Page 10 | Ghislaine Maxwell.....

Livelovebehappy · 2021-12-30T07:20:36+00:00

Ghislaine Maxwell has been found guilty of grooming young girls for Jeffrey Epstein. Whilst she absolutely was guilty of aiding the abuse of these girls, shouldn’t there now be investigations into the high profile men who were clearly involved in the abuse? Clinton and Trump, as well as a Prince Andrew were clearly very close to Epstein, and there have been rumours of many other famous people being around at the time. I actually think Epstein’s death was suspect, and I wouldn’t be surprised if his death had been staged to protect some high profile men from being exposed. Maxwell has definitely taken the fall for a lot of people who should have been in the dock with her.

MorningStarling · 31/12/2021 16:20

Prince Andrew hasn't actually been convicted of anything yet though, has he? What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? As far as I'm aware there aren't even any criminal proceedings against him, just a civil case.

Roussette · 31/12/2021 16:23

You are not wrong there. He has to win this civil case though, doesn't he? Then who knows.

I cannot think of him as 'innocent' but he is. However, he is guilty of mixing with sex traffickers on a regular basis.

DeliriaSkibbly · 31/12/2021 16:33

@MorningStarling

Prince Andrew hasn't actually been convicted of anything yet though, has he? What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? As far as I'm aware there aren't even any criminal proceedings against him, just a civil case.

This is true. However, ask yourself why he claims he is co-operating fully with the FBI and yet won't speak to them. This is not how I would term 'co-operating fully' but perhaps it means something different in Royal circles. I agree he would be unwise to go to the US and talk to them there - but why doesn't he offer to be interviewed by them at, say, Balmoral or Sandringham?

There's an old saying that you judge a man by the company he keeps.

There's also an old saying that if you want to see the true measure of a man, see how he treats people in a lesser position than him.

On boths of those counts, Andrew falls down badly.

If I were him I would desperately want to clear my name in the court of public opinion. He's clearly persona non grata and unless he can clear his name I think he'll stay that way. He's too toxic even for the Royal Family to recover from otherwise. So why isn't he trying to clear his name ? Why is he resorting to obfuscation, delay and technicalities rather than just 'having it out' and proving Ms Giuffre wrong ?

OverByYer · 31/12/2021 16:48

Exactly if I was innocent, I would be doing all I could to show it and that would include co-operating with authorities so I could clear my name.

NannyOggsWhiskyStash · 31/12/2021 16:58

Well said! It's obscene how this family behaves, why oh why do people STILL fawn over them, they are parasites pure and simple.

Itsnotover · 31/12/2021 16:59

@OverByYer

Exactly if I was innocent, I would be doing all I could to show it and that would include co-operating with authorities so I could clear my name.

Why would think she innocent? The evidence against her is overwhelming is it not?

AuntMasha · 31/12/2021 17:05

@NannyOggsWhiskyStash

Well said! It's obscene how this family behaves, why oh why do people STILL fawn over them, they are parasites pure and simple.

I feel exactly the same way.

SpaceshiptoMars · 31/12/2021 17:05

I find Prince Charles' association with Jimmy Saville far more concerning than PA's exploits. Add that to the Peter Ball connection. PA is outer circle now, beyond Neptune. Charles will be King 'though.

NannyOggsWhiskyStash · 31/12/2021 17:11

This.

Itsnotover · 31/12/2021 17:15

@SpaceshiptoMars

I find Prince Charles' association with Jimmy Saville far more concerning than PA's exploits. Add that to the Peter Ball connection. PA is outer circle now, beyond Neptune. Charles will be King 'though.

I agree. He had access to the royal households without question and they must have known full well what JS was up to. It is indeed, very concerning.

diddl · 31/12/2021 17:18

"I agree. He had access to the royal households without question and they must have known full well what JS was up to. It is indeed, very concerning."

Why must the royals have known?

DeliriaSkibbly · 31/12/2021 17:27

@diddl

"I agree. He had access to the royal households without question and they must have known full well what JS was up to. It is indeed, very concerning."

Why must the royals have known?

They knew all about Lord Mountbatten and his taste for young men and young boys in uniforms.

But with regard to Savile, it seems to have been something of an open secret in the upper echelons of British society at the time.

People continually miss the point. Someone like Charles, who will be Monarch and head of state one day, and who we have no choice about, has to be whiter-than-white and SEEN to be whiter-than-white.

His associations - and, to be fair, those of a lot of the rest of his family - leave a great deal to be desired.

diddl · 31/12/2021 18:00

"But with regard to Savile, it seems to have been something of an open secret in the upper echelons of British society at the time."

I hadn't realised that.

"Someone like Charles, who will be Monarch and head of state one day, and who we have no choice about, has to be whiter-than-white and SEEN to be whiter-than-white."

