Andrew and social services

And before anyone says “yes but she wasn’t over the age of consent in the US,” nobody seemed to care about that when that kid was arrested for having sex in Dubai

But the kid in Dubai wasn't trafficked so that's a silly comparison.

Virginia was over the age of consent in the UK but couldn't consent anyway as she was trafficked. Any my understanding is that she was trafficked from a state where she was underage. Andrew didn't traffic her but he must have been aware she'd been trafficked. And he must have been aware that she was very young.

It was definitely worse than "paying for sex", because Virginia Giuffre was trafficked.

This is not directed at the poster above, but I often wonder if people understand the legal meaning of the term 'sex trafficking'. It's a term that conjures up images of women/girls being kidnapped, tied up and taken to other countries in horrid conditions to work in brothels against their will.

But it can also mean - and indeed does mean in this case - simply buying someone a plane ticket from one state to another under false pretences for the purpose of commercial sex. That doesn't make it any lesser of an offense, obviously. But I do think the lack of understanding contributes to threads like this making all kinds of fictitious accusations.

Don’t be ridiculous

I dislike Andrew from all I know about him, but lets be clear - he has never been convicted of any sex offences, and what did happen, that we know about - a man in his 40s having sex with a 17 year old in London was not any kind of crime, then or now.

Twdry, repulsive, yuk, yes - discreditable, yes, criminal no.

Epstein and Maxwell are both convicted sex offenders, but we would have to prove that Andrew was aware ahead of time or a conspirator to go further with criminalising him - presumably no such evidence exists.

So as it stands there would be no case for SS to be involved.

Has he actually been convicted?

No.

Innocent until proven guilty. That’s how the law works whether we like it or not (and it has to be this way).

He needs to be formally tried and convicted. I hope he is put on trial.

What I find strange is why wasn’t Prince Andrew warned off having anything to do with Epstein by the security services? Why would conspiracy theorists Alex Jones know all about the Island but not MI5?

Just the simple question how did he make his billions is enough to think maybe being friends with him and by being friends with him giving him some respectability is a bad idea. So far no American has had any push back from being friends with Epstein and many people feel those with true influence are being protected. The rumours about Epstein have been around for decades but so far the only high profile person who has had any heat is someone with no real power who isn’t even an American.

He has low morals. If he was your father, would you let him be around you and your children? Would you trust him around your daughter or another girl in the family from say 15 years old?

Indeed, like the most powerful man in the world, for one, the giant orange toddler.

Quite. It's about time this subject was wound down. Every day there are new threads about it and it has become rather boring. Let sleeping dogs lie.

Is that the royal ‘we’? Speak for yourself, I think the threads are needed.

She was trafficked from a country where she was under age.

God if you think social services would be acting on any of this you've led a very very sheltered life. Have you not ever read any of the reportings of children murdered in this country? Children beaten so badly they are concussed in front of social workers and still nothing is done? children so hungry they are stealing food from school and still being sent home to die? Toddlers clearly raped by their fathers before they are murdered and fathers getting off through lack of evidence?

Andrew is an entitled, arrogant arsehole. He has no moral scruples and is in love with the idea of himself. But no one can prove that he did or didn't break the law. He's had his titles removed. Done. End of. Move on.

There has never been any suggestion whatsoever that he's a pedophile. Don't be ridiculous.

He was accused of sexual abuse on the basis that he had sex with someone who had been trafficked for sex, who did not want to be. There's never been any suggestion that he forced, threatened or compelled that person into sex. But by virtue of the fact that she did not consent to being trafficked for sex, that is abuse.

The things he did, and the people he did them with, are morally repugnant, and he deserves everything he's getting and more. But to suggest that he's a pedophile and a danger to his children/grandchildren tells me that you don't know what that word means.

Social Services protect children whose parents or carers cannot do so. What makes you think that his Grandchildren, who are small children, need protecting from him? He has no known history of paedophilia. Rather nasty, salacious post.

