is the former Royal Protection Officer Paul Page, Molly Sky Brown, who claims Andrew's team approached her to discredit Virginia Dufray, the journalist Michael Tracy and the Royal podcaster, Kinsey Schofield, host of Kinsey Schofield Unfiltered. Well, welcome to all of you. Paul Page, you were a former Royal Protection Officer. There's now been reports in the mail on Sunday at the weekend that Andrew asked his taxpayer-funded personal protection officer

to investigate Virginia Ufrey and even passed him her date of birth and confidential U.S. Social Security number. It's also reported, he emailed Ed Perkins, the Queen Elizabeth's Deputy Press Secretary, to say it would also seem she's a criminal record on the States. I've given her date of birth and social security number of investigation with XXX.

X the on-duty personal protection officers. So there is an active train of evidence there, which suggests that he was clearly trying to get dirt on Virginia Dufre and using the Royal Protection Police to do this. What is your reaction to that? Well, I've always said in my interviews that Prince Andrew was the most difficult member of the royal family to work for, and that's just an understatement.

Obviously, he's put this role. protection officer in a situation, in between a rock and a hard place. So basically, the bottom line is that officer, that officer would have to report that to his line supervisor. Now that officer would not be a PC, he would be a sergeant or an inspector, an experienced officer. And so he would have to pass that to his line manager, which I suggest was a superintendent at the time in a side 14. And that undoubtedly would have ended up on the commander's desk, Commander Loughbrett at the time. Now, the issue that Prince Andrew has got is that, as it stands at the moment, it looks like an attempt to commit, a conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office. It takes two or more people, so obviously Prince Andrew is requesting a police officer to potentially use the police national computer to do illegal searches on Virginia Jufre.

So there could potentially be evidence on the police national computer. Because when you do a check on a person, you have to put in the reason code, as in is this person in custody? Have you stopped him in the street or is it a general inquiry? And you have to provide your police number in order. So there's a trackable record of who has asked for this request and why. And so if this has been done, then it will come back to an officer. And that's going to be a problem.

And you worked with the Royal Family for six years. You say he was the most difficult member of the family to deal with. I think you helped look after the Queen, Prince Philip and others. What made him so difficult? It was rude. It just was disrespectful for staff, police officers, verbally abusive. You know, I've said it before. It was a bully.

It was coercive. You know, he forced us to break the rules, to let women in. We didn't know who they were, which was obviously going against strict security protocol, especially when the Queen. was in. You know, on another note, which comes back to asking his PPO to do the PNC check, he would have his personal protection officers drive some of these unknown women home of an evening

after they'd been with Prince Andrew. Well, that's not our remit. We're not taxi drivers for Andrew's bits of fluff at the end of the day. Their role is to protect him, not to act as a taxi service for these unidentified females, not to mention him using his PPO's as ball boys when he's knocking as golf was about at Buckingham Palace. So this is the type of person you're dealing with. You know, if you don't do what he asks, then you'll be seeing the back door. And that was what he's like.

Molly Sky Brown, it was reported in the Times this weekend, Prince Andrew paid a PR advisor, Mark Gallagher, up to £500,000 for around 18 months' work. He stepped down from advising the Prince in February 2021, after it was revealed he contacted you after you would claim the picture of Virginia, Jufre, Prince Andrew and Gilein Maxwell was a fake, and you'd attacked her credibility online. Just tell me about that approach by Mark Gallagher.

How did that happen? When the royal family reached out to me, I thought it was very pathetic. I sent all of the information directly to the media and to the FBI so that they could all be held accountable and interviewed. And none of that ever came to be. The FBI here is 100% corrupt. It's a global issue. I'm speaking to the audience

with the people that we want the answers to at this point. So I really appreciate you inviting me onto your show today. Well, as you know, as you know, you've been called an internet troll and so on. I don't know the truth. You talk about your truth.

I have always thought there's only one truth. I don't particularly like the phrase my truth because I think it's open to a lot of a lot of weird fact twisting. So I just don't know. You know, Virginia's not here to defend herself, obviously. I think what's interesting is that after you made these allegations and comments online, you were then contacted by a representative paid for by Prince Andrew about the picture, for example.

So I'm just curious about that process. How did Mark Gallagher contact you? So originally, Antonio Marshall had reached out to me, and that is Bergey's assistant. I didn't know who any of these people really were at the time because I'm not infatuated or enamored by prestige. She reached out to me through my Instagram page and then also found my email address and messaged me.

