More like this
Dominic Lawson sticks up for Prince Andrew
Columnist points out that billionaire pal Epstein was not really a paedophile
A new figure has joined the "cross-country pursuit of hunt the royal fox", as a would-be hunt saboteur. Sunday Times columnist Dominic Lawson has weighed in to the furore over Prince Andrew's unfortunate friendship with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Before he defends both the Prince and the billionaire, Lawson is quick to declare an interest. "Before I am outed by the Mirror as a paedophile at one remove, I had better confess all," he writes.
An admission follows: like Andrew, Lawson has been a recipient of Epstein's lavish hospitality. In 1999 he "enjoyed a brief family holiday" at the billionaire's Palm Beach mansion – later dubbed a temple of sin by the tabloids.
It was in the Palm Beach villa that "hordes" of naked young women enjoyed pool parties together while Prince Andrew was also staying, according to a former servant of Epstein dug up by the News of the World last weekend.
In January 1999, however, "The place was empty, apart from us and the housekeeper," Lawson insists. He doesn't mention whether the housekeeper was fond of nude bathing, but we are left to assume not.
Lawson's defence of Andrew amounts to the suggestion that Epstein is very clever indeed, while the Prince, um, likes golf. What's more, Epstein's not that bad really, Lawson tells us.
"[My visit] was before Andrew took on the job of being Britain's 'special trade representative'," he writes, "and long before the world knew of Epstein's involvement with teenage girls (not the same thing as 'paedophilia', by the way, since none of the girls was pre-pubescent…)".
Strictly speaking, Lawson is quite right. If his assessment of Epstein's predilections is accurate, the billionaire should more properly be called an ephebophile – someone with a sexual preference for adolescent girls.
As Lawson himself admits, however, seeking out and sexually using girls under the age of consent is not only illegal - it is "sordid and exploitative".
Given this, it is not clear what Lawson thinks Esptein's reputation gains from the distinction he makes, or why it should mean Andrew's association with him is any less of a national embarrassment. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
He is probably trying to assuage the prurient predilections of the public at large. 'Paedophile' is quite a negative 'buzz-word' in our modern global village communications; a person once labelled is anthropologically persona non grata! Lawson is attempting to rehabilitate Mr Epstein to a degree, although his (Epstein) billionaire status is more likely to elicit antipathy on a par with his sexual bias!