Prince Andrew

[Tevion28]

Do you think guilty or innocent

@bubblesbubbles11

"And I would respect the Queen a lot more if she withdrew all support for him"

This.

She has already gone a long way to keep him out of the public eye- no appearances in public , Remembrance Day etc etc.

What do you want her to do next?

@diddl

"I agree. But some parents (hopefully a very small %) just don't care enough/or don't care enough to know, where their offspring are."

Didn't VG's father get her her job at Mar a Lago & take her to JE's the first time she went there?

Possibly. I don't know enough about her life to know. I realise abused often turn into abusers, but it doesn't make it right. Not all abused people go on to abuse, some have enough insight to seek help

It is extremely difficult to convict sex offenders in the UK and US of crimes.

Didn’t the alleged incident happen in this country so she wasn’t underage here.

Innocent until proven guilty etc - but I am sure he is guilty is as....

She was 17 so not underage?

I'm not sure how many times it has to be said on these threads, the fact she was 17 is irrelevant and in NY that was underage, and a trafficked person is trafficked irrelevant of age.

There are some awful PA apologists and victim blamers on this thread. Shocking.

As for not remembering you saw Prince Charles in a Pizza Express. Come off of it. Most people would be dining out on that for decades. I saw Wayne Sleep stood outside some chain or other once, I still talk about it now and it was 20 years ago!

Sometimes you have to look at the reality and decide if it is worth the time and expense or just walk away

Really? Should people just walk away from these abhorrent crimes of trafficking young girls ? What about the three 12 year olds shipped to JE from Paris for a birthday present? There were hundreds of victims whose lives have been changed forever because of this and VG is highlighting something that needs attention. For that I give her credit.

@SerendipityJane

I'm not completely up to speed on the law, but isn't there the defence of "not knowing" a victim was trafficked available to a person accused ? I have a memory of a campaign to remove it as a possible get-out.

Also doesn't UK law extend to behaviour overseas when it comes to some sex offences ? To catch predators who fly out to poorer countries ?

It was removed in the UK two years after the Virginia sex abuse is alleged to have taken place. That is lots of abusers were getting free simply by claiming they didn't know, even when it was obvious they should have known. But there must legally be a case to answer. The lawyers tried to get the case thrown out by saying there was not a case to answer. The court ruled against them. I am not a lawyer. I trust the court knows better than me if there is a case legally to answer.

She has already gone a long way to keep him out of the public eye- no appearances in public , Remembrance Day etc etc.

What do you want her to do next?

Let him go to court, the way that the commoners end up doing

It probably wouldn't occur to PA that the girls were trafficked

If I went to a friends house and there were lots of young girls there who weren’t with their parents, I would certainly question the reasons why they were there. It just wouldn’t sit right with me that a man or woman in their 40’s would have so many friends in their teens .

Didn’t the alleged incident happen in this country so she wasn’t underage here

For the fourth time on this thread... no. It was also in NY and JE's island in the caribbean

@RoyalFamilyFan

And I would respect the Queen a lot more if she withdrew all support for him.

She doesn’t give a monkey’s about your respect, nor mine or anyone else’s and neither do the rest of them.

Someone who must surely have had detailed legal advice before that Maitlis interview still did not manage to grasp the foolishness of throwing out there

PA has long been noted for refusing to take advice that didn't dovetail with his own wishes. Just yesterday there were reports that any such advice would be met with a curt 'fuck off out of my office'.

He wanted to do the interview and took the advice of those who encouraged him to do so notably his private secretary Amanda Thirsk who resigned shortly after but returned through the back door to run Pitch@Palace, a role she later stepped down from in the wake of the charity being found to have breached rules regarding her remuneration.

@SpongeBobJudgeyPants why do you think it is the Queen keeping him out of court? What an odd thing to say.

And the court is a civil court. At most he will be made to pay for 'emotional distress'. If anyone thinks this is a criminal case VG is bringing, it's not. He is not going to go to jail even if found guilty.

@JinglingHellsBells The Queen is reportedly spending millions defending Andrew.
www.thesun.co.uk/news/16306055/queen-prince-andrew-defence-sex-abuse/

"Respected U.K. newspaper The Sunday Times on Sunday suggested the queen, who is commander-in-chief of the British armed forces, has indicated she wants Prince Andrew to keep his role as colonel despite opposition from the military."
www.newsweek.com/queen-elizabeth-ii-risks-tainting-own-reputation-prince-andrew-jeffrey-epstein-author-1621976

"The Department of Justice then submitted a formal request through the U.K. Home Office for his co-operation but Andrew is yet to give an interview to the FBI, according to Giuffre's lawsuit." Same newsweek article

Guilty.

And that's before all the hiding behind mummy's skirts and dodging court orders.

All that makes him look as guilty and slimy as sin.

Guilty or innocent of what? A philanderer and probably a sex pest, guilty. A paedophile, innocent - the girl in question was over the age of consent in the UK.

@JinglingHellsBells

If it can be proved he can be guilty, the charge is he cause VG 'emotional distress'.

It's a civil case, not a criminal one.

She is asking for a payout for the distress she was caused.

She has clearly targeted one of the many men as she knows he has the means to pay up.

Whether he is guilty or not, she doesn't cover herself in glory by her behaviour now, IMO.

Or from a less fucked up misogynist perspective, she’s pursued him through the civil court in the US because he can wriggle out of criminal charges in the U.K. due to being 2 years prior to changes to the law.

Make no mistake, if VG had not had the courage to keep pursuing Epstein and PA, the way would not have been paved for more victims to come forward and ultimately for a successful prosecution against GM.

@noworklifebalance yes probably true. But without public support for the Royal Family it will not survive the Queen's death.

A sex pest? That is a euphemism for someone who commits sexual assualt.

There are some awful PA apologists and victim blamers on this thread. Shocking.

That's because there are some awful people who believe the Royal Family are somehow our betters and should be treated with nothing but deference and a bowed knee. I cordially invite such folk to FOTTFSOFATFOSM.

Imagine living in a fairy tale country where people are born to power and privilege.

Or, if you are a bit creatively challenged, just live in the UK.

Surely anyone who worked in that Pizza Express around that time could clear this up pretty quickly, presumably there are only a handful of staff who would obviously have talked about PA being there, even if they were not actually on shift on that night. Detectives/investigators can surely get this information pretty easily/ at least of the names of staff on the books of the Woking branch around that time from Pizza Express??

@OnTheSafeSide everyone strangely seems to have forgotten about it. And the police logs have gone missing.
Strange that.

He is definitely guilty of sleeping with her but how they'll prove he knew she was trafficked is another thing altogether. I can't see how they will

Umm... maybe the Maxwell verdict on the trafficked girls says it all? She procured girls for Epstein. She is guilty. There were trafficked girls despite some on here (not you) trying to pretend that 17 year olds and younger were just sleeping with 40 and 50 year olds for fun

[quote JinglingHellsBells]@SpongeBobJudgeyPants why do you think it is the Queen keeping him out of court? What an odd thing to say.

And the court is a civil court. At most he will be made to pay for 'emotional distress'. If anyone thinks this is a criminal case VG is bringing, it's not. He is not going to go to jail even if found guilty.[/quote]
You think the Queen doesn't have any influence? That's a very odd thing to think. Are you a bit hungover still?

@ddl1

Guilty or innocent of what? A philanderer and probably a sex pest, guilty. A paedophile, innocent - the girl in question was over the age of consent in the UK.

What does a 'sex pest' mean if it doesn't mean uninvited, unwanted sexual harassment?