Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To want Prince Andrew to lose his title and go to prison?

228 replies

Fandango52 · 21/10/2025 00:28

I read an extract at the weekend of Virginia Giuffre’s book and it really shocked me. I was aware - like lots of people - of her case against Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and Prince Andrew, and also watched Emily Maitlis’s interview with Prince Andrew when it came out a few years ago.

We know that Epstein and Maxwell went to prison and I think Andrew should also go to prison. He raped Virginia Giuffre and lied about this, repeatedly denying he had actually met her. This would definitely lead to criminal charges for non-royals (even if the case was later dropped, as it often is with rape - which is another story).

I know it’s likely Andrew won’t go to prison - mainly because he is a prince - and I find that so grim. I know he’s lost some of his titles, like his dukedom, but I don’t think that is enough.

I have no connection to the case at all and no reason to be particularly invested in it, apart from the fact it’s shocking and quite unique, and because I think it’s hugely unjust that Andrew probably won’t be brought to justice because he was born royal.

AIBU to think Andrew should at least be tried in court - and if found guilty, should lose his titles and go to prison?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
TheExcitersblowingupmymind · 21/10/2025 06:11

GrimDamnFanjo · 21/10/2025 01:06

id Prefer his removal from public life, his titles and his house. Let him live in the suburbs on his naval pension.

Could you imagine having him as a neighbour..no fucking thanks 😁

TankFlyBossW4lk · 21/10/2025 06:13

Viviennemary · 21/10/2025 05:57

If its suspected he has committed a crime (which it looks like he well may have) then he should face a trial like anybody else. He should not continue to live at Royal Lodge and should be stripped of all titles including Prince. And kicked out the country along with his sidekick Fergie.

It does look dodgy. If you've never met someone, why would you give them £12m. Obviously, not his money though.

InNewYorkNoShoes · 21/10/2025 06:16

HappiestSleeping · 21/10/2025 01:42

It would be somewhat difficult now that two of the major witnesses are dead.

How convenient.
Men barely face consequences for raping and killing women. Especially if they are rich.

BreakingBroken · 21/10/2025 06:16

17 is the age of consent in New York. VG was 17 at the time she met PA. The location was NY.
I’m not sure what he did in the USA was illegal.

sashh · 21/10/2025 06:27

He hasn't 'lost' anything, he has been persuaded to not use them.

OP the royal family get away with things all the time. I don't think he will ever see the inside of a court and yes I'm angry about that.

I'm also angry about how much this family costs us as tax payers.

HappiestSleeping · 21/10/2025 06:29

InNewYorkNoShoes · 21/10/2025 06:16

How convenient.
Men barely face consequences for raping and killing women. Especially if they are rich.

That is true even when the witnesses are alive. And only convenient for him. Entirely inconvenient for Virginia I'd wager.

sashh · 21/10/2025 06:46

He hasn't 'lost' anything, he has been persuaded to not use them.

OP the royal family get away with things all the time. I don't think he will ever see the inside of a court and yes I'm angry about that.

I'm also angry about how much this family costs us as tax payers.

winter8090 · 21/10/2025 06:49

I wonder why VG chose to accept 12m rather than pursing a trial and justice.
She was not a reliable witness. The embellished events of the accident with the bus is proof of that.
Andrews preference for young girls in this case is immoral and disgusting. But no laws were broken. Whether he knew of epsteins full history in how he obtained these girls is another matter. And Andrew was quite happy to associate with Epstein when he had been released from prison for soliciting a minor. Poor judgement and poor character, but associating with someone else who has broken the law doesn’t make you the guilty one.

Vera87 · 21/10/2025 06:51

I agree. And his actions around paying her off stink of guilt.

sashh · 21/10/2025 06:53

Sorry I have no idea why I double posted.

Boomer55 · 21/10/2025 06:53

Fandango52 · 21/10/2025 01:58

Yes, that is very true that she has accused him of rape (her US lawsuit says she was forced to have several sexual encounters with him) and he has denied it.