This is nothing, on one of the other Andrew threads someone tried to claim that he had also been groomed by Epsteine and was every inch a victim as Virginia Giuffre.

I’m just repeating myself on them now so feel on a loop, tbh.

Suffice to say, there does appear to be a sourced suggestion that Andrew has been involved in a friendship network of sex traffickers.

I wouldn’t want him around my children, no. He has no moral filters.

See also: behaviour at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral; friendships with oligarchs and potentates; Chinese spy scandal.

I am genuinely shocked at the comments on this thread.

Seems some can really do no wrong in some eyes.

He knew what was going on. He went to that island. They all knew.

Trafficked people can not give consent.

Ah, you’re doing a Simon and trying to discredit what I’m saying by suggesting I’m personal besties with them? Hardly.

So look at above. Andrew should be investigated by social services. Majority of posts are saying no, he shouldn’t, don’t be ridiculous.

I am saying that the more people come out with this sort of stuff (including the media) the more Andrew is going to end up being ‘defended.’

On this thread, I have said that there is a difference between morally reprehensible and illegal and that had Andrew not been a Royal, his mistreatment of Virginia (and probably others) wouldn’t have even been commented on.

I have been accused of supporting him, of having a family who habitually abuse young girls or something and of ‘hanging out’ with Andrew supporters. See how it goes? Division and conflict. While Andrew slopes off with his millions; he’s fine.

Let him slide into obscurity and let’s have a proper conversation about wealth, power and sex.

I agree.
The Robertson family interviews repeatedly shown on BBC are uncomfortable. The quote "This normal girl from a normal family has taken down a prince. We are so proud of her”. The tears.

No mention of their highly dysfunctional family and predatory, paedophile father, or the many powerful US citizens and those from around the world who are involved.
VG talked of a billionaire who bought her services, why hasn't he and his wife been ‘taken down’ or Donald Trump.

Bring down a part of the UK monarchy but also bring down American politics and business.

No support for Andrew at all. He is a sleaze, but he hasn't broken the law.

Good grief, what sort of people do you mix with that would think like that.

The majority will have no sympathy for him, I don’t think we should change of behaviours for the sort of people that will feel sympathy with him.

We can keep the heat on him and have those conversations.

I have read the book, not just flicked through it.

I don’t think I have said at any point ‘Andrew has not got what he has deserved.’

I do think there is a risk of the tide of public outrage shifting. That inevitably happens when one person is reported on almost exclusively. People talk about it and (as can be seen here) we risk a sort of ‘well yes he’s this and that but he surely is not THAT bad’ which can turn to sympathy, especially if that extends to his daughters.

And why shouldn't he lose everything? If you lie down with dogs then you get fleas.

Yes, of course all the other people need to be held to account too. But you can think that whilst also feeling Andrew got what he deserved.

What surproses me most is the air time being given to the Giuffre family. When a teenage girl gets mixed up with this sort of crap one has to ask why and her abuse and misuse certainly wouldn't have started with Epstein. Why is nobody after the parents who should have cared for and protected her?

Andrew is an arrogant and not very bright twit with the emotional intelligence of a gnat. That doesn't make him a paedophile or a rapist and it's notable that neither of his daughters have kicked off against him or other family members.

There are bigger secrets being covered up by a smokescreen if you ask me.

Andrew has certainly dominated the BBC news for a while now, to the point where I’m starting to wonder if it is counterproductive. The problem with these sorts of things is that they can run the risk of going so far the other way that amongst a certain type of person sympathy can start to be generated.

It would really be better if he was allowed to fade into obscurity and if we were able to have proper adult conversations about wealthy men and young girls.

I was actually looking through the book in Waterstones the other day (I couldn’t look at it for long as I had my young children with me) and I hope Virginia is at peace now. I hope things change. I really genuinely do. But … they won’t if we make shit up, to be very blunt about it.