Norway’s crown princess had years of contact with Epstein, files suggest
8 months ago by HellsBelle to c/world
Norway’s crown princess has become embroiled in another scandal after newly unsealed files appeared to show her years of extensive contact with the late child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The latest tranche of Epstein files, released on Friday by the US justice department, appear to include nearly 1,000 mentions of the crown princess, Mette-Marit.
The files include scores of emails traded between the two, suggesting they were in contact from 2011 to 2014, the Norwegian daily VG reported. Mette-Marit married the future king of Norway in 2001.
The revelations come at a sensitive time for the royal family. The trial of Mette-Marit’s son, Marius Borg Høiby for rape is due to begin on Tuesday. He was born from a relationship before she married Crown Prince Haakon
Høiby is facing 38 charges, including the alleged rape of four women as well as alleged assault and drug offences. If convicted he could face up to 16 years in prison. Høiby has denied the most serious charges, including those of sexual abuse.
I've traditionally been a supporter of keeping the monarchy for its diplomatic functions and (mostly) unifying force among people, but this does feel like a sea-change. Maybe opinions in Norway are more forgiving, I don't know--I moved away many years ago. In my opinion, it's probably time to re-evaluate whether we (Norway) want to keep this going. It was decided decades ago to keep it at least until the current Crown Prince had his turn, but now that's looking like a bad idea. They need to do something, and hopefully they can still wind it down with some dignity. Maybe it's possible to make a nice, clean break when King Harald passes on. Either way, it should be up to the People.
I'm not 100% convinced having a President will be better, seeing as some Presidents like to act as if they're kings. But with all the scandals, I think if anyone still believes monarchs are immune to political influence, they should wake up now.
PS: I was wondering if you have some more information about the hearing (e.g. news article). I can't find it in the Norwegian media. (I read/speak Norwegian).
Yeah, power corrupts. But royalty is excempt from scrutiny way too much. The king keeps pardoning finance crime buddies and it's not even mentioned in the media like other corruption would be.
Anyway, https://stortinget.no/ has info on the hearings :)
Pretty sure because it's a routine tradition, and is always expected to end in the favor of keeping the monarchy. So it's not really too interesting unless you are a politician
You can have a President without having a Presidential system - like, for example, Germany - were that post is mainly being a figurehead/top-diplomat with mainly the power of shaming parliament when they go overboard with some laws, both not actually able to block it, possible with some limited power to dissolve parliament and call new elections.
Basically it's the same thing as a modern day monarch in a Democratic nation, except that people actually get to chose who gets the post, if they turn out to be bad at it they get replaced after 4 years rather than being there for life and they don't actually own a massive chunk of wealth for historical reasons (like, for example, the British Royal Family).
I've lived under Presidential systems (Portugal) and Constitutional Monarchies (The Netherlands, Britain) and vastly prefer the former: the latter is especially fucked up in Britain were the Royals actually have real power (to block laws) - if seldom used - and are the cornerstone of a well entrenched system of patronage and class segregation which is far beyond anything I've seen elsewhere in Europe, though granted in The Netherlands The Royals were a lot closer to normal people - to the point that before becoming King the current ruler used to work as a pilot for KLM - than in Britain.
You're correct, similarly to Germany it has a President with limited powers which are far less than Parliament or the Govern, not a Presidential System (like the US or France) were the President actually has executive power.
I guess ‘No Kings’ is doing something after all
Does the Norwegian monarchy also generate a significant amount of revenue for the government like the British one does?
I asked this when the final season of The Crown came out. What EXACTLY does the monarch do? There was so much talk of "the work we do for this country" but no explanation of it? In the same vein, how exactly do they generate revenue?
like the British one does?
pfft. that was some fantastic propaganda. royalty in no way generates revenue, they're fucking parasites.
I honestly don't keep up with them much, so I can't say what the current status is. I didn't even realize until today that Mette-Marit had been connected with Epstein already back in 2019.
