Oh Prince Andrew is getting SUED by Virginia Robert's

[LaurieFairyCake]

That will be interesting

Your attempts to defend the indefensible are embarrassing.
It really is disgusting.

The true colours are there when you look past the hedging (I'm not saying he is or isn't guilty but she...):
I think it is entirely possible that he at least met her, maybe indulged in sexual shenanigans with her and maybe others
Sexual shenanigans!
An older man having sex with a minor is described as 'shenanigans'.

It's not surprising that someone who views older men having sex with 17 year olds as a bit of a shenanigans might spend pages minimising that behaviour and trying to discredit the victims.

LolaSmiles - I'm not trying to discredit anyone. I'm asking how it can be proven. Sexual abuse/trafficking is appalling, and in no way could I defend it. But a person is innocent until proven guilty. Even Epstein Saville et al. And Andrew too as I write.

Yet there's been multiple posts of you minimising and victim blaming, in fact, let's have a look a a recent one:
I think it is entirely possible that he at least met her, maybe indulged in sexual shenanigans with her and maybe others

You're not trying to discredit anyone or minimise anything, but you describe older men sexually abusing minors as "sexual shenanigans".

I think the language needs to change because clearly different abuses are being committed. Calling PA a paedophile won’t help anything because he isn’t. Sexual abuser might be a better term as he and other men in his position must realise young women are having sex with him under duress of some sort.

Trafficking people by lying about work, taking their passports and physically abusing them using them is not the same as telling someone you are going to take them to meet rich and famous men at parties and then do just that. Clearly still wrong (because otherwise she would have had a solid working contract including sex), but it needs a different law.

It’s the fat edge of a thin wedge that starts with being treated in expensive restaurants by a rich men and let into the VIP areas in nightclubs. When does “treated” stop and groomed begin? If you can walk away you could still argue they were grooming you but where’s the legal system that could do anything about it?

You can’t really have a law that says you can only ask someone for sex if you haven’t promised or given them anything they couldn’t afford themselves.

You can dress it up all you like with the "I'm not saying either way" but we see you, and we see your minimising and your attempts to discredit victims

This^
I just can't work out why?
Is it because some people on here are fervent Royalists?

Here is the link again for all those ignoring it.

www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/03/jeffrey-epstein-ghislaine-maxwell-florida-lawsuit

StapMe
And why is she only taking action against Andrew? What about all the other alleged abusers?

Your point is??

She has taken action against others

Please let's not trot out the innocent until proven guilty nonsense.

PA has been slapped with a civil suit, he is in a position of unbelievable privilege with probably the best lawyers in the land, but he has to answer to it.
And let's not go down the route of him not 'recollecting'. He said there are a number of things wrong with VG's account. I'm surprised he would know... given he can't recollect even meeting her.

I'm NOT discrediting nor defending ANYONE, even though it appears that way to you. And you are enlightening me of my ignorance of this case, thank you. And correcting my use of language. No shenanigans in our house then, the old man will have to ask me outright if I want him to give me one....I was simply wondering how things in this case can be proved.
And before you start on me again, let's think about present day trafficking and abuse, and what can be done about it.

@StapMe

LolaSmiles - I'm not trying to discredit anyone. I'm asking how it can be proven. Sexual abuse/trafficking is appalling, and in no way could I defend it. But a person is innocent until proven guilty. Even Epstein Saville et al. And Andrew too as I write.

Ok, I just need to be clear here - do you think that Jimmy Savile was not guilty?

let's think about present day trafficking and abuse, and what can be done about it.

Do you not think seeing rich, powerful men being punished for it might act as a disincentive?

"Ok, I just need to be clear here - do you think that Jimmy Savile was not guilty?"

No, not on the evidence I have read. But if I'd been a juror in his case had it come to court, I'd have to suspend what I'd read, and agree him guilty or not on what was presented to the court. No?

Sexual abuse/trafficking is appalling, and in no way could I defend it. But a person is innocent until proven guilty. Even Epstein Saville et al. And Andrew too as I write.

I've heard it all now.
Epstein, Saville are innocent.
Because they're dead.
Shocking

@StapMe

I'm NOT discrediting nor defending ANYONE, even though it appears that way to you. And you are enlightening me of my ignorance of this case, thank you. And correcting my use of language. No shenanigans in our house then, the old man will have to ask me outright if I want him to give me one....I was simply wondering how things in this case can be proved. And before you start on me again, let's think about present day trafficking and abuse, and what can be done about it.

This IS present day trafficking and abuse. Do you think all of Epstein's buddies just stopped? Do you not think that pursuing legal proceedings against abusers sends a strong message that might make other men think twice?

