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

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Prince Andrew

999 replies

Tevion28 · 01/01/2022 23:58

Do you think guilty or innocent

OP posts:
youvegottenminuteslynn · 02/01/2022 11:58

@ginghamstarfish

I'm no fan of his, and maybe he did have sex with the young women while visiting Maxwell etc, as men will do. It doesn't mean he would know the circumstances of them being there. What puzzles me is that these young women, some of whom have been interviewed in the media recently, say things like 'I was invited to their hotel room/house etc where they raped me .... and this continued for the next 3/4 years'. Another interview yesterday was from the mother of one of these girls, who said that the girl was paid $300 for each time she went. So as it appears none of these girls were actually imprisoned by Maxwell/Epstein but chose to keep going back to them, travelling with them, then it seems that it was clearly sex for money. Yes, Maxwell and Epstein are/were vile predatory individuals, but there's something that doesn't add up (and no I am not victim blaming - if anything it seems a case of impressionable young women who were attracted to the glamorous lifestyle and taken advantage of). 'Trafficking' is generally used to mean something much worse than this, where girls are taken from their home/country and kept against their will for sex.
No. You're completely wrong.

Maxwell and Epstein's activity WAS trafficking. It was legally found to be trafficking. They are convicted sex traffickers. You misunderstanding the term doesn't make that any less true.

You clearly have no understanding of grooming or trafficking and frankly you've embarrassed yourself.

I despair if posters like you have daughters or nieces or other loved ones who are young girls.

chaosrabbitland · 02/01/2022 11:59

pursuing i meant to say

RoyalFamilyFan · 02/01/2022 12:00

@Plantstrees I am in my late fifties. 2001 seems last year to me. It was not different then. But men have been using that argument for forever. I think what is different is that the existence of social media makes it harder for rich people to cover up their wrongdoings. There is lots on social media about the past that we would never have heard about at the time. There used to be some main newspapers and the BBC and ITV news. If they didn't cover it, you were unlikely to hear about it.

gilorga · 02/01/2022 12:00

no , but shes going to be judged on it though

not by me

she should be purshing them all , as iv said before its intersting she pursues those who are high profile and have large sums of money , shes on a nice little earner with it and its worked for her , huge house in perth worth a million or two and a husband who had a job doing god knows what , so its clear whats funding their lifestyle

why not go after the ones who have money? why shouldn't the money fund her lifestyle?

gilorga · 02/01/2022 12:01

and a husband who had a job doing god knows what

why on earth is this relevant

RoyalFamilyFan · 02/01/2022 12:02

@DuncinToffee I can remember some on MN defending Jimmy Saville when the first allegations emerged. Of course, nowadays they don't try to defend him, even though he was never found guilty by a court. The evidence just became too overwhelming to ignore.

youvegottenminuteslynn · 02/01/2022 12:02

@chaosrabbitland

You're embarrassing.

Why would someone pursue a civil case against someone who would be unable to pay damages versus someone who would have to pay them and therefore have at least some justice?

A "nice little earner" from being raped? Whereas 'good' victims just get raped and then don't seek justice, presumably? What does a 'real' victim look like to you? How should a 'real' victim behave? Interested to know.

RoyalFamilyFan · 02/01/2022 12:03

@gilorga I always hope people like you are trolls and not a parent. Because you are simply repeating every victim-blaming myth there is out there.

chaosrabbitland · 02/01/2022 12:04

This reply has been deleted

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

SecretSpAD · 02/01/2022 12:05

The father of my adopted children (the children of my husbands sister) is a sex trafficker. Of course, being of aristocratic stock people don't use those words, just make jokes about Arthur's taste for young girls in their private members clubs and their country estates and private islands - one of which is has resided on for many years now because there's no extradition arrangement with the UK.

Arthur (nit his real name) and his "friends" started their paedophile ring whilst in oxford. It didn't look too bad then, just a group of young posh undergrads inviting local girls to parties and plying them with champagne and vodka. The girls were only 3 or 4 years younger and there was never really any proof that any sex happened and this was the early 80's so different times, different morals....oh and a 30 year old man who married a 19 year old in front of millions across the world.