It's not just about money, though. When I still lived there ('90s), the common sentiment seemed to be that though they have no political power (even less so than the British), they were good, wholesome ambassadors for Norway and served as a sort of cultural focal point that "everyone" shared pride in. (Obviously not a 100% true, but if you're Norwegian you know what I mean.)
Importantly, one point of pride was that they weren't as embroiled in scandals as other royals. They were "of the people", with one example often cited that King Olav during the oil crisis took his skis on the bus instead of driving. That kind of thing.
The current line of Norwegian royals is even pretty new, so to speak. King Haakon VII was chosen by committee in 1905 after the dissolution of the union. At the time, they passed on becoming a republic. So, it felt more like they had been selected by us rather than they just inherited everything.
But: the whole Epstein business, greed, political influence and all that flies directly in the face of all that pride. That's why I think that case is probably lost now. The trust is gone, the monarchy is tarnished. It's become a liability and expense rather than a point of pride.
That actually makes a lot of sense. Coming from a country heavily influenced by Thomas Paine especially on the topic of nobility it's always been weird to me when such egalitarian countries as most of Scandinavia and the Netherlands maintain monarchies.
The buildings and overboard "state folklore" are what generate revenue, not the Royals - the probability of ever seeing a Royal in person, either as a tourist or a local, is basically zero.
Meanwhile the Royals are a cornerstone of a massive system of patronage and class segregation, not to mention being one of the wealthiest families in Britain. Oh, and the king also has the power to block laws, though he seldom uses it and apparently will instead in the background use the threat of it and of shaming governments (look up the "black spider memos", which date back to his time as prince).
They're pretty much the most anti-Democratic Royals in Europe by a long margin, IMHO.
voted today https://www.nrk.no/... 141 voted to keep current constitutional monarchy, 26 for a republic.
Also 76% of people asked in a poll trust the crown princess less after the recent Epstein information.
In ages 19–29 and 30–39 its 81 %
Also 44 % this she is unfit to rule
You can bet that once the inevitable population-wide vote happens on whether to keep the monarchy, I will vote no. I already didn't like having a monarchy from before, now doubly so.
*monarchsplaining
I was told that royal families are all ceremonial and that they don't have any real power, but we keep finding them embroiled with people who have real power.
Really makes you think.
No times 2. Monarchs don't really roll in money, and to elaborate let's dive into your first statement, and why it's off. Money is only really power if you have the freedom to buy with it as you want. Monarchs have very little freedom of any in that regard. Often you'll find that the vast majority of the so-called appanage comes with a note of exactly what they should pay for. Like, paying for renovations of buildings you don't appreciate living in and stills being told to live in it. Agreed, they do live a rather decent lifestyle, and there's no reason to feel sorry for monarchs' financial setup, but it comes at a hefty price of a lifetime commitment to no freedom in some regards. Personally I really appreciate the royal family in Denmark. The Danish king is a wise, highly trained military man, who also is a father driving his kids to school in a flatbed bicycle. It's just good PR for a country to have a king (and queen) like that.
In theory, yes. In our country, our royal family has an undisclosed amount of money, get an undisclosed amount of money from the taxpayer and has a number of other sources of income as well. One of the nephews of the king has a huge real estate business built upon his family money.
Fucking parasites.
Any social influencers of this level obviously have indirect power and anyone who claims otherwise is delusional.
That being said, I do think it's possible that ceremonial representation can be beneficial. I'd love states start electing purely ceremonial roles more as it's a really powerful social tool for uniting people and can be done right.
Her son is a rapist https://www.cbsnews.com/...
Sounds like the apple didn't fall far from the tree.
A lifetime of living without consequence where your every whim is met creates dangerously broken people
What happened here is actually worse somehow. Mette marit was a "commoner" known on her circles as a fun party/rave girl. The usual drugs included. She had a son (Marius) with someone from that walk of life. He had the chance to turn 8 or 9 i think before having the title of "royalty" thrust uppon him at the same time his single mother got swept away on all sorts of royal adventures.
Not hard at all to see how that can fuck you up royally.