Roussette
Either a blind love for the royal family or are a foot soldier in the misogyny army where women discussing their experiences of sexual assault are met with we don't really believe you, how do we know you didn't just change your mind after a one night stand, did you actually push him off or did you just lie there, well she did willingly go to his flat that night and there's a photo of them in the bar smiling, he didn't lock her up and prevent her leaving so why didn't she leave... it's so hard for men these days, they have no idea if they can go on a date without being accused of sexual assault... nobody was in the room with them so how can it he proven... I'm not saying he isn't guilty, just saying that she can't prove it.

Or both, healthy misogyny mixed with a love of the royals.

@StapMe

"Ok, I just need to be clear here - do you think that Jimmy Savile was not guilty?"

No, not on the evidence I have read. But if I'd been a juror in his case had it come to court, I'd have to suspend what I'd read, and agree him guilty or not on what was presented to the court. No?

Yes that is how the legal system works.

What is your point though? You aren't a juror, you aren't in a court of law and you don't have to disregard all evidence in the public domain.
So why are you behaving as if you do?

StapMe
Challenging your use of "sexual shenanigans" to refer to rich, powerful, older men having sex with minors who've been groomed and flown around the world so that the aforementioned men can have sex with them is not 'starting on you'.

You can call various sex acts whatever you like in the context of your own relationship.
People will rightly take issue with abuse of minors being described as light-hearted sexual fun between consenting adults.

She has nothing to lose, her case is being fought pro Bono.

Really?
From her own statement
I did not come to this decision lightly. As a mother and a wife, my family comes first - and I know that this action will subject me to further attacks by Prince Andrew and his surrogates - but I knew if I did not pursue this action, I would be letting them and victims everywhere down.”

There is no best outcome for him, his reputation is well and truly shot now, whatever the truth of the case.

Setting aside the VRG case, do you not think PA's reputation was shot when he admitted to repeatedly engaging with and forming a longterm close friendship with a convicted paedophile?

When he chose to socialise with that paedophile and invite him into the royal household.

Regardless of any legal proceedings, don't you think those choices are worthy of reputational loss @StapMe ?

There is no best outcome for him, his reputation is well and truly shot now, whatever the truth of the case.

And it will cost him a vast amount of money. In what world is that not being punished?

Setting aside the VRG case, do you not think PA's reputation was shot when he admitted to repeatedly engaging with and forming a longterm close friendship with a convicted paedophile?
Could you imagine a MN thread:

AIBU to think that most people would stop being friends with a man who has pleaded guilty to procuring a child for prostitution. The man in question is continuing his friendship with this convicted sex offerder. He has two daughters and doesn't seem to think the friendship is inappropriate. I don't understand why anyone would be so invested in remaining friends with a man who wants wants prostitute children.

That's the only evidence some people will accept.
Unless you're dishevelled and with ripped clothing and a black eye, you haven't been sexually assaulted.

Of course it’s not and that wasn’t the point that’s being made.

Are rich men ( or women)m having sex with under 18’s sexual assaulting them by the very nature of imbalance? If so how rich do they have to be before they have overstepped the mark. Only millionaires or any man with money they can spend on a girl?

How old before they fall into “ older” man?
What if they marry later marry them ?

It really needs a better discussion than the one on here.

It really needs a better discussion than the one on here

The one here works for me. Feel free to start your own superior thread.

If it can be proved that the pair of them were together in private at any time, how can it be proved that anything untoward went on? Could it be possible that he had a regular massage, no funny business on the side. How can you prove that bit either way?
The car crash interview proved that he is guilty of breathtaking arrogance. I think it is entirely possible that he at least met her, maybe indulged in sexual shenanigans with her and maybe others and he genuinely doesn't remember them because they were "little people". But I don't know, nor could I prove it.

The massage front was ridiculous. Jeffrey Epstein supposedly wanted to train up mid teen girls to give perfectly innocent massages to powerful men and himself. How does anyone buy this apart from the poor vulnerable girls who were promised this training? If you want an actual massage there are adult men and women trained to do this very thing. Massage, my foot.

@RecallRecall

That's the only evidence some people will accept. Unless you're dishevelled and with ripped clothing and a black eye, you haven't been sexually assaulted.

Of course it’s not and that wasn’t the point that’s being made.

Are rich men ( or women)m having sex with under 18’s sexual assaulting them by the very nature of imbalance? If so how rich do they have to be before they have overstepped the mark. Only millionaires or any man with money they can spend on a girl?

How old before they fall into “ older” man?
What if they marry later marry them ?

It really needs a better discussion than the one on here.

Did you read the link @Roussette posted and I reposted? Does that woman's experience qualify as sexual assault?

What about the girls that Epstein was convicted of assaulting?

And considering that history, why do you think PA had no concerns about attending parties with teenage girls provided by his friend the convicted sex offender, on an island with no escape?