Prince Andrew stripped...

[Sarahlou63]

Of all royal patronages and military titles.

Guess mummy has finally had enough.

yess errnercall, I did scour the net looking but could only see a lot of accusations

@KravMaga

I wonder if he will be allowed to play a role in her funeral when the time comes. That will be a head scratcher for Prince Charles.

Almost certainly yes, just as his Great Uncle (Edward VIII) came back to attend the funerals of family members.

@cassie2and2

In the photo of the two of them with arms around each others waist, she looks like the cat that has the cream, definately no look of a rabbit caught in the head lights. She was seventeen, not exactly a naive age in this day and time. I dont condone P A but am wondering if all these accusations in court are happening with the other men she says have taken advantage of her

Fortunately the prosecution team is a lot more knowledgeable than you.

Do you know how difficult it is to have charges laid? Evidence has to be compelling enough that a reasonable jury would convict.

Do you realise that VG is not the one being charged? That she is the victim?

Do you know how courageous a person has to be to go forward with s sexual abuse complaint?

And how robust the evidence must be for that complaint to make it to court?

Because it doesn't sound like you have the slightest clue about how the law works.

What your post reveals, other than ignorance and a victim blaming mentality, is crashing ignorance and a deeply internalised misogyny.

@sweetbellyhigh- Totally agree with your post

Well said, sweetbellyhigh.

@sweetbellyhigh spot on.

I would defend my child until they were actually found guilty.

@MrsTSwift
She's not just somebody's mother. She is the head of state by dint of descent from people who claimed to rule by divine right. She is the personification of the abstract institution - the Monarchy - from which government authority is derived as well as the authority of the courts. She is the personage to whom the armed services swear fealty.

She has a duty to put her position first and whatever family feelings there may be should come after that. I don't think she put her position first here. She should have cut Andrew loose years ago .

The monarchy, which exists and functions thanks to a contract between it and the people of the UK, has shot itself in the foot here by waiting until a NY judge dismissed a ridiculous argument to dress down a member of the royal family who has clearly never understood that the people are watching, and expecting more of him than he has given.

You claim immense privilege - an income for doing virtually nothing, housing for you and your ex wife, your daughters' weddings to nobodies televised as if they mattered. You expect people to bow and call you Sir and refer to you as His Royal Highness. If you don't understand that with this comes responsibility to the institution that makes all of that possible, then your education has been seriously lacking.

Eloquently said @mathanxiety.couldnt agree more.

I think she held out as long as she could because she loves him, obviously, but not to the extent that she would let him bring down the monarchy.

@amusedtodeath1

Eloquently said *@mathanxiety*.couldnt agree more.

The key facts here are that even without a conviction or award Andrew has shown himself to have no judgement. He knowingly stayed with a convicted paedophile, and did so publicly. At this point he should have been removed from public life. The Queen is years too late here.

sweetbellyhigh. After watching the Panorama programme and Virginias admission to being abused from the age of seven (horrifying) and during most of her life I find it hard not to think she is more than a bit street wise, and, when arriving at age 17 to an obviously very rich persons residence where he is laid on a massage table naked she knows very well what is expected. She also says she went to Epsteins homes, some of which she needed to go on his private jet to get to, She admits to having sex with his friends, these are the other people I meant when I said why hadn't she accused them along with P A.
Also it seems she jumped on the band wagon of Epstein conviction , receiving $16000 from a newspaper for her story and later accusing Maxwell and P A, Maxwell has since been found guilty and P A ????
Whatever, I am entitled to my opinion of Virginia as you are to yours.
I appreciate going to court is not any easy option but perhaps the incentive is worth it.

