To ask why it seems quiet on here regarding Prince Andrew and underage sex slave claims?

[TestNamePleaseIgnore]

Not much discussion going on or have I missed a thread?

After all, that's what happens at the kind of parties PA goes to, right? I would have no idea. Which is why I am not making comments such as Just because he was pictured with a sex offender and one of the girls said sex offender trafficked, doesn't mean he got his dick wet.

The lawyer sounds like a slimey leech, I don't believe a word he says.

You really have no idea about what happens at these parties, nomama? You honestly have no conclusions to draw about social gatherings where rich powerful men congregate along with partially clad women and girls who, not being movers and shakers themselves, would otherwise not be in the same circles as them? What on earth do you think would go on there? A nice little game of bridge? Use the common sense you were born with, ffs.

Good article about PA here:

www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/08/prince-andrew-201108

I think it's clear that his greed overrides his judgement when he accepts $5 million more than the asking price - from a dodgy politician's SIL - for a house that had been on the market for ever.

I totally agree with your last post.

What a massive power imbalance there would have been.

Reading that older vanity fair article makes me sick.

It was obvious what he was up to for a long time aided by maxwell.

Cruikshank, I am using the common sense I was born with.

a) the picture we have been show the girl was fully clothed - and cropped to make it look as though they were alone.
b) she has said she attended parties with him present and did not have sex with him
c) not all parties were sex parties
d) I do not know what happened and so am not going to speculate wildly based on prurient nosiness

Whatever else any of the people here have been found guilty of, in this instance there is no litigation or accusation against him. If/when there is there will be an investigation - regardless of what the cover up brigade suggest will happen/is happening.

I will continue to despise the trial by social media that happens so much these days. The trial by media that is happening here, despite the protests of those making unfounded claims and insinuations.

Trial by media = nonsense

Yes.

However, as a minimum, the whole mess just highlights how silly and irrelevant a royal family are to modern society.

(Not forgetting there are probably actual victims in this sordid tale).

Whatever the rights and wrongs of this ongoing issue, it's made me take a closer look at some background information on this man that is grounded in fact. I don't read tabloids or magazines so miss this sort of coverage. I'm referring to an article here from 2011 regarding the sale of the Yorks former home, www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056398/Prince-Andrew-told-Sunninghill-Park-order.html where it appears it was sold for millions over the asking price, despite there being no other offers!

And a reference from Wikipedia:
On 24 February 2009, the Daily Mail newspaper reported that the house has been allowed to fall into an increasingly derelict state.[10] In July 2009, Bracknell Forest Borough Council were said to be considering seizing the property under the Housing Act 2004 and using it as a homeless shelter, following several reported break-ins.[11]

That is shocking.

I feel genuinely sorry for our Queen.

Please don't feel sorry for the queen. Feel sorry for her subjects, in particular the underprivileged ones.

I certainly don't feel sorry for the Queen or for any other royal. Let's face it they love their priviledged position. And would be dragged away kicking and screaming if anybody dared to suggest a republic. They need us more than we need them. Can't stand them tbh.

I take your point. It's all very thought provoking. Nothing piques my righteous indignation like a double standard. Wish I could have ten minutes with an accountant that serve these people

Trial by media = nonsense

Just as well I am bemoaning trial by social media then

And I was thinking of victims. All victims.

I have said here and will repeat ad nauseum, when newspapers fan the flames of 'debates' like this, post cropped pictures, give partial information, blatantly lie, use emotive big banner headlines, the only people who really lose out are the real victims. Whether they may be male or female, old, young, black, white, hetero or homo, shite like this does them no favours whatsoever.

Prurient conjecture helps no one.

Well I will repeat 'ad nauseum' - that that photo (cropped or group), with Prince Andrew's hand around the girl's bare waist is just plain wrong!

From what I can make out, Ghislain Maxwell was a former girlfriend of Jeffrey Epstein and wanted to marry him. Instead she holds wild parties and seeks out young girls to basically groom them to entertain guests at those parties. Presumably she does this to supplement her (in terms of the billionaire company she mixes with) meagre income left to her by her father.

Can you imagine even doing that? Providing young girls to have sex with the man you wanted to marry? Apparantly Epstein is quite a retiring individual compared to her and the parties she organises for other people.

As far as I can tell also, Epstein is a genuine mathematical and financial genius who deals with an elite level of high net worth individuals and controls their entire funds. He does the work in his company himself - ie he has only support and admin staff and doesn't employ fund managers and so on. This work also seems to include a very high element of networking and contacts, whom he deals with personally. He also invests massively in charity and scientific research (some would argue that this is at least partly for the financial and social returns and relative immunity it provides). So presumably if he was jailed for any longer than 13 months, not only would many billionaires find their finances in disarray, it might also possibly have a negative effect on financial markets.

All very secretive, controlled by a very small number of people - you can imagine how easy it would be to lure someone with as bad judgment as PA into this scene and how his contacts and title might be useful.

Inkanta look at the photo again, her waist was not bare, there is about 1 inch gap between her top and shorts - not exactly nude. That is the sort of overstated puff I mean. What happens when real evidence comes in?

What happens when a) she proves she is right? or b) he proves he is innocent?

What will all the prurient gossipers who got it wrong say then? Well I have never heard/read anyone apologise, has anyone else? It is also quite easy to find trials that have run into difficulties because public opinion has contaminated a jury pool - here and in the US.

It is because of that that I feel trial by social media is wrong!

The sad thing is that trial by judge, even by trial by jury, can easily be as effed up as trial by public opinion!

This girl won't win. There's just no way. Our society isn't set up so a girl from nowhere can win over a prince. There's a towering heap of slut shaming coming her way once this is all over.

That said, it's a civil suit against Epstein right? I'm not quite sure what can happen with Andrew. Could they make him stand trial?

Sadly, you may be right on both counts. Having done jury service I was gobsmacked by the prejudices and lack of ability to leave personal opinion behind and focus on the evidence. It was very, very uncomfortable. I almost voted NOT guilty to make up for the nastiness of other jurors.

You may also be right about what any of the women in this case will face. Whether during the trial when the US system allows hypothetical 'tales' to be told to illustrate the defence or out of court... I too can imagine a slagfest!

I don't know if his royal standing makes it impossible. The king of Spain's sister stood trial... different I know, but...

It's a civil action against the prosecutors who agreed what the women view as an overly lenient plea bargain with Epstein, I think.

Yes, its a civil action against the US authorities for allowing the plea bargain without consulting some of the victims, which is allegedly an infringement of the rights of US citizens, as enshrined in US law.

I have had another read round - there appear to be many more women who have come forward after that trial. Which may have some bearing on the case.

I haven't read any of this thread but would assume that, because this story is merely speculation and there hasn't been a court case proving any allegations, there is little point in persecuting the people concerned at this stage.

I literally have no idea why we still fund this family.

I have never heard one argument for them that cannot be upheld if you believe in equality.

The only hope is that this story ( and yes I believe her) brings them and their sneaky ways down.

Tbh I actually find Andrew's relationships with dodgy billionaires particularly those from Kazakhstan absolutely unacceptable. The purchase of his Southfork style mansion by some mate seemed very strange. Why did he even abandon it anyway? I think he needs to be stopped from having any kind public role. Apparently Charles is very keen on slimming down the royal family and Andrew is upset because he wants a role for his girls. I think this scandal shows the bigger a royal family the higher the chances of someone screwing up.
I read that he was accompanied to the Alps by 5 royal protection officers. What a disgusting waste of taxpayers money.