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
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

999 replies

churchandstate · 03/12/2019 07:05

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
lyralalala · 03/12/2019 08:52

I hold no brief for PA whatsoever, but in the interests of accuracy I don't think anyone suggests that he "regularly" consorted with him after the conviction; ; it was one occasion.

I think it would be interesting for anyone having a rummage through his emails and the likes because his comment he made was that he went to New York to tell Epstein it would be "inappropriate for them to be seen together" not actually that it would be inappropriate for them to be in contact.

StKnickerloss · 03/12/2019 08:52

This reply has been deleted

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

Original poster
churchandstate · 03/12/2019 08:52

SerendipityJane

In my opinion, it will be part of their brief that they don’t speak about their protectees. Whether that includes any legal protection I don’t know, but unless this comes to trial my expectation is that they won’t comment.

OP posts:
SchadenfreudePersonified · 03/12/2019 08:53

I’m not sure she needs to justify it beyond that - it doesn’t change what PA did or didn’t do.

Exactly - she does not need to justify herself.

I believe her. I think he is appalling. He has daughters - how would he feel if one of them had been handed round a bunch of entitled men to be used, and dumped like rubbish?

He should be ashamed, but he does not know the meaning of the word.

And I agree with ChurchandState
if it is true (and I believe it is) his moral culpability is now the issue, for doing this and then lying about it.

Arrogant and entitled.

Brimful · 03/12/2019 08:54

if it were with someone that wasn't rich and famous she'd have moved on by now

My abuser was most definitely not rich or famous; funnily enough it didn't help me 'move on'. What a dumb thing to think.

ballsdeep · 03/12/2019 08:54

At 17 I can imagine she was disgusted to have to sleep with a sweaty middle aged man who was a member of the Royal family. She'd been a sued from a young age. I completely believe her. PA is a smarmy disgusting man who knew exactly what he was doing. I don't think you'd get on or know of a plane full of young girls called the lolita express and not question it.
I feel sorry for her and I feel sorry for his daughters, especially the one who is getting married. I don't know how he will be able to walk her down the aisle on national TV

IHateBlueLights · 03/12/2019 08:54

She doesn’t overstate what happened. She talks convincingly about enough detail without over-embellishment.

I thought the exact opposite.

But I'm a drama teacher and I know coaching when I see it.

lynsey91 · 03/12/2019 08:55

I didn't believe her. I don't think she came across very well at all. She is just after money

Original poster
churchandstate · 03/12/2019 08:55

IHateBlueLights

I’m sure she has been coached. Just like I am sure PA has received extensive media training. I still believe her.

OP posts:
fikel · 03/12/2019 08:56

Believe all the way!! It’s time the royal family were abolished

crossandperplexed · 03/12/2019 08:56

Her father was interviewed by Piers Morgan this morning. I didn't see all of it, but I don't think he was asked anything about her assertion that she had been abused and illtreated for years at home.

Butchyrestingface · 03/12/2019 08:57

It’s not her interview that convinced me - it was his!

I had zero thoughts as to his innocence or guilt until he opened his big, fat, stupid mouth and then BINGO! - I was sold! I knew he did it.

Just proves the old adage about it being preferable to keep your mouth shut and only have people suspect that you’re guilty, rather than open it and remove all doubt. 🙄

Passthecherrycoke · 03/12/2019 08:57

@newdeer that’s a brilliant post and I completely agree. I think underneath it all is the fact that she didn’t have the emotional maturity to realise she was being trafficked, as well as it being a different time where society didn’t recognise that (and the early 2000s were rather hedonistic too)

I actually think she thought it all quite fun at the time and convinced herself the Sex was a price to pay for the jet set lifestyle. Can you imagine, a girl from her background at 17 attending Naomi Campbell’s party on a yacht in st tropez?

I imagine it’s only with hindsight and the more recent #metoo revelations that she’s realised how wrong it is.
And I suspect, it’s the way she’s talking about how horrified and scared she was that’s coming across as false. It doesn’t mean it didn’t all happen, but I don’t think that society at this stage can handle her saying- I thought it was great at the time but it was so wrong.

We’re a society who is only just accepting that rape victims shouldn’t be black and blue from fighting back.

Burlea · 03/12/2019 09:00

I don't know if it's already been mentioned on here, but someone was on the radio a few weeks ago and he stated that every member of the royal family have detailed diaries, even for their private time. So if PA was in pizza express etc he would be able to provide that information so my argument is if he is innocent why has he not shown these records.

