What does surprise me, though, is Sarah Ferguson. Just months ago, it emerged that she had emailed convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein in 2011, calling him a “supreme” friend and apologising for criticising him in a media interview. Her reasoning for sending such an email after Epstein was released from prison for child sex offences was that she feared he would sue her for defamation.
And these emails were sent from Sarah to Epstein after his 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor for sex. Some emails were also sent after Epstein was released from prison in 2009 after serving 13 months.
In one email sent in 2009, Sarah thanks Epstein for being like a “brother” to her.
In another email, dated 2011, Sarah seems almost desperate to be friends with Epstein after previously writing to him to say that he must have only been friends with her to “get to Andrew”.
She then wrote in one 2011 email congratulating Epstein for the birth of a baby boy, with the context behind this being unclear, and finished the email with: “Even though you never kept in touch, I still am here with love, friendship and congratulations on your baby boy. Sarah xx.”
These are not the words of someone who wants to distance themselves from Epstein; rather, they suggest that Sarah wanted to maintain his friendship.
This is almost unforgivable. As a mother of two daughters, why would you want to keep in touch with a convicted sex offender? Scrap that, as a good human, why would you want to keep in touch with someone like that?
The answer to that – only Sarah knows. While some people felt sorry for the ex-Duchess after the first email saga last September surrounding Sarah, I don’t think anyone is feeling any sympathy for her anymore.
The excuse for the first email, that she feared he would sue her for defamation, is not an adequate justification if she tries to use this again for these latest emails. Is there any justification at all? This could really be the scandal that gives Sarah no point of return.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.express.co.uk ’
