Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Oh Prince Andrew is getting SUED by Virginia Robert's

999 replies

LaurieFairyCake · 09/08/2021 23:54

That will be interesting

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
StapMe · 10/08/2021 18:10

@VladmirsPoutine

And I think she was rather more worldly wise than she lets on.

Therefore what?

You'd really think this website is one of very few places where discourse on rape & abuse wouldn't be treated with the typical 'well was she wearing a short skirt and red lipstick' lens but alas...

I meant I think she knew what she was getting into with Epstein/Maxwell. She was paid for her efforts, way more money than she could have earned in a less sleazy job. She is a victim, in that she was young, indeed underage, and she should not have been exploited.
MotionActivatedDog · 10/08/2021 18:13

And I think she was rather more worldly wise than she lets on.

What do you mean by worldly wise?

DeeCeeCherry · 10/08/2021 18:16

StapMe*
I meant I think she knew what she was getting into with Epstein/Maxwell. She was paid for her efforts, way more money than she could have earned in a less sleazy job. She is a victim, in that she was young, indeed underage, and she should not have been exploited

No - You mean she was well up for it and prostituted herself for money. No shade on grown men who groom non-monied teenage girls and tempt them with money then.

The faux 'she was a victim' at the end of your statement is poor, considering you've already painted her as predatory instead of the reality of it being the other way around.

"She knew what's what" style talk doesn't wash when talking of rich worldly men decades older than a girl they're aiming to coerce into their seediness

KidneyBeans · 10/08/2021 18:18

I meant I think she knew what she was getting into with Epstein/Maxwell
You think a 17 year old girl training as a sports club masseuse knew she was going to be used in an illegal sex trafficking ring?

Really?

MotionActivatedDog · 10/08/2021 18:21

I meant I think she knew what she was getting into with Epstein/Maxwell.

Do you realise how ridiculous that sounds? The authorities don’t even know the full extent of what Epstein and Maxwell were doing. Do you honestly think Epstein and Maxwell divulged their whole operation to this 17 year old? She will have been told a whole load of nonsense to get her there and more nonsense to get her to have sex with PA.

Strictly1 · 10/08/2021 18:31

@SpidersAreShitheads

I'm not a Prince Andrew supporter and I think that his interview was absolutely awful.

But I am confused by the references to a 17 year old being a child. At 17 she's a young adult. Sex with a much older, powerful man is distinctly sleazy - no question - but she's not a child. You can't drink until you're 21 in the USA, but that doesn't mean you're a child. Plus one of the two rape incidences took place in London, where she was over the age of consent.

I think the allegations of rape and coercion are bad enough without exaggerating for effect.

Every child under the age of 18 is protected by the rights of a child. There was also an imbalance of power. I'm ashamed that some adults are trying to defend a man of 40 years for having sex with a vulnerable child. That none of the men knew - really?! They weren't stupid or vulnerable - they thought themselves above the law because they were male and rich. We need to protect our children not make pathetic excuses for pathetic men.
Maireas · 10/08/2021 18:35

I can't believe that the victim blaming is still going on here.

StapMe · 10/08/2021 18:39

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

KidneyBeans · 10/08/2021 18:46

@StapMe

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.
So are you arguing that trafficking and prostitution of underage girls and compelling them to have sex with strangers is ok as long as you pay them and they don't look unhappy in photos?

Really?
Not looking miserable whilst being groomed and coerced is your threshold for acceptability?

DuncinToffee · 10/08/2021 18:46

@Maireas

I can't believe that the victim blaming is still going on here.
It is depressing but sadly these threads are always full of them.
MotionActivatedDog · 10/08/2021 18:47

And she doesn't look too unhappy in that photo with Prince Andrew.

Oh come on! How would you expect her to look when she is surrounded by the people who have forced her to be there and the people she has been forced to have sex with? Do you really think she would have felt comfortable crying for the photograph? Or scowling? Or making a secret signal with her hand that tells someone (who? The chemist that developed the photos? ) that she didn’t want to be there?

MotionActivatedDog · 10/08/2021 18:48

I mean do you think she had any belief that photo would be seen by someone who could help her? The photo was taken by and for the people who forced her to be there.

Pixxie7 · 10/08/2021 18:56

Strictly1@ I agree with most of what you say, however the law is there to protect both sides. You only have to look at some of the reality tv shows to see that youngsters are not all innocents. If a crime has been committed it should be dealt with as a criminal offence based on evidence and not something that you can choose to sue for.
No one is above the law and should face the consequences of their actions, if the rich are treated differently this needs to be addressed through the judicial system.

StapMe · 10/08/2021 18:58

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

KidneyBeans · 10/08/2021 19:03

@Pixxie7

Strictly1@ I agree with most of what you say, however the law is there to protect both sides. You only have to look at some of the reality tv shows to see that youngsters are not all innocents. If a crime has been committed it should be dealt with as a criminal offence based on evidence and not something that you can choose to sue for. No one is above the law and should face the consequences of their actions, if the rich are treated differently this needs to be addressed through the judicial system.
What do you mean by 'youngster' and 'innocent' ?

Because unless the tv shows you watch show 17 year olds being groomed and trafficked for sex by older millionaires I'm struggling to see the relevance?