Arthur then left oxford and got a job in the city (as well bred men did then) and at the age of 29 raped a 12 year old - my sister in law. She was known to be a bit of a wild child so her parents blamed her for leading him on and so she got the reputation of being a silly little slut. That attitude allowed him to continue raping her and she became pregnant with her first child at 15. She was thrown out of school and forced into a marriage with him for respectability on her 16th birthday. He continued raping her - but of course it wasn't really rape because they were married. It was his right to have her anytime he wanted and to share her around his friends. By the time she was 20 he was pimping her out at S&M parties and he encouraged her to take drugs and drink to excess because it made her more pliable.

He eventually grew bored of her when she was 25 with two young children and threw her and the children out on the streets. He went on to continue to run a private club where men of his age and class could fuck young girls in private. Obviously the men were all powerful and rich. I don't know who they were and neither does my husband (who was abroad for a lot of this time so unaware of exactly what was happening). We suspect that there were a few members of the royal family because Arthur socialised in those circles. I remember my mother in law being very proud of his pedigree and connections and, being the disgusting human being she is, felt that her daughter had "married well". This was the daughter who had been used as a sex slave and who was then having to resort to blackmailing her ex husband to feed the children and house them. She never told us who the men were and was afraid that if she did, or if she reported it, then he would kill her. Whether he would have or not, I don't know.

The fact is, whatever background the girls come from, they are always the victims of rich, influential, powerful and manipulative men. A 12 year old is not able to be a slut, they are a child that has been corrupted.

Teenagers - and I've seen it with my two - are full of bluff and bluster, but ultimately they are vulnerable and just learning how to navigate the adult world. It is up to adults to help and support them and not abuse them. It is never, ever the fault of a young girl that she has been trafficked, used as a sex slave and manipulated into a situation that is of the making of a grown man.

TheKeatingFive · 02/01/2022 12:07

Where there is money /fame /power, you will always find young women around willing to have sex for the lifestyle, to get close to the famous person etc. I worked in the music industry a while back and groupies were everywhere trying to get with the artist.

That's not a useful comparison though. The music business is full of people from all kinds of backgrounds, differences in backgrounds would not be unusual.

However Andrew would have mixed entirely with royal/aristocratic/global rich types. In what situation would he ever come across poor girls from the projects on an equal social footing? Literally never.

SpindleSpangle · 02/01/2022 12:09

The American media is clear that VG has accused PA of rape and sexual assault, not having underage sex.

www.nytimes.com/2021/08/09/nyregion/virginia-giuffre-prince-andrew.html

I think this has escaped many posters' notice. The case would appear therefore to hinge to some extent on whether or not she consented genuinely, and whether PA had a genuine and reasonable belief that she did. If he knew his friends who 'supplied' VR were procuring and exploiting girls, then than could be used against him and his defence.

VG is effectively asking a civil court to rule that what PA did to her was wrong, partly because the whole set-up was wrong (as has been proven in the criminal courts).

I think VG's actions are part retribution against her exploiters; and part rehabilitation and atonement for herself. She does a lot of work now for victims of sex trafficking. If anyone understands the tangled dynamic of how it operates, it's her.

Roussette · 02/01/2022 12:09

It's not wrong but she has chosen someone who is high profile and also who has the means to pay. She should if it's a matter of ethics, pursue them all

Have you any idea how much that would cost and how long the legal intricacies would take? If I were her, I would do exactly what she is doing to draw attention to all of this murky stuff. Go for the well known one, she is doing it for others too.

RoyalFamilyFan · 02/01/2022 12:09

@TheKeatingFive there were people saying that about Saville as well.
Lots of people say how terrible rape and sexual abuse is. But a lot of people do blame teenagers when they are raped or sexually abused.

RoyalFamilyFan · 02/01/2022 12:10

@SecretSpAD

The father of my adopted children (the children of my husbands sister) is a sex trafficker. Of course, being of aristocratic stock people don't use those words, just make jokes about Arthur's taste for young girls in their private members clubs and their country estates and private islands - one of which is has resided on for many years now because there's no extradition arrangement with the UK.