And she and I spoke for, I want to say a good hour on the phone. We spoke for quite some time. I could feel all of her gas lighting. She was talking about how Prince Andrew and Fergie were still living together in a happy couple and that Prince Andrew doesn't do the stuff. He doesn't let people take pictures of him.

And I mean, it doesn't matter. I believe that Virginia had sex with him. So then Mark Gallagher reached out to me. I really wasn't comfortable speaking with him because he is Prince Andrews PR agent, a spin doctor. And I told him such. I said it's much deeper than just a photo scandal. And if we can't talk about that and get to the bottom of it,

then there's really no reason to talk. And again, I went to the media directly afterwards and the FBI, and that's when the media posted about all of my intel that I had received and my screenshots about this, and that's when Mark Gallagher stepped down. But just to be clear, you don't actually have any independent evidence. These are just your theories. Well, Rina O was the one who brought it to my attention as well.

She is convinced that it is layers. Victoria Hervey, she and I used to speak for a while. I didn't trust her either, but I was getting intel. As a survivor myself, I don't trust anyone. I'm just always getting intel. Lady Victoria Hervey, I have a 14-minute conversation that she was giving me voice recordings. I have posted this as well to my YouTube, to my Instagram, and to my blog.

And she talks about how she found the artist that had made the compromise. She posted pictures about it. It's all over her Instagram page. But unfortunately, she stopped. I've interviewed her about that. I've interviewed her about that. And none of that makes sense. She stopped talking about it because she wanted to free Galane Maxwell.

So the story she told me is very different than what she tells you all. That's all I'm saying. I just try to relate the information. Repeatedly. He does. And then she attacked me after saying she was interested in getting my story out. Yeah, I just know, I spoke to Virginia. Virginia's lawyer, David Boyes, is one of the most eminent criminal attorneys in modern American history,

and he's 100% certain that picture is genuine. That's all I know. And I take his word over Victoria Hervey's any day. OK, let's move on. Kinski, there's so much stuff swirling around about this. Seems to me the most potentially lethal swirl is the constant release of these leaked emails and the US Congress investigating this, that Andrew, every week that goes by, more stuff comes out about him. about his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, which contradicts the public statements they made about their friendship with Epstein. That is highly damaging

because it goes right to the heart of their credibility. Today's show is sponsored by One Skin, which could help all of us look even younger. One Skin is redefining skincare with cult favorites like OS1 body, face and eye, build around their patented OS1 peptide, which is clinically proven to target senescent cells, a key driver of skin aging.

Backed by five clinical studies, One Skin products improve skin texture, firmness and elasticity over time. They have more than 10,000 five-star reviews. Born from over 10 years of longevity research, One Skin's OS1 peptide is proven to target the cells that cause the visible signs of aging, helping you unlock your healthier skin and hair now and as you age. For a limited time, try One Skin with 15% off using code Peers as P-I-E-R-S at OneSkin. dot co. That's 15% off one skin.com with code peers. After you purchase, they'll ask you where you

heard about them. So please support our show and tell them that we sent you. Yes, first of all, congratulations on Woke is Dead. I think that that's one of the most terrifying parts about this story. We're watching this evolution where we don't know. I mean, was there any material that was cut from the book? Was it cut from the book just because the public? only wanted a certain amount of pages. There is still so much mystery surrounding this story. We have the Epstein files that will continue to leak. We have these tapes that you just mentioned

in another interview that exist that could potentially include more details. There's too much on the line here. Prince Andrew is he jeopardizes the royal family by the day and I think he needs to be out of sight, out of mind. out of mind. Well, we're seeing the real cold hard reality of the impact of this. King Charles was heckled during a visit to Litchfield Cathedral in Staffordshire by a protest who asked him about Andrew and Epstein's relationship. Let's take a look.

How long have you known about Andrew and Epstein? Have you asked the police to cover up for Andrew? Have you asked the police to cover up for Andrews Charles? What do you think, Would the MPs be allowed to debate the royals in the House of Commons? No, you're always going to get hecklers of royal events. It's not unusual. But it's clear the questions that that protester were yelling are, to many people's eyes, there will be valid questions to ask of the king about his brother. And that's why this becomes so damaging to the wider family.

They can't just shrug this off. You're right. But, I mean, what was the ultimate objective there? It felt like that was somebody peacocking. When has the royal family stopped in their tracks and said, we're going to give you this exclusive to this random person? Maybe when the Prince of Wales was asked if his family was racist, yes, he shut that down.

