VG/Prince Andrew - to say I wasn’t sure before but I believe her

[churchandstate]

I posted in a thread after the Prince Andrew interview, and although I didn’t believe him about everything he said, I wasn’t wholly convinced at that time that he was lying about sleeping with young girls, about seeing things in Epstein’s houses that should have repelled him, about having sex with Virginia Roberts in particular. I just didn’t think there was certainty to be had.

I am convinced now. I believed every word she was allowed to say last night and I am only sad they didn’t give her more air time. Prince Andrew has very serious questions to answer.

The thing is though @Ronald, with the greatest of respect, who cares what you think? You are clearly unaware of a lot of the information already in the public domain, let alone what hasn’t been released

To: RonaldMcDonald
It certainly seems that Epstein was involved in the trafficking of young women, some of whom were under age, for prostitution and used his besotted 'girlfriend' (GM) to facilitate this.

There's no evidence that any of Epstein's guests knew the women at his house parties were coerced. I think you'd have to actually live with someone like him, not just occasionally stay for a short while, to know that sort of detail. He would have kept any dodgy stuff well under wraps. They probably thought he just hired women from an agency including a few regulars whom he knew well.

Unfortunately that's how it goes in rich and influential circles. Epstein entertained loads of prominent people from all walks of life - politics, business and, particularly, scientific research which was a special interest of his. Not forgetting a British royal of course - as if we could! I wish I could, frankly, he was relatively small fry, if he hadn't been the queen's son nobody would even notice his name amongst all those big fish.

Do we believe that all these men VR named knew she was trafficked Had any idea at all? Does that matter? Does there need to be intent or knowledge in the crime of rape?

I don’t know how the law is framed in the US. But in the U.K. if you have sex with a trafficked prostitute it’s an offence regardless of whether you knew.

Can we accept that maybe Epstein hired a series of women who provided massage services - their choice to offer anything else was just that. He and they may very well have been aware of the potential other real deal but does it make them trafficked or escorts? Surely trafficked holds some element of against your will or by coercion I mean this seriously

Why would we accept that when the women say otherwise? Coercion is exactly the case.

Unless you’re the kind of woman who slavishly believes rich men just because...

@poppycity

"It is always disheartening to see people use the innocent until proven guilty to protect men, and yet so easily accuse vulnerable girls of the guilty action of lying. "

Indeed. The child grooming in Rochdale and many other cities went on for years as the girls were deemed "trash" and "liars" amongst a background of victim blaming.

Don't people understand anything about abuse and coercion.

I don't see any difference between this and Rotherham TBH. The only difference is that JE was a billionaire and can buy his innocence off to a degree. Both situations groomed vulnerable girls to exploit for sex. One used cheap booze and intimidation whereas the other used fancy planes and apartments with manipulation. Both as as disgusting as each other but there is really no difference between the 2 IMO.

@Passthecherrycoke I hear ya.

I’d quite like to see the two photos on the same reel that were withheld from the public domain to protect PA’s privacy. Her camera. Where is she getting photos that may threaten his privacy if something hasn’t happened and if, in fact, he hasn’t even met her?

"just straight sex"

It's a man putting his erect penis into a woman's vagina who is being abused, coerced and was trafficked by a paedophile in order to satisfy rich men's penises.

Sorry girl's vagina.

17 is a child..

YANBU

It was interesting the way they edited it- with VR talking about an event on a particular date, then it cut back to the PA interview where he was in total denying about being in a particular place at a certain time, denying any knowledge whatsoever about VR

If it wasn't such a serious subject matter, it would almost be comedy in how stupid it made him look

I thought the program last night tied lots of strands to the story together nicely, with timelines etc. DH watched it and now vaguely gets what it's all about

Also, I thought VR came across as very plausible and believable

I've seen comments previously with people saying- oh but she was 17, not below the age of consent etc

That illustrates how some just don't get it- these girls were trafficked around the world to basically be used as sex objects.

VR didn't have to say a great deal about her background or family situation growing up...you could tell that as a 17 year old she was very vulnerable and they exploited that- that is, GM & JE...and by extension all those who came to interact with her including PA.

Ghislaine Maxwell came across as one thoroughly unpleasant woman

If my Child was jetsetting all over the world with a rich man, it would raise massive red flags.
Massage means bodily contact, your child has no qualifications to do this. Red flag.
Absolutely - but it's strange that a grown, adult man with teenage children of his own didn't think that before he fucked her isn't it?

There are so many shades of gray.
No there aren't.

I can believe that some of these men thought they were sleeping with escorts. Sordid and questionable yes, knowing the full background of trafficking possibly not. However, Virginia looked young. In the photo at Naomi Campbell’s party she looked like a child. So, at best we’ve got ‘young looking escort’ Many of those men must have turned a blind eye to some of the darker possibilities. It disgusts me.

Indeed. The child grooming in Rochdale and many other cities went on for years as the girls were deemed "trash" and "liars" amongst a background of victim blaming.
Yes

The following award winning article in the Miami Herald, reveals how Epstein got away with it back in 2007, only served 13 months in prison, during which time he was let out to "work" frequently.
PA must have known that Epstein was a convicted sex offender.