Arthur (nit his real name) and his "friends" started their paedophile ring whilst in oxford. It didn't look too bad then, just a group of young posh undergrads inviting local girls to parties and plying them with champagne and vodka. The girls were only 3 or 4 years younger and there was never really any proof that any sex happened and this was the early 80's so different times, different morals....oh and a 30 year old man who married a 19 year old in front of millions across the world.

Arthur then left oxford and got a job in the city (as well bred men did then) and at the age of 29 raped a 12 year old - my sister in law. She was known to be a bit of a wild child so her parents blamed her for leading him on and so she got the reputation of being a silly little slut. That attitude allowed him to continue raping her and she became pregnant with her first child at 15. She was thrown out of school and forced into a marriage with him for respectability on her 16th birthday. He continued raping her - but of course it wasn't really rape because they were married. It was his right to have her anytime he wanted and to share her around his friends. By the time she was 20 he was pimping her out at S&M parties and he encouraged her to take drugs and drink to excess because it made her more pliable.

He eventually grew bored of her when she was 25 with two young children and threw her and the children out on the streets. He went on to continue to run a private club where men of his age and class could fuck young girls in private. Obviously the men were all powerful and rich. I don't know who they were and neither does my husband (who was abroad for a lot of this time so unaware of exactly what was happening). We suspect that there were a few members of the royal family because Arthur socialised in those circles. I remember my mother in law being very proud of his pedigree and connections and, being the disgusting human being she is, felt that her daughter had "married well". This was the daughter who had been used as a sex slave and who was then having to resort to blackmailing her ex husband to feed the children and house them. She never told us who the men were and was afraid that if she did, or if she reported it, then he would kill her. Whether he would have or not, I don't know.

The fact is, whatever background the girls come from, they are always the victims of rich, influential, powerful and manipulative men. A 12 year old is not able to be a slut, they are a child that has been corrupted.

Teenagers - and I've seen it with my two - are full of bluff and bluster, but ultimately they are vulnerable and just learning how to navigate the adult world. It is up to adults to help and support them and not abuse them. It is never, ever the fault of a young girl that she has been trafficked, used as a sex slave and manipulated into a situation that is of the making of a grown man.

I am so sorry to hear that. And even sorrier that he will never will face justice.
Roussette · 02/01/2022 12:11

Some of the posts on here are disgusting.

I'm going to start reporting them.

RoyalFamilyFan · 02/01/2022 12:11

@SpindleSpangle

The American media is clear that VG has accused PA of rape and sexual assault, not having underage sex.

www.nytimes.com/2021/08/09/nyregion/virginia-giuffre-prince-andrew.html

I think this has escaped many posters' notice. The case would appear therefore to hinge to some extent on whether or not she consented genuinely, and whether PA had a genuine and reasonable belief that she did. If he knew his friends who 'supplied' VR were procuring and exploiting girls, then than could be used against him and his defence.

VG is effectively asking a civil court to rule that what PA did to her was wrong, partly because the whole set-up was wrong (as has been proven in the criminal courts).

I think VG's actions are part retribution against her exploiters; and part rehabilitation and atonement for herself. She does a lot of work now for victims of sex trafficking. If anyone understands the tangled dynamic of how it operates, it's her.

Yes people keep arguing in defence of Andrew on irrelevant grounds.
Vapeyvapevape · 02/01/2022 12:12

Imagine if Charles had gone to Saville to personally break off their friendship, because a phone call would be the cowards way

PA probably went to see JE in person to break off the friendship rather than do it over the phone because phone calls can be hacked or recorded.

Roussette · 02/01/2022 12:13

Teenagers - and I've seen it with my two - are full of bluff and bluster, but ultimately they are vulnerable and just learning how to navigate the adult world. It is up to adults to help and support them and not abuse them. It is never, ever the fault of a young girl that she has been trafficked, used as a sex slave and manipulated into a situation that is of the making of a grown man

^^ This. So well said.

Yet to some... it's just a nice little earner, and she smiled and knew what she was doing.

RoyalFamilyFan · 02/01/2022 12:13

Epstein and Ghislaine were at the Royal Cabin. Photo attached that was revealed at Ghislaine's trial. Who took them there?