Passthecherrycoke · 03/12/2019 09:00

By the way from what she said her dad got her a job at mar-a-logo, as he worked there. He had nothing to do with getting her a job with Epstein, she was approached by Maxwell

She simply said she found him afterwards and told him about it

Original poster
churchandstate · 03/12/2019 09:00

Well, it’s the essence of exploitation, isn’t it? Target someone who is so young and naive, or whose expectations of how they ought to be treated are so low, that they can’t see that what is happening to them is wrong, then use their compliance as evidence that what you were doing wasn’t wrong. I don’t give a shit if a 17 year old, trafficked rape victim went ‘willingly’ to bed with a sweaty, 40 year old prince or not - if the allegation is true, he knew it was wrong, and that is the issue here.

OP posts:
YouSawThePlans · 03/12/2019 09:01

She is just after money
That doesn't make sense. As PPs have pointed out on this thread, having sex with someone who was trafficked wasn't a crime in the UK then and she also wasn't underage in the UK. There's no reason for PA to pay her.
If it were about money, she would have focused on one of the high-profile, wealthy Americans who were involved.

Passthecherrycoke · 03/12/2019 09:01

To people saying royal diaries and plane records should be released- why? To whom? PA is not being investigated for anything.

LaurieMarlow · 03/12/2019 09:01

But I'm a drama teacher and I know coaching when I see it.

Jesus Hmm

Gosh, perhaps they should have jury’s full of drama teachers. Has no one ever thought of that?

greenlynx · 03/12/2019 09:01

I do believe her . She might get some details wrong but I do believe the whole picture. Her claims are supported by different documents. She mentioned her Dad but he probably was glad to get rid of her when she was 17 , she wasn’t exactly from the nice loving family. JE was deliberately seeking that kind of girls from unstable background.
PA knew what kind of person JE was, he just didn’t consider his behavior immoral. There were lots of very young girls around. What did he think it was - after school youth club?
I don’t think he was involved in sex trafficking though. I’m sure PA just thought that he’s God’s gift and those young girls were voluntarily queuing to have sex with him. He doesn’t remember VR, of course, there far too many.

artisanparsnips · 03/12/2019 09:03

Quite apart from whether you believe her or not, the programme also demolished a whole tonne of PA's explanations, so it's pretty clear that he was not telling the whole truth (or indeed any of the truth). That to me was far more damning.

Butchyrestingface · 03/12/2019 09:03

I imagine it’s only with hindsight and the more recent #metoo revelations that she’s realised how wrong it is.

She made the allegations long before the #metoo era kicked off.

TatianaLarina · 03/12/2019 09:03

Read an interesting piece about Ghislaine by Petronella Wyatt who knew her. Said that G was v close to her father and that she was used to being the golden girl - superich and powerful father, went to Oxford, intellectual It girl, socialite. And then he died and was disgraced and it was all over.

She eventually went to live in the US. JE was like a father replacement - provided her with the lifestyle she had had with her dad. And similarly dodgy.

LolaSmiles · 03/12/2019 09:04

We make assessments based on probability all the time - innocent until proven guilty is the standard for conviction in court, not likelihood that something actually happened
That's my feeling on it.

What's more likely:
A) A man with money and status, hung around with a convicted sex offender AFTER conviction, stayed in the sex offender's house, saw teenage girls etc, has been photographed at parties with teenage girls and couldn't possibly have slept with these girls because he "doesn't recall it" and goes on to nagically have amnesia about whether he did or didn't sleep with teen girls whilst being absolutely being able to "recall" details of a pizza in average chain restaurant.

B) Women who had an abusive childhood and was subsequently groomed by known sex offender can identify in detail a series of events surrounding journeys around the world and being coerced into sex with older men.

I entirely understand his friendship with Epstein PRIOR to the conviction because absuser are clever and can hide in plain sight and it's really common to hear "I'm surprised because he seemed like such a normal/nice guy". To remain friends AFTER a conviction for sexual offences is utterly inexcusable and brings his own actions into question

SerendipityJane · 03/12/2019 09:05

In my opinion, it will be part of their brief that they don’t speak about their protectees. Whether that includes any legal protection I don’t know, but unless this comes to trial my expectation is that they won’t comment.

If that is the case, then the Royal Family can jolly well pay for their own paid goons to protect them. It's bad enough we have to pay for these spongers anyway, but the thought that the taxpayer has effectively been subsidising PA in his disgusting activities should be the final straw for the whole nation.

Is the the British or Saudi royal family for fucks sake ?