Edit: just remembered she had a sextape from the good old days, and since it was only of interest to us Norwegians and the internett wasn't as big as it is now they've managed to scrub it. Or that might just have been rumors, but I'm like 80% sure i saw it at one of the early 2000's LAN parties.
He was first sentenced in 2008..
That part is the most insane to me. She actually looked up Epstein's past after he had just signed that plea deal for child prostitution in 2011 and then replied with a smiley... And then called him "soft hearted", "sweetheart" and "very charming" and used him as a mentor for how to raise her son. That is beyond poor judgment.
Imagine you have some decorational vases on your mantle. They cost you an extraordinary amount of money each year, but you like them and they're family heirlooms. But then one vase starts spewing the most insane conspiracy theories that make everyone uncomfortable, one shills dangerous health advice for money (despite you paying its salary), one is facing multiple accusations of sexual assault, and has been indicted for rape, and one it turns out is heavily in the Epstein files. Would you reconsider if those vases were worth paying a ton of money every year that could be used to better yourself or others?
No? You're saying you wouldn't even consider spending the exorbitant amount of money it cost to maintain those purely decorational vases on something else? Like saving for your retirement or your kid's retirement, setting up community gardens, beefing up your home security, funding medical research, etc?
Mossad wants dirt on everyone
They've released less than 1% of the files. Still plenty of things we have yet to see.
The world really is run by a cabal of pedophiles.
Who knew
all the NONCE kings and princes had ties with epsteins MS kung fu master.
The fact that Mette-Marit was a single mother and the fact that Høiby's father was a convicted felon created controversy. TV 2 later wrote that "merely by existing, Marius Borg Høiby was seen by many as a scandal for the royal family."
He sure lived up to their expectations. Well cheer up guys, at least he can use your tax money to hire himself the best lawyer available.
Norwegian here, and I don't think it's gonna change a whole lot. Well, not for her, at least.
Personally I don't care enough about them, and I don't get the impression anyone under 60 care that much either, neither positive or negative. Her husband is genuinely a nice person, so is her father in law (yes, I've met them both). Her son is a scumbag, though. (And he almost ran into me on a bicycle when he was 5 or so!)
So if anyone wants to litigate against her, I'm not gonna stand in the way, but for now this looks mostly like a case of "Should've known better", something several government officials have publicly stated.
Just to clarify my stance on monarchy: Conflicted. In theory it does make sense to have someone who can veto everything on behalf of the state if the government goes weapons grade guano. However, the apolitical nature of a monarch pretty much stand in the way of this. And on the other hand, I'm not a big fan of inherited power.
But all in all, I don't really care that much. Larger portions of my taxes go to stupider things.
While I agree that having an independent body from the main political organ makes sense, I feel like a monarchy isn't a great symbol to have in the first place
And what's going to stop future scandals from happening? Or consequences for them? If a future king does something bad, we can't exactly fire them and replace them with someone else, as that's not how a monarchy works. We only got one tool, and it's to abolish the monarchy. It doesn't feel like great checks and balances
Generally I am against inherent power. And a monarchy is the peak of that, as you simply are in a position of power by having a lucky birth. It is true that lucky births happen constantly and are everywhere, especially if you get born in norway, but it feels wrong to actively support it.
It just doesn't really feel like a system that has a place today. Though I do also realize that there's problems with having a president or the like as well. But generally I support more democracy, not less.
And also as a final note like, if this went hidden for so long until the files got released, I wonder what other stuff got hidden as well? I mean, we got pretty much directly lied to here back in 2019
I'm just uncomfortable with systems that enforce a hierarchy. I think we could do with less of that
They can definitely replace the monarch. Remember it’s a constitutional monarchy where the monarch has only ceremonial power. The throne has been given to the current royal family by the people. The people can take the crown away if they want to. Parliament just needs to amend the constitution. Also the monarch can be encouraged to step down if they are embroiled in a scandal.
Also monarchs are just humans their heads can be chopped off like any of us. They should never forget what happened to their cousin during the French Revolution.
Who would replace the monarch though?
