Despite his villainous behaviour, anyone feel a teeny bit sorry for Andrew?

bottom line the public love trial by media, yet heaven forbid the public get prejudged

my point and context was if you are expressing surprise at the support for andrew who some consider a criminal then george was also a criminal yet got support even considering his crimes, were omg etc

Not in the slightest. He’s a privileged twat.

🙂‍↔️ 🙂‍↔️ 🙂‍↔️ 🙂‍↔️

DS said this some months ago. Apparently, VG said some while ago that if she was found dead, it wasn't going to be from suicide (or words to that effect).

I have this 1961 Australian Women's Weekly magazine, with Andrew on the cover on his first birthday.

I feel a bit sorry for this baby, knowing what's ahead for him, but I don't feel sorry for the 66-year-old.

That's an absolutely disgraceful comparison.

Andrew has been arrested because he is believed to have committed a crime. He hasn't been murdered by the police.

You know the police aren't meant to kill people, even if they have criminal convictions?

I agree, paedophiles would not be attracted to 16+ year old girls because they look fairly ‘adult’. The word is bandied around a lot which is very unhelpful because it needs to be reserved for the specific offending against very young children.

If he knew Virginia was trafficked, it makes him a rapist. If he didn’t it makes him incredibly sleazy, pretty disgusting and morally bankrupt but not a criminal.

I think it would be unlikely any associate of Epstein’s wouldn’t know there was something sinister about his island full of girls though. So no, I don’t feel sorry for him.

Or that dreadful Lady Victoria Hervey perhaps?

It’s mind blowing!

Is he to be treated like any member of the public in other ways? Where we withdraw his security for example? Where the argument over his residence means he gets to go on a 12 year long points dictated social housing list? Because if we treat him like any other members of the public in every other way then yes I'll accept innocent until proven guilty. Will we go back in time and investigate the allegations made against him previously where the victim was paid off by our countries monarch?

plus thinking of him going back to an empty house on his birthday with no family support

It is good to be compassionate but, in my opinion, this is simply disproportionate.
No, I do not feel sorry for him, because I can’t as yet see what would be deserving of sympathy.

No. Why would I?

He had massive advantage all his life and what has he done? Grifted, sought to make himself richer and richer, sold trade secrets to bloody Epstein, and had sex with trafficked young women.

Ffs. All he had to do was behave normally. You reap what you sow.

Is that you Fergie?

The minimising and justifying is insane! Palace PR machine working overtime, or bad men posting, or has the patriarchy just really done a number on a lot of women?

We can treat his as innocent until proven guilty without feeling sorry for him, though. Unless you feel sorry for every single person who has ever been arrested for a crime?
He’s a man who has lived a life of privilege most of us can only dream of. Why would be feel sorry for him?

Not yet. But if he had sex with any of those girls it’s rape. They were trafficked, so consent is out of the question.

No. I am very happy. This sets an example.

Mentioning equality on a specific thread specifically about powerful men trafficking young women, placing them in a position where it's taken 30 years before anyone would even touch their allegations isn't mentioning equality. It's erasure of the inequality our societies are built on. Are you a woman? If so that is startlingly internalized misogyny. If you're a man then not all men, but definitely you.

None of us know the full facts, in this country we adopt the principle of innocent until proved guilty and AMW like any member of the public should be treated as such.

Someone I know served in The Falklands with him. Couldn't stand him and, on one occasion, flatly refused to fly in helicopter with AMW piloting as he felt he would be very unsafe.

well when you read the rest of the comments about andrew, then how if andrew was and has paid the price for anything he was guilty of but your words "Crimes he served time for" so as far as im aware andrew is innocent of all charges so why the difference ?

Why do we need to mention equality in a thread about a particular man who has done bad things?

but andrew was never convicted of it, so therefore he is not

Regardless of the circles you travelled in

Hes a man.
He's a father of daughters.
He's capable of conscience surely? Because if not then we really do want to abolish the priveged if it's unreasonable to expect humanity from them.

Anyone, regardless of background, who can stand by and watch children tortured or have unconsenting sex as an adult with women he knows would be unlikely to consent to that otherwise deserves to be punished.

That's how you teache someone they still face consequences, that's how you avoid the 'trabelling in circle you can't even imagine' as a society we punish that behaviour.

You literally cannot just say 'he was so unfortunate to be spoilt poor chap, couldn't help raping teenagers and spilling state secrets for the privilege, poor aul guy, always looked good in a suit holding a martini glass, knew which fork to use, sure he opened a shopping center in our town, not his fault. Anyway he paid the teenagers well for the privilege of raping them....'

it was because you said bad men, so in terms of equality i mentioned there are bad women too, or am i not ment to mention equality ?