To think Prince Andrew needs to stop being bewildered and...

[chaoticisatroll55]

get himself over to the States to account for his actions and to give evidence for those poor victims of abuse. He's a bloody disgrace.

It wasn’t “different times”. It was this century not the 1970s!

Different times back then

Actually yes, in the court of public opinion, men were given more leeway back then. Luckily in the actual court sex trafficking women was considered illegal.

@Callipygion

On a different tack - I think the Americans getting on their high horse about this is a bit ironic given their stance on the woman who mowed down UK citizen Harry Dunn.

I agree with this.

Also, aren't there people who were closer to Epstein & likely knew more?

We'll let them have Randy Andy in exchange for Anne Sacoolas.

Keeping that woman shielded is a fucking moral disgrace.

And the Queen needs to do the right thing here, favourite son or not.

@cabbageking

She was under the legal age in the USA.

Wasnt it in England?

It surely has nothing to do with age. If a woman is raped (which is what this was - watch the Netflix doc) then we don’t say oh well she was over the age of consent. Of course children were involved too. He must certainly face the music but I suspect he won’t.

The Queen is foolish not to make him face the music- the royal family are living on borrowed time anyway, this will only hasten their demise.

Mehmen you're so wrong.

I'm slightly younger than P Andrew and my husband is slightly older. It's never been normal to do the things he did to very young women/girls. It was illegal and he should be held accountable. To use the "it's was a different time" excuse is disgraceful.

'different times' @Mehmen ?

When was child rape legal?

Or trafficking legal?

Not for quite a while I think?

He needs to face the consequences of his actions.

I hope Ghislaine sings like a bloody canary.

I have no high opinion of or liking for Prince Andrew but this woman killed a teenage boy, failed to stop, then used diplomatic immunity to escape all charges. So the USA can fuck off now they want someone who is (presumably) immune from having to go and answer their charges.

You've said it so much better than I could @BlessYourCottonSocks

We can do a trade - send him over if the USA send over Anne Sacoolas. Otherwise (as vile as he is and I am in no way a royalist) I don’t see why the UK should comply with any extradition request from the USA.

Just saw others already raised AS!

I have no high opinion of or liking for Prince Andrew but this woman killed a teenage boy, failed to stop, then used diplomatic immunity to escape all charges. So the USA can fuck off now they want someone who is (presumably) immune from having to go and answer their charges.

I agree. I also agree that if PA was innocent, he would absolutely be doing everything he could to assist the FBI / other authorities to bring the guilty to justice. He's an embarrassment to the Royal Family & to the country. The so called "Special Relationship" with the USA, only ever worked one way, it's no surprise that this is happening now.

Anyone who thinks that the USA is going to be of any assistance to the UK after Brexit is sadly deluded. America serves America. Specifically, the rich. The poor & the rest of the world are "Other".

I agree he's an odious creep. But the American lawyers are worse. They are out for money not justice. And prepared to lie for attention.

If, and it is if, he had sex with the girl - and I'm not convinced he did - she was over the age of consent.

At that time women were falling over themselves to have him. He had no need to coerce or have a friend fix him up with a girl.

So many lies told by so many people I doubt the truth will ever be known.

She was under the legal age in the USA.

Not in New York, the age of consent is 17 there. (And 16 in the U.K.)

If, and it is if, he had sex with the girl - and I'm not convinced he did - she was over the age of consent.

Which is meaningless if she was trafficked.

Again.

The tone of some posters - whether intentional or not - is worryingly reminiscent of the apologists for abusers and rapists.

He isn't bewildered at all
He chose to stay friends with a known paedophile. Probably because this allowed him access to young girls. Nothing confusing about it

I'm shocked at some posters on here justifying why he shouldn't be called to account. Prince Andrew as useless as he is I'm in a position of power. The girls he was having sex with on that island had been trafficked and groomed. I hope none of these posters have daughters. If so...well you wouldn't mind that happening to them then?

powerful men have always fucked vulnerable women/children and lied about it. He's repulsive.
The sad thing is that I now find the queen a grotesque peadophile apologist. Revolting woman.

At that time women were falling over themselves to have him. He had no need to coerce or have a friend fix him up with a girl.

Rape is not about sexual desire, it is about power and domination. It is the high of feeling powerful that is sought. The possibility of consensual sex doesn't stop men raping.

You just sound like a garden variety rape apologist spouting the usual ignorant nonsense.

Can you normally be seen telling women their husband "would not have to rape them if only they'd better met his needs"? Because that's where your logic leads.

There are many cases of huge and systematic abuse where we still pander to the people who turned a blind eye to it, by saying that it was “a sophisticated operation”. Epstein’s operation was certainly expensive. But was it sophisticated? How sophisticated is it really when your private Caribbean property is known locally as “Paedophile Island”?

It makes me cringe when people say “different times” etc. I was talking to my Dad about all the celebrity going’s on In the 70s & 80s (Operation Yewtree type stuff) recently. He made a good point that he was of the same age as the men (inc Prince Andrew) and he and pretty much every man he knew, understood than even flirting with a teenager was wrong & repulsive - so why didn’t they? Either they didn’t care or were attracted to children.

Until there is plausible evidence that he broke the law then you’re only speculating on what MAY have happened

Wasn't there some money loaned to Sarah Ferguson? She loves rich people and being friendly with a billionaire was prob a great thing. Not now of course. But he will never go to the US. Prob a talk with the FBI at Windsor Castle with his lawyer present will be as good as it gets unless Maxwell has a journal/diary and/Or some photo's.

Sorry @Littlecaf but I disagree. Letching after teenage girls was pretty mainstream in the 70s and early 80s. We were considered fair game. Of course many people knew that it wasnt really ok but it was widely tolerated and even celebrated in some quarters. It certainly wasnt hidden and if something did hit the headlines it was all "a bit of fun" or "lucky bastard" or the girls were held accountable for "leading him on".

I'm not saying this to defend Andrew but just because I think people need to realise how far