Prince Andrew
Prince Andrew
noworklifebalance · 02/01/2022 12:13

@SecretSpAD

The father of my adopted children (the children of my husbands sister) is a sex trafficker. Of course, being of aristocratic stock people don't use those words, just make jokes about Arthur's taste for young girls in their private members clubs and their country estates and private islands - one of which is has resided on for many years now because there's no extradition arrangement with the UK.

Arthur (nit his real name) and his "friends" started their paedophile ring whilst in oxford. It didn't look too bad then, just a group of young posh undergrads inviting local girls to parties and plying them with champagne and vodka. The girls were only 3 or 4 years younger and there was never really any proof that any sex happened and this was the early 80's so different times, different morals....oh and a 30 year old man who married a 19 year old in front of millions across the world.

Arthur then left oxford and got a job in the city (as well bred men did then) and at the age of 29 raped a 12 year old - my sister in law. She was known to be a bit of a wild child so her parents blamed her for leading him on and so she got the reputation of being a silly little slut. That attitude allowed him to continue raping her and she became pregnant with her first child at 15. She was thrown out of school and forced into a marriage with him for respectability on her 16th birthday. He continued raping her - but of course it wasn't really rape because they were married. It was his right to have her anytime he wanted and to share her around his friends. By the time she was 20 he was pimping her out at S&M parties and he encouraged her to take drugs and drink to excess because it made her more pliable.

He eventually grew bored of her when she was 25 with two young children and threw her and the children out on the streets. He went on to continue to run a private club where men of his age and class could fuck young girls in private. Obviously the men were all powerful and rich. I don't know who they were and neither does my husband (who was abroad for a lot of this time so unaware of exactly what was happening). We suspect that there were a few members of the royal family because Arthur socialised in those circles. I remember my mother in law being very proud of his pedigree and connections and, being the disgusting human being she is, felt that her daughter had "married well". This was the daughter who had been used as a sex slave and who was then having to resort to blackmailing her ex husband to feed the children and house them. She never told us who the men were and was afraid that if she did, or if she reported it, then he would kill her. Whether he would have or not, I don't know.

The fact is, whatever background the girls come from, they are always the victims of rich, influential, powerful and manipulative men. A 12 year old is not able to be a slut, they are a child that has been corrupted.

Teenagers - and I've seen it with my two - are full of bluff and bluster, but ultimately they are vulnerable and just learning how to navigate the adult world. It is up to adults to help and support them and not abuse them. It is never, ever the fault of a young girl that she has been trafficked, used as a sex slave and manipulated into a situation that is of the making of a grown man.

This is beyond fucked up I agree wholeheartedly with your last two paragraphs. The photo of VG smiling with PA - she has been groomed.
Alondra · 02/01/2022 12:14

Andrew can't support with proof some of his statements given on a BBC TV interview dismissing he had sex with 17 y.o Virginia Roberts.

Andrew has supported Epstein in the past as to call him a close friend.

Maxwell, through Andrew, has enjoyed many BRF outings in the past.

Andrew's legal team is trying their best to throw his matter out of court on technicalities.

If it looks like duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck

Roussette · 02/01/2022 12:15

PA probably went to see JE in person to break off the friendship rather than do it over the phone because phone calls can be hacked or recorded

No.
He said he did it in person because it is 'the honourable thing'. Oh, and by the way, he spent 4 days there at the time, and went to a dinner party in his honour.
Of course he could've made a phone call if he wanted. Or he could've ghosted him.
He went for one last time out of choice.

CathyorClaire · 02/01/2022 12:15

its intersting she pursues those who are high profile and have large sums of money

Why would anyone without a high profile and/or fat wallet have been of any interest to the predatory Epstein?

RoyalFamilyFan · 02/01/2022 12:16

@Vapeyvapevape

Imagine if Charles had gone to Saville to personally break off their friendship, because a phone call would be the cowards way

PA probably went to see JE in person to break off the friendship rather than do it over the phone because phone calls can be hacked or recorded.

If it had been hacked and Andrew had said I cant believe what you are up to, I no longer want to talk to you and will totally blank you if I see you at events. If that had been released, so what? It would have supported Andrew. The problem with a phone being hacked is if you are saying things you don't want the public to know.