@cassie2and2

sweetbellyhigh. After watching the Panorama programme and Virginias admission to being abused from the age of seven (horrifying) and during most of her life I find it hard not to think she is more than a bit street wise, and, when arriving at age 17 to an obviously very rich persons residence where he is laid on a massage table naked she knows very well what is expected. She also says she went to Epsteins homes, some of which she needed to go on his private jet to get to, She admits to having sex with his friends, these are the other people I meant when I said why hadn't she accused them along with P A. Also it seems she jumped on the band wagon of Epstein conviction , receiving $16000 from a newspaper for her story and later accusing Maxwell and P A, Maxwell has since been found guilty and P A ???? Whatever, I am entitled to my opinion of Virginia as you are to yours. I appreciate going to court is not any easy option but perhaps the incentive is worth it.

I tried to read your post but couldn't get past your comment "she admits". She has nothing to admit. She has done nothing wrong. She is not on trial.

Again with the victim blaming

Look, if you truly believe this maybe contact the prosecutors and alert them to your findings?

Another idea would be to school up on abuse, trafficking, legal process, misogyny and victim blaming.

@DisforDarkChocolate

This is true, but by this stage his lack of judgment was all too apparent to anyone with more than a neuron or two in their heads.

His "roving trade ambassador" role basically turned out to be one long jolly for him at taxpayers expense and making personal profits which have long since been frittered away. As a pointed example, he brokered a deal between a Greek water company, the Kazakh government (very corrupt) and a Swiss bank for a £385million contract - and he would have taken £3.85 million commission. I'm struggling to see why the UK taxpayer should be funding him for this and it's one of many, many examples.

Pitch@Palace just turned out to be embarrassingly more of the same. Once it was established he started jaunting around the world at the organisations expense, with the taxpayer footing his £250,000 security bill into the bargain.

Continuing with Pitch@Palace, the website proudly claimed to be associated with many big names such as the insurance giant AON. They demanded their name was removed from websites and so on and, mysteriously, all the other sponsors - mostly unheard of Asian tech firms - vanished too. But then he got a new, Chinese, sponsor and all seemed well until a bit of digging showed that some of the equipment this new company made had been used to pursue the Uighur community.

Lastly, Pitch@Palace's contract demanded that all startups they helped had to give a 2% equity stake to Pitch@Palace. Why ?

Going further back, in 2003 he spent £325,000 on flights at taxpayer expense, including using military aircraft to go to Scotland and play golf.

One of his friends is David Rowland (Tiny Rowland) who has some fairly murky finances. But he bailed out Sarah Ferguson to the tune of £40,000 and allowed Andrew to use his £40 million luxury jet when needed. Why ? What did Mr Rowland get in return ?

This list just goes on, and on...

I knew he was a twat, but not that much of a twat.

He's a Huge Twat and we're all better off for the fact that now, even his own mother agrees.

I just heard on the news the City of York Council are starting a campaign to remove their city from his title as it is bringing the city into disrepute.

I tried to read your post but couldn't get past your comment "she admits". She has nothing to admit. She has done nothing wrong. She is not on trial

She might as well be on trial! He side of the story will be heard and judged by the jury. Is it True or false? She will be cross examined by the defence just as the odious P Andrew will be cross examined by the prosecution.

@Viviennemary

I just heard on the news the City of York Council are starting a campaign to remove their city from his title as it is bringing the city into disrepute.

What bollocks, are they mad?

[quote DeliriaSkibbly]@AcrossthePond55

I agree with most of your post, but in regard to your claim that the US does not "selectively protect its own vs citizens of other countries' I have two words to say to you:

Anne Sacoolas.[/quote]
The Anne Sacoolas situation can be laid directly at the feet of the Donald Trump Administration and his Dept of Justice. With any other administration she would have been extradited, assuming there is nothing 'top secret' about her that we don't know about.

She was not a case of the US Govt 'protecting' a US citizen. At least not in the way I believe you mean. She was a case of Donald Trump trying to stay popular and make points with his 'Cult members'. And to flex his (non-existent) muscles with the UK to 'prove who was 'boss'.

@cassie2and2

In the photo of the two of them with arms around each others waist, she looks like the cat that has the cream, definately no look of a rabbit caught in the head lights. She was seventeen, not exactly a naive age in this day and time. I dont condone P A but am wondering if all these accusations in court are happening with the other men she says have taken advantage of her

So is grooming ok then or that only when the person doing the grooming is a millionaire?