At that point it's literally just an appointed minister by another name. And I'd rather have the position taken by someone who doesn't live in a literal castle
And yes, I know it's a constitutional monarchy, I live here :)
Yeah at that point it will just turn into a republic. But nothing is stopping Norwegians to go into that direction except tRAdiShyUn and decades of brainwashing.
The problem is this voting power is held by someone just because he/she is the child of someone, not because they can actually wield it responsibly. This is the whole reason monarchy was abolished.
And that's why you shouldn't white-knight random people you don't know
God forbid we’re unfair to this guy https://www.cbsnews.com/...
Probably for the same reason we still have one in the Netherlands, where a large part of the country can't comprehend abolishing the monarchy because "it's tradition" or "because they do important diplomatic work" (ie brown-nosing other politicians for an idioticly high salary)
Ik vondt de enige gechillte Nederlander ;) Groeten vanuit Duitsland! (Grapje, ik weet dat niet iedereen Rutte of Wilders in het achterste wil neuken)
The US doesn't have a monarchy, but we ended up with a king anyway.
To point out that having a democracy and not having a monarchy doesn't mean much, practically speaking.
I'm guessing it's like the UK where they have a monarchy but they don't actually have any real power.
Well, aside from the usual rich person power of being able to commit all sorts of crimes and get away with it.
Mette-Marit and a scandal. I’ve heard that before.
All monarchs are parasitic scum.
I was kidding but in all seriousness, I have a dual Polish-Spanish citizenship. The last Polish president (2 terms, 10 years in office) was an useless, partisan idiot who help destroy the justice system and blocked everything the government tried to pass. He was recently hired by the Heritage Foundation and is now spewing pro-Trump propaganda in Polish media. The newly elected president is a ex football hooligan idiot who, again, is blocking any progress to help his opposition party. The office or president in Poland is abused and is harmful to the democracy. Most of Polish presidents elected since the office was created were either drunks, idiots or hacks and embarrassed the office and country they are supposed to represent on countless occasions.
In the meantime, the Spanish king is not aligned with any party and is limiting his work to purely representative functions and occasionally mediating between the parties. He's well educated, speaks foreign languages and knows all the protocols. He's nothing but professional. His daughter, the princess, from the youngest age is getting all the education she will need to represent the country with honor and dignity. (Yes, the old king was an old drunk and pervert but he had enough common sense to resign when the scandals started surfacing).
The office of the Spanish King costs the taxpayers like 10% of what the president costs the Poles.
I know there's a good middle ground where people elect smart, professional people to represent them and you have the best of two worlds but if I had to choose I'm taking well educated King over drunk President every time.
Guillotine the educated king and the drunk president as far as I'm concerned. If the king's really so smart he'll renounce his title when the guillotine comes out and the bloodshed can be avoided, so it's a win all around.
I'm sure there are great solution that work in fantasyland. Here, in the real world, we have to work with what we have and in my experience, a King with little actual power works better than politically nominated president.
The constitutional monarchy is from 1814, but our real political power is democratically elected every 4 years. There is a significant minority who wants a republic instead, but most of us like having an unpolitical symbolic head of state to do the speaches, diplomacy and ribbon cutting that we can (mostly) all get behind. It's the same system as in Sweden and Denmark.
It don't want to should sound disrespectful to the finish language, but kokoomus sounds like the villain of a Mario spinoff.
Just as a good few other European countries, yes. Most definitely yes.
A lot of Europe has monarchs. Yes, the french and American mind struggles to comprehend this, but they just don't ger rid of them
Possibly, but that excuse doesn't fly for contacts following his first conviction in 2008:
[..] was convicted in 2008 by a Florida state court of procuring a child for prostitution and of soliciting a prostitute.
That was well before the above mentioned email contacts.
With your justification, nobody should be working for HSBC, Meta, Google, Apple etc. [..]
You are so close.
@lemmy.world
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/...
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/...
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
go to feed...
The movement to get rid of the parasitic monarchy in Norway got a lot of traction this week, so that is nice.
There is an actual hearing in Parliament this tuesday about abolishing the monarchy. Not caused by this but happily strengthened.
save