However, he has paid her a multi-million settlement (estimated to be £12m). Why did he pay her?

And why did he have sex with her? She was less than half his age (41 compared to 17, which is just a year over the U.K. age of consent and still seen as a child in terms of U.K. law).

It’s sleazy but sex with an over 17 is not illegal. 16 is our age of consent.

However, in some states, in America, it is illegal.

He can’t be tried here - only in America.

But, obviously, he won’t stand trial anywhere. 🤷‍♀️

thepariscrimefiles · 21/10/2025 06:55

Meadowfinch · 21/10/2025 01:31

What happened to the process of law? To innocent until proven guilty? Have the standards of 'beyond all reasonable doubt" been met?

I don't think they have. It is his word against hers.

Did she write that book, to maximise her financial legacy for her family? Did she exaggerate through anger and trauma? Did she tell the absolute truth? As she saw it, or as it was? Was her book a final act of revenge? I don't know and neither do you.

Just because you don't like someone, because he is an arrogant entitled fool and you are jealous of the advantages he has had in life, does not make him a criminal. Proof is needed to deprive someone of their freedom.

I prefer to live in a country where being sent to prison depends on a high standard of proof, and it applies to everyone equally. Trial by broadsheet is nothing to aspire to.

Edited

I would prefer to live in a country where a reigning monarch didn't give her son £12 million to pay off the woman who accused him of rape to protect her hideously entitled son from the consequences of his own actions.

Trial by broadsheet is probably the only consequence he will ever face due to the way the Royal Family are always protected. He asked his own police protection to dig up dirt on his accuser and to discredit her claims.

sashh · 21/10/2025 06:58

Boomer55 · 21/10/2025 06:53

It’s sleazy but sex with an over 17 is not illegal. 16 is our age of consent.

However, in some states, in America, it is illegal.

He can’t be tried here - only in America.

But, obviously, he won’t stand trial anywhere. 🤷‍♀️

Sex with a trafficked woman or girl is rape, it is illegal.

MidnightPatrol · 21/10/2025 06:59

He’s gross and the royal family are right in not wanting to be associated with him.

But I’m not sure he’s actually broken the law.

MC846 · 21/10/2025 06:59

I believe he's probably guilty of it all but there's little way to prove it. I find it very interesting though of all the supposed men involved with Epstein, only claims/witness have come out about Prince Andrew and absolutely no evidence has been floating around about the others. It's quite staggering 🤷‍♀️

Ritasueandbobtoo9 · 21/10/2025 07:08

There will be close protection officers / staff who knew information. There will be other abused victims. He went to Epstein’s island and flat. What was he doing there? Why did he go to Thailand and not stay in the Emmbassy? Why hasn’t he been to USA to talk to police? He needs to be investigated and if evidence is found, tried. If found guilty he needs to go to prison.

Moglet4 · 21/10/2025 07:09

winter8090 · 21/10/2025 06:49

I wonder why VG chose to accept 12m rather than pursing a trial and justice.
She was not a reliable witness. The embellished events of the accident with the bus is proof of that.
Andrews preference for young girls in this case is immoral and disgusting. But no laws were broken. Whether he knew of epsteins full history in how he obtained these girls is another matter. And Andrew was quite happy to associate with Epstein when he had been released from prison for soliciting a minor. Poor judgement and poor character, but associating with someone else who has broken the law doesn’t make you the guilty one.

Because she couldn’t pursue a trial. It wasn’t up to her in the US system. The only option she had open to her was a civil case.

curious79 · 21/10/2025 07:13

Andrew is sordid and vile but VG was age of consent in the UK. Orgies are also legal. I doubt there is enough to send him to jail

idontknowhowtodreamyourdreams · 21/10/2025 07:15

He should be tried in court if the CPS think there is sufficient evidence of his alleged crimes in this jurisdiction. Or the equivalent should happen in the US. Then, if found guilty, of course he should receive a prison sentence.

