Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor - you have blood on your hands

[Muffinmam]

Am I being unreasonable to say that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor - the Duke of York and member of the Royal Family has blood on his hands following the tragic suicide of Virginia Giuffre?

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has faced zero consequences for his role in Virginia Giuffre‘s sexual abuse and trafficking because he’s rich and his powerful mummy paid off the victim and the British police failed to pursue charges against him. To be clear, while the age of consent in the UK is 17 years old this does not apply to trafficking victims and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has never faced criminal charges.

He probably thinks he’s got away with it now she’s gone.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14649791/Virginia-Giuffre-suicide-perth-mansion.html

Please. I know exactly what RAVEC does. I know how it works. We had a very good and detailed discussion on here a few weeks back. By "The Royal Household" it means the diary keepers and planners of KC and the PoW in particular. This is to enable effective and secure planning.
At no point would they ever get together and say "let's put Harry in mortal danger because he's a pain in the arse".
No. It is done according to very clear guidelines and in order to keep people safe.
Harry knows this, but what he wants is top level taxpayers' funded security, giving no notice and for whatever purposes.
That is the central argument.

Or does Harry know this? I'm now reflecting. Perhaps his folly and ignorance about RAVEC and security is just about trying to keep his celebrity status?
It certainly gave him the headlines.

@MagdaLenor
If RAVEC is as completely uninfluenced by William and Charles as you believe , why then did a previous Home Secretary , Priti Patel, write to Charles’ via Charles’ permanent secretary then Clive Alderton I think, asking that Charles take another look at RAVEC procedures ?

I think she was suggesting that proper scrutiny was needed re RAVEC decisions.

Because she was requesting that the diaries were presented further in advance because of increased concerns at one point.
William and Charles do not make security decisions.
Harry is lying. He lies to make money. He lies to make himself look good, and worse: he lies to get limitless taxpayer funded security ar his whim.
The recent court proceedings were against
The Home Office.
Why? Because they make the decisions.

At no point did Priti Patel suggest that KC or the PoW make security decisions.
What is reported in the Daily Mail is not always true. Harry and Meghan have a journalist friend there who seems to be putting out some.."misinformation".

Harry does not like ti accept that there are any limits to his status and privilege.
He is pursuing a case which is based less on security and more on celebrity.

Anyway. I thought this thread was about how awful Andrew was, and how he had been culpable in the destruction of an innocent woman. His behaviour has been vile, and he seems to have paid little price for this.
Now it's gone on to defending Harry (no equivalency, but he is still at fault) then the thread ends for me.
I hope one day that Andrew - and other men - will be brought to justice for this.

I agree @MagdaLenor that this issue should not be allowed to deflect from the thread .
My point is that RAVEC is not a legal body it is under ‘royal prerogative’ therefore Charles can overrule any decision they make. He is not bound by the law. I’m no fan of Patel but I believe her email was concerned with allowing proper scrutiny of decisions rather than calendars as you state .

The whole issue of royal security, finances etc. is linked to Andrew in the sense that we have no proper oversight over any of this . Hence we have apologists for Andrew saying ‘ he was never convicted!’ . Yes - no doubt he was protected by the Windsors and continues to be so . Any other man in his position would have been arrested .
We are simply expected to accept the crumbs we are thrown while being denied any proper oversight re most issues concerning the Windsors .

I wonder if anyone in the US has questioned her parents to find out why they didn't seem concerned about where their 14 year old child was sleeping? When the PA situation first kicked off her father was saying that he intended suing PA and also wanted to meet HM to discuss it! This from the first man to let her down.

I can't stand the guy but he's not on a level with Jimmy Savile.

Yes, quite unnecessary rudeness.