Andrew and social services

I absolutely abhor what Andrew has done. And I agree wholeheartedly with him losing his titles and his large subsidised mansion. But…I actually think this is all turning into a witch hunt. It seems people are not really going to be happy until he is visited by social workers, face a trial and be imprisoned for life. He sounds an awful, arrogant self entitled twat, but being an awful human being isn’t against the law. What he did though with the Epstein incident was appalling, and I honestly think we should now just leave it there - he’s received what probably to him is a humiliating substantial punishment because status is everything to him, and it now lies in the gutter.

I agree with this, and I am no fan of the royal family and especially not of Prince Andrew.

It was definitely worse than "paying for sex", because Virginia Giuffre was trafficked. However, a number of young sex workers are trafficked and that isn't made clear to paying clients. Proving he knew is the bit which is difficult.

I also think most anonymous men who use sex workers know there is a risk they are trafficked, but they simply don't care.

No, the world isn’t focused on him, but Britain is because he is British. We are not the world. I have family in the US and they’re not so bothered about Andrew, they want their own held accountable. Of course there will be interest all over the world because of the commonwealth, the history of Britain and the fact there is always interest in the Royals.

What has pissed me off is that I haven’t minimised what Andrew has done.

But if he is to be held to account about what he’s done we have to be clear about what he has done, which is to do with morals and character rather than the law as it currently stands.

We expect more from him; we should (imo) expect more from men generally. But it’s pointless making things up. That gives him and any supporters he has (not that I think there are many) a curtain to hide behind.

“he’s clearly a sex offender of a very young woman and I’m not sure but possibly a paedophile.”

I’ve never read such nonsense.

1. At seventeen, it is not illegal to have a sexual relationship.
2. He denies the allegations.
3. He is not and has never been accused of being a paedophile.

What on earth would “social care” have to do with his adult daughters and their husbands? Quite apart from the fact that one of his daughters lives abroad, don’t you think they’re quite capable of looking after their own children? It has never, ever been suggested that Prince Andrew is anything other than a devoted father and grandfather. As for “thinking about how different life would be for him if he’d lived in an ordinary family”, all of our lives would have been different had we lived in a different family. Prince Andrew has been shown to be entitled and ill-advised, but the witch hunt against him, and the baying mob howling for retribution is nothing short of vindictive.

Sure but I didn’t say ‘Andrew is a good man’, did I?

Do you really think social services says ‘hmm you’re not a good man, let’s stop you seeing your grandchildren?’ Do you?

Why on earth would social services be involved?

Did I say he was the only one? No I didn’t.

But he was one of them. And he is British and we are in Britain. He was also tax payer funded, part of the RF that historically has been looked up to so of course Britain is going to be interested in him.

I hope others are also held to account and lose everything, they’re scum, but I have an issue with people who don’t just seem to want others held accountable, they actually want to minimise what Andrew has done. You have to question the morals and intentions of anyone justifying Andrew and pointing at others in a bid to take the heat off him.

I think Virginia G could possibly be counted as statutory rape given she was trafficked. However, proving Andrew was aware of this could be impossible given that most involved are deceased or unlikely to give a balanced view.

I am actually surprised anyone is surprised that rich, powerful men abuse and take advantage of young girls. Is anyone actually shocked at this, or is everyone expecting Andrew to somehow to have been above all that because he was a Prince. I mean, I guess so given that he’s lost his title.

There's no suggestion he's a paedophile, it seems pretty clear he his interest is in women.

He allegedly had sex with a young woman/women with whom it was (allegedly) obvious were being trafficked.

There's nothing about that that puts his family in danger, even if he'd been convicted. Don't be a loon.

This is so spot on. I can’t stand him and in no way think he’s got any less than he deserves but the world seems absolutely focused on him, and not who else is involved with possibly far more disgusting behaviours and actions.

Yes but I think they have young children themselves. I assume OP was concerned about them (and potentially historical abuse of his daughters?).

Naive.
A good man would have looked at Virginia and said. You don’t have to do this. Which makes him a rapist. Andrew spent £££’s on prostitues in Thailand. How old were they????

He’s not a paedo, VG was legal everywhere except Florida or wherever she brought charges.

He’s not a sex trafficker, there’s no evidence he knew she was a prostitute (until afterwards). Using prostitutes isn’t illegal in US or UK.

He is a sleaze, but that’s always been blessed by the law everywhere.

I agree. It has been heavily suggested that some very big names have been linked to Epstein and Maxwell

You really are an odious little man.

I am sure you understand (even though you might pretend not to) the difference between behaviour that is morally reprehensible and behaviour that is illegal.

The point is that Andrew, Epstein and Virginia were not a tight little trio. There were other men and other girls. Virginia spoke out - well done to her - but there are probably so many more we just don’t know about, not just girls but men, rich men, powerful men, but men who don’t have Andrew’s position in society.

Andrew is not a paedophile. The world is not divided into good people and paedophiles. Many absolute festering twats are not paedophiles. Many disgusting and hateful people have never broken a law. I am sure we do not have to think too hard about examples where this applies.

Honestly the obsession with Andrew is ridiculous.

No. He is not a rapist.

No. He is not a paedophile.

In fact to suggest that he is is bloody offensive to children who have been genuine victims of child sexual abuse.

The woman was 17.5. In the UK she was over the age of consent.

He’s a sleaze, that’s not in question. But to suggest that his children and grandchildren were in any way at risk is just pathetic really.

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.

@beatingandbearing I hope all the attention on Andrew doesn’t stop any investigations on anyone else involved

It’s not like Andrew will be getting any jobs with children, the extended family can make their own decisions about letting grandchildren etc near him. It’s not like he isn’t recognisable to the public.

What about all the unknown males who were as bad or worse than him?

I don’t think that has been proven…

She was young and vulnerable and probably didn’t know what she was getting herself into - and no doubt was exploited.

But - I don’t think there’s any evidence that he knowingly trafficked her to the UK, or coerced her into it.

The whole thing is very grubby and I feel sorry for her, but there isn’t really any evidence he’s broken the law nor is a paedophile. Unacceptable conduct for someone in his position, yes.

If there was evidence of criminality - he would have been prosecuted. He hasn’t, because there isn’t.

Having sex with a trafficked girl or woman can never be consensual regardless of her age. Non consensual sex is rape. Virginia’s age is a red herring.

Aren't his daughters adult women in their 30's??

It wasn't consensual, she was trafficked. British law at the time held that trafficked women are unable to give free consent.

Because sadly, even being a convicted served time in prison child sexual offender (which he is not) does not mean you are banned from contact with children.

I have two convicted child sexual abusers in my family. One sentenced to 3 years in prison. Both abused a close family member they were in a position of authority over. One had absolutely no restrictions whatsoever. The other was only banned from spending more than 12 hours in the same dwelling (so essentially overnights) with a child without the parents’ permission. It has not stopped either from extensive unsupervised contact with children and for at least one of them, reoffending. 🤷🏻‍♀️

And he was the only one, was he?

We all know that it was massive, involved a lot of girls and a lot of men. Who are hiding in plain sight while everyone demands Andrew loses everything.