I think that that ship probably sailed with the Diana debacle.

Roussette · 31/12/2021 18:02

Of course they knew about Mountbatten. In military circles his nickname was Lord MountBottom after all...
IN the RF's defence (and believe me I rarely do this), he was homosexual before it became legal in the UK so I suppose it was a best kept secret. I have no idea if what he did was between consenting adults though.
Saville and Peter Ball... no defence there. The RF have a history of cosying up to dodgy people.

DeliriaSkibbly · 31/12/2021 18:10

@Roussette

Of course they knew about Mountbatten. In military circles his nickname was Lord MountBottom after all... IN the RF's defence (and believe me I rarely do this), he was homosexual before it became legal in the UK so I suppose it was a best kept secret. I have no idea if what he did was between consenting adults though. Saville and Peter Ball... no defence there. The RF have a history of cosying up to dodgy people.

Being homosexual is perfectly normal and nothing to be criticised over, although I accept what you say as being quite true of course.

He liked young BOYS in uniforms. He was a paedophile too...

Roussette · 31/12/2021 18:16

No absolutely, no criticism there from me. I just didn't know whether he had a prediliction for young boys and groomed and took advantage of them. Obviously, I see yes. Appalling, and a huge cover up no doubt. The RF are very good at cover ups, that's for sure.

LeSquigh · 31/12/2021 18:34

@Giggorata

We had a girl named Ghislaine at my school. Everyone pronounced it as it is spelt, not Gillaine. Her parents, the teachers, she herself. (misses point of thread)

Hers is pronounced “Gill-en”

diddl · 31/12/2021 18:35

It's just a whole other world isn't it?

Marry someone suitable have kids to carry on "the line" then do what the hell you like with whomever you want.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 31/12/2021 19:00

Someone like Charles, who will be Monarch and head of state one day, and who we have no choice about, has to be whiter-than-white and SEEN to be whiter-than-white

Hence why so much effort goes into burnishing William and Kate's image; with Charles and Camilla almost beyond parody the next in line are the best chance the RF have got and they know it

SpaceshiptoMars · 31/12/2021 19:05

You'd think, with all the PR people and other staff that the RF employ, that someone there would be heading all these dodgy characters off at the pass. But no. Impaired judgement all around, and failure to do due diligence.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 31/12/2021 19:17

I take your point, Spaceship, but wouldn't be too quick to blame the PR people and advisers. The PR type are professional liars, just there to put a gloss on things, and the advisers can only do just that - advise

Granted they're useful whipping boys who the family can blame when it all goes wrong - note the number of staff some get through - but they're all in hock to a family who nobody can effectively control and who clearly view scrutiny as an impertinence

DeliriaSkibbly · 31/12/2021 19:20

@SpaceshiptoMars

You'd think, with all the PR people and other staff that the RF employ, that someone there would be heading all these dodgy characters off at the pass. But no. Impaired judgement all around, and failure to do due diligence.

Not really. They just don't CARE, because they don't need to. They know there are, literally, no repercussions of any consequence.

Think of everything that's happened in, say, the last 40 years to do with the Royal Family. Nothing has changed. They just carry on because they know it'll blow over soon enough and the public will forget. Andrew's shenanigans seem to be a step too far even for the Royal Machine, but I suspect it's more because they've realised that the public aren't letting this one go...

I hope, beyond hope, that once the Queen dies that the appetite for a Royal Family in the UK will die away and being a Republican (in the sense of not having a Monarchy) will not be regarded as an outlier any more.

amnm · 31/12/2021 19:29

She committed the crimes she was convicted of and is certainly not a scapegoat. She knew full well what she was doing.

It may have happened in a time when less attention was paid to stuff like that, or it was seen as less serious, but it certainly wasn't okay.

And for the men involved, if they had sex these girls then they need to be held accountable too. It's not good enough to say they didn't know the girls were under 18 or they assumed that because Maxwell 'procured' them that it didn't cross their minds they could be underaged.

Roussette · 31/12/2021 19:41

Not really. They just don't CARE, because they don't need to. They know there are, literally, no repercussions of any consequence

^^ This. Absolutely.

Anyone who hasn't read Norman Baker's book "And so what do you do?"... really should.
An eye opener from someone reputable

Paquerette · 31/12/2021 20:00

@diddl

"I agree. He had access to the royal households without question and they must have known full well what JS was up to. It is indeed, very concerning."

Why must the royals have known?

This.

Jimmy Saville abused about 60 victims at Stoke Mandeville hospital from 1968 to 1992 even though several reports were made about his behaviour from as early as 1973.

Sadly it was a totally different era back then when adults were always believed instead of children. Also, why would anyone expect the Royal household to know what Saville was up to when the BBC, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, and various other charities were apparently unaware of what happening?