Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

To think that Buckingham Palace SHOULDN'T have named Prince Andrew's accuser?

218 replies

aermingers · 03/01/2015 23:39

I've just heard on the news that Buckingham Palace has named the person who has accused Prince Andrew of sex crimes against her. I can't find any confirmation online. But is it just me who thinks this is deeply wrong? Okay it may be technically legal because she's making the allegations in the US - but surely as potentially the victim of a sex crime they should have the decency not to name her? I'm really shocked, it just smacks of malice. And they can't even be certain she's not telling the truth.

OP posts:
georgedawes · 04/01/2015 00:10

They have named her in a statement tonight, presumably because of tomorrow's mail on Sunday story.

hellsbells99 · 04/01/2015 00:11

If he did have sex with her, she was 17 at the time. She was not underage in the countries named.

noblegiraffe · 04/01/2015 00:11

She seems to have sold her story to the mail so it doesn't seem anonymity concerns her. Also, the Palace appeared to be responding to specific questions about the woman named by the Mail.

HopeClearwater · 04/01/2015 00:12

Well it diverts us all away from his arms deals for the moment, doesn't it.

Icimoi · 04/01/2015 00:15

The Mail named her well before the palace did

littleducks · 04/01/2015 00:16

The BBC story days she waived her anononminity when she gave an interview in 2011 to the Mail on Sunday re Epstein. Perhaps she has done so again for another story tomorrow?

CaptainHolt · 04/01/2015 00:25

The Mail has a picture of Prince Andrew with his arm around her, which is now all over the BBC

Original poster
aermingers · 04/01/2015 00:33

Yep, just seen the Mail article. But I'm fairly certain that went up after the palace named her. This morning the mail carried a picture of the girl next to the story but didn't explicitly link her. So I'm wondering if the mail is just running the story because the palace has named her maybe?

OP posts:
Bulbasaur · 04/01/2015 00:34

"US citizen -name withdrawn- waived her anonymity in an interview with the Mail on Sunday in 2011, claiming she had been sexually exploited by Epstein as a teenager."

It sounds like she willingly gave up her own anonymity to do an interview.

I don't know much about the case though, so I could be wrong. If she gave up her "Jane Doe" status, I see no problem. Perhaps not wise, but ultimately her choice. If someone else outed her though, there needs to be consequences for those involved.

TheSpottedZebra · 04/01/2015 00:41

The case at the moment is of her, and Jane Doe 4, wanting to join the case of the two women contest g the plea bargain. I think. So its entirely plausible and justifiable that she went to press a few years ago, and now the cases are getting traction, is trying to follow up with civil proceedings.

There were 40 or more women in the case against JE.

PhaedraIsMyName · 04/01/2015 00:49

Who says Buck House released her name?

That photo and her name was on the front page of today's Telegraph.

EachandEveryone · 04/01/2015 00:49

It's all very sordid. I hadn't heard of it until I read The Guardian today. Says Robert Maxwells daughter was in on the "arrangements" as well. Vile.

PhaedraIsMyName · 04/01/2015 00:53

This article is from 2011. She waived anonymity in 2011 to give press interviews.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/8362690/Prince-Andrew.html

PhaedraIsMyName · 04/01/2015 00:57

I have reported this thread. It is completely inaccurate to say Buckingham Palace leaked her name.

Original poster
aermingers · 04/01/2015 01:00

Buckingham Palace DID name her. It was on the news! And it appears that although she may have been named in relation to the case before she hadn't in this country, been identified as Jane Doe 3 up until that point.

OP posts:
PhaedraIsMyName · 04/01/2015 01:08

Her name has been in the public domain since 2011.

Original poster
aermingers · 04/01/2015 01:11

Yes, but not linked to Jane Doe 3 in this particular case.

OP posts:
Nerf · 04/01/2015 01:13

Oh I think there are two and the one named in the statement had been named elsewhere and waived anonymity - I was reading something I by in the paper today which had about four Jane does, one of whole is this one. Not the same person, I think.

Nerf · 04/01/2015 01:16

So I think Phaedral is correct and there was no leak from B Palace.

HedgehogsDontBite · 04/01/2015 01:17

Yep, just seen the Mail article. But I'm fairly certain that went up after the palace named her.

It's a rehash of a Daily Mail article from 2011, which also named her. They've even used the same photos.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1361039/Prince-Andrew-girl-17-sex-offender-friend-flew-Britain-meet-him.html

PhaedraIsMyName · 04/01/2015 01:29

The Daily Mail named her in April 2014 as being the woman in the US law suit.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597308/The-bombshell-court-document-claims-Prince-Andrew-knew-billionaire-friends-abuse-age-girls.html

They also named her in an online article in December 2014.

ReallyTired · 04/01/2015 05:53

I feel that it is horrific how Epstein has been able to get off so lightly with grooming these girls to be prostitutes. Is it possible Andrew had a one night stand with a prostitute without realising the young pretty girl was paid by Epstein to have sex with her? Princes have had casual sex with pretty young girls since the dawn of time. I don't think that having sex with a seventeen year old is child prostitution. Even if prince Andrew had sex with Virginia, it does not make him a paedophile. There are different levels of repugdent sleezebags.

I feel desperately sorry for Virginia. She has clearly had a horrific childhood. I believe that Epstein did abuse her.

Happyringo · 04/01/2015 06:59

I thought she outed herself in the media?

QuinnTwinny · 04/01/2015 08:52

She sold her story, allowed her name to be published and posed for photos, Buck Palace didn't name her. YABU.

WilburIsSomePig · 04/01/2015 09:03

She sold her story and gave her name herself, she was not named by folks at the palace.

Sordid situation either way.