We are very much not a racist family. I thought the king handled this okay. This is a man that survived an assassination attempt. He just didn't blink. He just moved forward. Ultimately, I don't blame King Charles. I feel like Queen Elizabeth's team should have shut this down and cut Andrew off at the knees years ago. And King Charles is ill and is navigating a very difficult situation.

Yeah, I mean, the problem, it seems to me, is more that this is open season on the whole royal family because of this scandal not going away. And in fact, just getting bigger and more damaging, it seems, by the week. That is very hard to see what they do. The papers are reporting, the Sun Exclusive, said that they're, they're playing. planning to move out of the Royal Lodge, but that Andrew is demanding Frogmore Cottage, the former home of Megan and Harry, of course, but also a separate property in Royal Grounds for his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson. And, you know, the moment you hear Andrew is demanding, I don't think he's in any position to demand anything, is he?

Wish in one hand, you know what in the other. He has no negotiating power here. He should have given in when they initially offered him Frogmore Cottage once they booted Harry and Megan out. doesn't deserve two properties and he should not be on the Windsor estate where Prince William is trying to create a safe environment for his children. There have been protesters out there recently, helicopters above. Prince Andrew is a distraction and will continue to wreak havoc. He needs to be far, far away from here. And the problem finally, Kinsey for you is when you see an event like the Duchess of Kent's funeral, for example, recently, you see Andrew there trying to be sent to outside the church, standing next to William the future king.

William clearly very uncomfortable, Andrew making or appeared to be clumsy jokes, which seemed very inappropriate. But the whole optics of that are just, they're toxic for the royal family. You are who you associate with. That is what, I mean, whether Prince Andrew's guilty or not, you are who you associate with.

There are those images of Andrews standing next to Epstein. It looks absolutely vile to then see, then see Prince Andrew sitting there trying to joke around with Prince William the future king. I think that it's guilt by association for Andrew and Epstein, and it does not reflect well on this monarchy to have Prince Andrew anywhere near the working members of the royal family. Michael Tracy, you were thrown out of a press conference held by Jeffrey Epstein victims and lawmakers on Capitol Hill last month. You said after, as my question was a straightforward one, but the assembled media and politicians clearly found it appalling,

given that Virginia Roberts Dufray admitted that she had spent nearly a decade falsely accusing a prominent individual graphic sex crimes, why should she now be seen by the public as remotely credible? And this alludes to what I was discussing earlier with Amy Wallace, the co-writers of Virginia Dufre's memoir about the Alan Dershowitz case, in which she stated, after dropping the allegation she made against him, she may have made a mistake in identifying Mr. Dershowitz. you believe that goes to the heart of her credibility.

Yeah, you know, the credulity with which this supposed memoir has been received across the media, especially the British media, but the American media as well, is just utterly ludicrous. What could be fatal to someone's credibility other than spending nearly a decade, making the most lurid and graphic claims of sex crimes against a prominent individual, individual which let's remember virginia roberts scufre described in granular detail with respect to dershowitz insisted and was adamant that she was 100 percent certain that she had correctly identified him and then lo and behold all the sudden she has to admit that she quote may have made a mistake or at least that's how the statement was worded that her lawyers drafted for her

one of whom meaning her lawyers was bradley edwards who had been delegated to mc that vaunted press conference last month in front of the capital. So, I mean, I've read this whole book, okay, this whole supposed memoir. And there are portions of it that are basically just repackaged, almost verbatim with some minor cosmetic adjustments from her original memoir manuscript that she wrote in 2011, was never published, but she was shopping it around to literary agents, hoping to get a big payday. and over the course of litigation that she initiated, right? Her extortionist lawyers initiated a whole slew of litigation on her behalf.

But over the course of discovery, she had to eventually concede, or her lawyers conceded on her behalf, that that original memoir manuscript was fictionalized. It was a fictionalized account of her purported experiences, supposedly so she could engage in some trauma therapy or something. But the real reason why the lawyers had to make that stipulation, was because the memoir manuscript defamed a whole host of people and made numerous claims that were wholly unsupported.

Amy Wallace, the ghostwriter who you interviewed earlier, simply transports key passages from that admittedly fictionalized memoir into the new memoir. So what due diligence did Amy Wallace do, journalistically, to verify that those passages which Virginia Roberts Cuffrey herself, and her lawyers had admitted were fictionalized, what due diligence did she do to discover that now they're supposedly factual

and nonfiction in 2025? None that's made particularly clear in this new memoir. So for Prince Andrew, and I'm not, I have no particular brief for the British royal family, but for him to be so relentlessly hectored as a pedophilic sex criminal on the basis of nothing really more than the word, the uncorroborated and partially retracted word of a serial fabulous. But he did have a relationship with a convicted sex offender. He did have a relationship with the convicted sex offender.