Or are you equating twenty-something women having consensual active sex lives on reality tv with the coercion and sex trafficking of a minor?
In which case I find it bizarre that you need the differences in those situations pointing out.

If you think the judicial system protects all demographics equally I'm assuming you aren't BAME? Or poor? And have chosen not to educate yourself?

KidneyBeans · 10/08/2021 19:06

@StapMe

Of course it was not acceptable for her to be groomed/coerced/trafficked. And that's without her being underage. I'm not sticking up for the sleaze balls that used and abused her. I'm just not convinced that she had no inkling whatsoever of what her job entailed.
So what if she did? What is your point?

If you genuinely believe her treatment by a ring of millionaire paedophiles was unacceptable, then why does it matter whether she 'had an inkling'?
It doesn't. Unless you are trying to make her accountable for their behaviour.
Which you are. Please stop victim-blaming.

Maireas · 10/08/2021 19:06

It's like the language used by the Rotherham grooming gang in their defence, isn't it?
The girls were up for it, they weren't innocent, they knew what was going on etc
Stop letting these men off the hook.

mathanxiety · 10/08/2021 19:07

And she doesn't look too unhappy in that photo with Prince Andrew.

How did it happen that so many women are so completely unaware of rape myths?

oneglassandpuzzled · 10/08/2021 19:11

At 17 she wasn’t mature enough emotionally or psychologically to sell her sexual services. Anyone who’s seen a daughter change between 17 and 22 can see the huge development the late-teen brain goes through. I’d obviously argue that no woman should ever sell their sexual services at any age.

mathanxiety · 10/08/2021 19:17

If a crime has been committed it should be dealt with as a criminal offence based on evidence and not something that you can choose to sue for.

The civil law apparatus provides for civil suits for damages arising from criminal behaviour or acts as well as for negligence or omissions. This is because criminal acts often result in physical or psychological conditions which a victim has to live with for the rest of their life, which a guilty verdict in the criminal court does nothing to assuage.

A civil suit is based on evidence.

If you have a problem with this redress available for victims of crime, I suggest you write to your MP to have tort law abolished for criminal cases. See how far that gets you.

Pixxie7 · 10/08/2021 19:19

KidneyBeans@ back with more insults I see. I agree the judicial system is warped and needs to be sorted. No I am not BAME, neither rich or poor. Just because I don’t agree with you doesn’t mean I am uneducated , I just believe in innocent until proven guilty.
As far as reality tv shows they are not all in their twenties some are 16 plus who have very active sex lives.

Martianworld · 10/08/2021 19:21

@KidneyBeans

I don't know,why you're being so aggressive towards me. I haven't said anything negative about Virginia Guiffre. I've said that if he's broken the law, I hope she wins.

“Perhaps because Ghislaine has now been apprehended and further forensic evidence seized? Plus VR has attempted criminal proceedings against PA and been thwarted, at the time she gave those interviews I'm sure she was more hopeful of a criminal investigation rather than a Royal family cover up.
Why are you insinuating that it matters when she decided to sue? What is your point?"

When I talked about her suing, I mean HER suing in a civil case. Nothing to do with the authorities taking a criminal case. And I don't believe, I'm open to be corrected, that there was ever a criminal case against PA. The judge threw out her evidence against PA. Are you saying the judge was corrupt? But VRG could take a civil case in this country or could have sued at any time but chose not to. If she had evidence for a civil case, then the earlier when all evidence is fresh in the mind, the better. At the moment she's,saying she can't remember dates,and places, only daces. That's why all courts like evidence after the fact to be presented ASAP. She'd had legal advice so if you have solid evidence why wait? It looks to me like she's suing because it's her last opportunity rather than because shes in a good legal position. I also said that she might feel more encouraged to sue at the moment because of the support from the “me too“ movement. Which is a valid reason.

"Worth noting that she also successfully sued Ghislaine in 2015 - by your reckoning that undermines any criminal allegations. Interesting that the US court system doesn't agree with you."

Guiffre and Maxwell settled the 2015 case and it was dismissed by the judge. No one won or lost. Of course public prosecutors can take people to court. Public prosecutors took Michael Jackson to court. And they lost.

"Also remarkable that you say she was doing interviews with NOTW in 2019 since it's not been in publication since 2011."

I never said she was doing interviews with NOTW in 2019. I mentioned an interview she'd done with NOTW years ago and I said she's being doing interviews about this for 15 - 20 years (with all kinds of media outlets.)

“You may want to review your 'facts'”

You might want to review your reading ability.

mathanxiety · 10/08/2021 19:24

It's eye popping statements about basic elements of tort law, a foundation of the justice system, that make people wonder and question, @Pixxie7

LolaSmiles · 10/08/2021 19:27

StapMe
It wasn't a 'job'.
It was trafficking children to be sexually abused.

Dressing up your victim blaming with trafficking is bad but... I not defending him but... doesn't disguise the fact it's there.

One more time for everyone at the back.
Children.
Don't.
Consent.
To.
Being.
Sexually.
Abused.

There's no 'I don't support Andrew but...', not 'trafficking is wrong, but...' and no 'not defending the perverts but...'. Blaming child victims of abuse is not OK and that includes the but she isn't wholly innocent lines of argument.

justasking111 · 10/08/2021 19:29

Did she have to sleep with any other men or just him??