"As a result, neither the victims — nor even the judge — would know how many girls Epstein allegedly sexually abused between 2001 and 2005, when his underage sex activities were first uncovered by police. Police referred the case to the FBI a year later, when they began to suspect that their investigation was being undermined by the Palm Beach State Attorney’s Office."
"“Jeffrey preyed on girls who were in a bad way, girls who were basically homeless. He went after girls who he thought no one would listen to and he was right,’’ said Courtney Wild, who was 14 when she met Epstein."

www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html

@mummmy2017 I find some of your posts truly disturbing. Are you being goady? Or do you really not understand how grooming, coercion and trafficking work? If it’s the former then Gilead is that way➡️. If it’s the latter, then please do read through what other pp’s have posted around the process of grooming and trafficking the already vulnerable- Virginia did not have s hand in her victimisation. The blame lies squarely with those who abused her. And it looks like PA was complicit.

Powerful article andy

ChristmasAngst Tue 03-Dec-19 15:05:00
I don't see any difference between this and Rotherham TBH. The only difference is that JE was a billionaire and can buy his innocence off to a degree. Both situations groomed vulnerable girls to exploit for sex. One used cheap booze and intimidation whereas the other used fancy planes and apartments with manipulation. Both as as disgusting as each other but there is really no difference between the 2 IMO.
........
I think I'd know the difference if I was a teenage girl. If I was well dressed, looked after, taken to interesting places, had money in my pocket and a decent standard of living even if I was expected to sleep with men sometimes, that would be quite different to being drugged and put out to nasty, smelly men in unpleasant surroundings with little financial reward at the end of it - plus the strong possibility of disease (even pregnancy, one of those poor Rotherham girls had a baby).

Both scenarios are sordid but one is far more unpleasant than the other.

@Bluerussian

It's still coercion and abuse, albeit with nicer furnishings.

What next, alter boys were somehow complicit because the priest supplied tea and cake.

Not on MN - which reminds us in real life there are women that will continue to shit on other women at the first opportunity

You’re assuming that these posters are female though. There are a few names on here that hear the MAN klaxon and assemble, because at no point must we ever discuss The Wrongs Men Do without a group arriving to victim blame.

Although, sticking up for a man who had sex with a child sex trafficking victim is a new low.

+@AngelsSins*

"Oh yes you’re absolutely right. When your very rich middle aged male friend shows up with an unrelated teenage girl, you don’t ask questions do you? You don’t wonder who the fuck she is, why she’s there or if your mate is a pervert. No, no, instead you make sure you get a chance to put your own penis in her."

Not all men are perverts. Not all rich men are perverts. I'm not aware of knowing any and know loads of men who are very respectful towards women. You sound so utterly cycnical.

I don't think my first thought would be whether my friend is a pervert. Because they are my friend that probably would not cross my mind unless I heard them say something offensive about girls/women or saw them do something unacceptable like leering or leching over them.

If you have 6 homes as Ghislaine Maxwell says JE has, then obviously he would have staff in those houses and I would probably just assume they are employees, especially if I was brought up in homes surrounded by staff for every need as PA is.

I may, however, think to ask them "and what do you do here?" in polite conversation but would otherwise think they dealt with admin or were an accountant, cook, cleaner, housemaid, driver or whatever (unless I saw something untoward). If they said they were a masseuse I would actually think they were........a masseuse. I wouldn't think of a masseuse who provided other services.

I don't know if we'll ever know whether JE offered the 17 year old to PA. This is why I said in my first post that I felt VR didn't say enough in the interiew. If she'd just said what the conversation starter was for her to go from being on the landing of GM's home to ending up in a bedroom it would have helped. Somebody must have said something. Even hearing that one line would give us an idea of who knew what would take place so who may have been complicit in abuse.

Bluerussian

I think I'd know the difference if I was a teenage girl. If I was well dressed, looked after, taken to interesting places, had money in my pocket and a decent standard of living even if I was expected to sleep with men sometimes, that would be quite different to being drugged and put out to nasty, smelly men in unpleasant surroundings with little financial reward at the end of it - plus the strong possibility of disease (even pregnancy, one of those poor Rotherham girls had a baby).

Are you real? Are you actually a real person who thinks being raped in a mansion is much better than being raped in a council flat? That being raped by rich men is better than being raped by poor men? Do you think the victims of Epstein should be grateful for 'being taken to interesting places' before being pimped out to his cronies? Jesus Christ.

You’re assuming that these posters are female though.

I am assuming that most posters on MN are women. With that in mind, it's simply not statistically believable that every such post is by a man.

The same way there are men who will happily shit on their fellow men, there are women that would do the same to other women. It's a little depressing as it's the same divide-and-conquer tactic used by a small elite over a huge underclass since recorded history.

@Bluerussian Do you have children? If so would you be happy if they were raped as long as their rapist was rich and had a luxury home?

Internalised misogyny. To me its more depressing that people think PA is the real victim.

There is something warped in the minds of people who think that what happened is ok because the girls flew in private jets, were given cash and fed well etc. These posters are pandering to the idea that the rich can do what they like and that they are not subject to the same rules as others (the not rich). Vulnerable young girls are not a rich person's plaything and having $$$ does not mean that you live by a different moral code.