@cassie2and2

sweetbellyhigh. After watching the Panorama programme and Virginias admission to being abused from the age of seven (horrifying) and during most of her life I find it hard not to think she is more than a bit street wise, and, when arriving at age 17 to an obviously very rich persons residence where he is laid on a massage table naked she knows very well what is expected. She also says she went to Epsteins homes, some of which she needed to go on his private jet to get to, She admits to having sex with his friends, these are the other people I meant when I said why hadn't she accused them along with P A. Also it seems she jumped on the band wagon of Epstein conviction , receiving $16000 from a newspaper for her story and later accusing Maxwell and P A, Maxwell has since been found guilty and P A ???? Whatever, I am entitled to my opinion of Virginia as you are to yours. I appreciate going to court is not any easy option but perhaps the incentive is worth it.

Oh poor little Epstein, some of his victims made some money from selling their stories.

@NinaDefoe

I tried to read your post but couldn't get past your comment "she admits". She has nothing to admit. She has done nothing wrong. She is not on trial

She might as well be on trial! He side of the story will be heard and judged by the jury. Is it True or false? She will be cross examined by the defence just as the odious P Andrew will be cross examined by the prosecution.

Yea I understand court process. Indeed I have been cross examined as a witness in an abuse case.

But no she is not on trial.

The key facts here are that even without a conviction or award Andrew has shown himself to have no judgement. He knowingly stayed with a convicted paedophile, and did so publicly. At this point he should have been removed from public life. The Queen is years too late here.

Agree 100%, @DisforDarkChocolate.

I recall reading that the paparazzi who followed Epstein and Andrew through NYC to get that famous shot of the two of them walking together had searched NYC for him for a few days and when they found him at Epstein's place he was preceded out the door by his security detail, who accompanied the pair on their stroll.

The Queen has presided over a disaster that has been obvious to almost everyone for many years.

@caringcarer

He has lost HRH title and military titles and all patronages. He keeps Prince Andrew and Duke of York. He is a jerk but the girl was 17 so not underaged in UK and she looks happy enough to be stood next to him in that photo. I feel sorry for his 2 daughters, how embarrassing to have a Dad like Andrew. Sorry for the Queen who really does not deserve Andrew or Harry and their antics.

There are pictures of children who have died through abuse where they’re sitting with their parents smiling.

You do realise smiling is a controllable action. You can smile for a photo while being unhappy or even abused. And also abuse and taking advantage of vulnerable people isn’t dependent on those people always realising they’re being abused. Some men get into relationships with young teens and those teens might be happy. ‘Ooh an older man is taking an interest in me, it’s because I’m mature. He really sees something in me, and he even has a job to take me places like a proper boyfriend. I know he’s 26 and I’m only 15 but we have a proper connection.’

It doesn’t mean it’s right. It just means the man has chosen a victim who might not realise they’re being victimised or might be affected by past experiences in such a way that they’ll try to smile through it/act like nothing’s wrong.

And @Kanaloa, that is why there will never be criminal charges and why it's always possible that she will not win a civil case against the Duke.

Because if the had been groomed that far by JE/GM, then she would have presented that smiling face to him and he would have had no reason to suspect that she was anything other than happy to be there

Was he gross and sleazy with no judgement? Of course, and I'm very glad to see him out of public like. But it's not guaranteed he'll be found liable.

I didn’t say he was going to be found liable. I was just responding to the bizarre idea that you can judge how the situation was by the fact she looked happy in a photo. Means absolutely nothing.

And regardless of whether he thought she was happy to be there, the onus isn’t on the victim to express their unhappiness at being groomed, it’s on a grown man (who has had some of the world’s finest education and presumably isn’t a complete idiot) to choose not to victimise teenagers. Otherwise he could merrily shag his way through an entire sixth form college and say ‘well they seemed pretty happy about it so why does it matter?’