Okay, having a relationship with Jeffrey EFs and there's nothing to prove that he actually engaged in sex. Michael, Michael, I would ask you this, Michael. I would ask you this. If Andrew is innocent, why did he pay a woman he said he'd never met a reported $12 million to a avoid going into court, having stated publicly and repeatedly, I want to have my gay in court, I want to clear my name. That, I'm afraid, is what people cannot work out. Why would you give $12 million to someone you say you've never met? And secondly, he made a number of emphatic statements, including that he'd never met Virginia Dufray and he'd never had sex with her and so on

to Emily Maitliss in that BBC Newsnight interview, but he also in that interview emphatically denied having anything to do with Epstein after the infamous Central Park walk and the four days he spent there. But we now know from the leaked emails from Congress that that is a lie that he carried on in consorting with him for a sustained period afterwards. So his own veracity has been exposed as very unreliable. Why are you siding with him against Virginia Dufre? It's not so much that I'm siding with him. I don't particularly care about Prince Andrew. I'm trying to as best as possible side with the factual record or the best approximation of the truth. And nothing that Virginia Roberts Gouffre ever said or did can be taken as the unvarnished

truth absent corroborating evidence. And there's never been any corroborating evidence presented that Prince Andrew engaged in sexual contact with this person. Why did they settle? Well, you've had David Boyes on your show. I've watched it. He's a very aggressive and skillful lawyer. He timed the lawsuit against Prince Andrew in 2021 so that I've been. was just before the Queen's Jubilee year. She was obviously ailing. Obviously it was going to be a PR fiasco, whether he was guilty or not for him to pursue the litigation process.

And so they made a judgment that it was best to settle. As you know, I'm sure, he had bitted no liability or culpability in that settlement. And Virginia Roberts Cuffrey, who were constantly told was this beleaguered victim who had this horrible traumatic life in every single respect. she was a multi-multi-millionaire. Some of these settlement funds that boys and Edwards were able to broker gave the supposed victims tax-free compensation amazingly enough. And Virginia Roberts Coofrey got to purchase palatial estates, a branch estates in Australia,

an Oceanside mansion. She had this NGO that she supposedly set up that the other guest mentioned that was basically just a fiction. I mean, it didn't do anything. But none of that, Michael. Raise awareness. Michael, we've got to. In other words, Pierce, there is nowhere near ample enough grounds to continue to torment Andrew about his supposed culpability for victimizing this woman because the evidentiary basis is not there.

There's no new information presented in this memoir. Amy Wallace simply just repackaged digitalized memoir passages from 2011. It's amazing. Okay. But nothing, listen, but nothing you said actually goes to what I said, which is why do you give $12 million to someone you've never met? Why do you tell Emily Maitliss you closed off all contact with the convicted sex predator in Jeffrey Epstein? When it turns out you didn't at all. And we only know that through leaked emails.

Andrew is lying. Look, I don't know about the veracity of Virginia Dufre. All I do know is that there were thousands of women, several thousand women who are believed to have been abused and raped and treated like dirt by Epstein and his rich, powerful cronies. none of them have been brought to justice. And I think the focus should be on that rather than smearing the women making allegations, even if it turns out that, you know, as we saw with the Dershowitz case,

she may have got some of these names wrong or details wrong. You know, I suspect that goes with the territory, these kind of investigations. But it doesn't clear Andrew, because we now know, from his own words, he's been lying. And I'm afraid he needs to put himself, to me, he needs to go in front of the investigators

under oath for as long as a law. they determine would be what they require from him to tell exactly what he knows. And we also need to have full disclosure of all the Epstein files immediately. And then we need to have people in there help properly to account. David Boyce says between six and 12 men named in their deserved criminal prosecution, well, then they should get it. And the fact this is still going on 10 years later, and we don't have that information. One of the best ways to get to the truth is often through the court process,

where people are under oath with a penalty of perjury and going to prison, and they have to tell the truth. That's what we need to get to. But look, I've got to leave it there. It's an interesting debate. I preach that you all coming on. Thank you very much. Peers Morgan Unsensit is proudly independent.

The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask for only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Pierce Morgan Unsensit on Spotify and Apple Podcast. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain. and we'll do it all for free. Independent, uncensored, media, has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.