I don't know how much evidence there is against him though, other than her testimony.

sesquipedalian · 21/10/2025 07:16

Just what, exactly, is Prince Andrew guilty of? Consorting with a paedophile, certainly, but sleeping with a seventeen year old isn’t a crime, either here or in New York, and he has continued to deny that he slept with her. He is foolish and entitled, but that doesn’t make him a criminal. He has as much right to be considered innocent until presumed guilty as anyone else. Virginia Giuffre has been proved to be unreliable - when she accused Alan Dershowitz of sexual abuse, he accused her of lying and said that she and her lawyers were trying to extort money from others. She then had to withdraw the accusation, saying that she may have “made a mistake” in identifying Mr Dershowitz. It would take an act of Parliament to remove Prince Andrew’s Duke of York title, and this has hitherto only been done in cases of treason. It’s remarkable that of all those Epstein consorted with, it’s only English people such as Prince Andrew and Lord Mandelson who have been in trouble, and the only person to be imprisoned other than Epstein himself is Ghislaine Maxwell. There are a whole lot of very rich and powerful men, mostly Americans, who know a whole lot more about this than they are letting on, and Prince Andrew is a convenient scapegoat.

FleetingCraze · 21/10/2025 07:17

Meadowfinch · 21/10/2025 01:31

What happened to the process of law? To innocent until proven guilty? Have the standards of 'beyond all reasonable doubt" been met?

I don't think they have. It is his word against hers.

Did she write that book, to maximise her financial legacy for her family? Did she exaggerate through anger and trauma? Did she tell the absolute truth? As she saw it, or as it was? Was her book a final act of revenge? I don't know and neither do you.

Just because you don't like someone, because he is an arrogant entitled fool and you are jealous of the advantages he has had in life, does not make him a criminal. Proof is needed to deprive someone of their freedom.

I prefer to live in a country where being sent to prison depends on a high standard of proof, and it applies to everyone equally. Trial by broadsheet is nothing to aspire to.

Edited

you are jealous of the advantages he has had in life

Do you honestly think people who despise this man are all jealous? I would not want to be any member of the royal family, for all the ‘advantages’ in the world. Accusing others of jealousy is such a lazy MN rejoinder.

FamilyPhoto · 21/10/2025 07:19

IamNotBeingUnreasonable · 21/10/2025 05:15

How could the UK courts try him when he didn't commit any crime in the UK?

Surely having sex with a girl trafficked for that exact purpose would be a crime ?

Guildford321 · 21/10/2025 07:24

Meadowfinch · 21/10/2025 01:41

Could you honestly sleep nights, knowing that someone had been locked up, deprived of their freedom, without you knowing whether he deserved it or not?

We may be regressing on some fronts at the moment but we don't need a modern day prince in the tower. This is not the 15th century.

Not in my name anyway.

I absolutely support the rights of women, but not by shredding the rights of others in the process.

It really doesn't seem like you support the rights of women at all. You sound like a typical misogynist, assuming that women lie about being raped and do so for financial gain. Exaggeration, revenge, her word against his.

givemesteel · 21/10/2025 07:27

I dislike Prince Andrew as much as the next person, but there is no proof that he raped her. Yes, it is disgusting to have sex with a 17 year old girl if you're in your mid 30s but it is not a crime if it was consensual and he had no reason to believe she was being coerced / trafficked.

He should be removed from the RF and this palace he lives in, but he shouldn't be in prison. Even if he did rape her, the victim is sadly dead so it can't be verified.

RobustPastry · 21/10/2025 07:30

YANBU OP
if he doesn’t go to court for sex with trafficked person which is always rape x 3 and let the normal sanctions be applied if he’s guilty that is letting the whole country and royal family down.
He must go to court. The quid pro quo of us having the UK royal family by consent is that they are held to a higher standard of morality, an ideal family. Under no circumstances can they break the law. So we need a trial. Then the rest of the family can continue, without this taint of possibility harbouring someone who commits sexual crimes, on them.

Swipe left for the next trending thread