Why is it all about Prince Andrew?

[Watchmuch]

He should absolutely get what's coming to him but we know (don't we?) that numerous other rich and powerful men did the same. Why are we hearing nothing of them?

Asking what law you think Andrew broke in the UK does not mean people's standards are down the toilet. It is pointless saying he should be in prison unless you can specify how he has broken the law.

VG accused him of having sex with her underage. However, on her own evidence she was over the age of consent in all three of the locations where she alleges they had sex.

The laws surrounding sex and trafficking were looser then than they are now, but even under the law as it stands today it is not clear that Andrew committed an offence. He did if he paid Epstein for VG's services (and it doesn't have to be a direct cash payment), but there does not appear to be any proof that he did.

Of course, any attempt at prosecution would have been hampered by the fact VG refused to talk to law enforcement authorities in either the UK or the US.

Assuming VG's allegations are accurate (which is not a given), Andrew's behaviour was certainly immoral, but that does not make it illegal.

Was it illegal for him to give her social security number to a serving Met police officer and ask him to search for information about her?

Isn't that now part of an ongoing investigation, so we don't yet know if he acted illegally or if charges will be brought.

My guess is it's probably not illegal to ask, it would be the officer who acted illegally if he'd complied and how did he have her social security number?

The age of consent in the location where this alleged orgy took place is 16. Her allegation is that all the girls "appeared to be under 18". She has not alleged that any of them were under 16.

VG repeatedly relied on the law of Florida, where the age of consent is 18, to accuse Andrew of underage sex. However, none of the alleged encounters took place in Florida. They all took place in locations where the age of consent is 16. Therefore, however much she claimed Andrew was guilty of underage sex, her own evidence fails to support that allegation.

Again, that does not mean Andrew's actions were correct morally. If he behaved as VG described (which is not a given), there was clear immorality.

I'd guess that Epstein gave Andrew her social security number.

If it happened, it could be classed as encouraging an offence, but only if it was clear the officer was being asked to search law enforcement confidential records. Even then, I wouldn't expect an offender, royal or otherwise, to be prosecuted for a single offence unless the officer complied with the request.

A lot of files are held at the highest level in the US and we all know where that is!

Some of the names in there are probably too well known and powerful to allow the keeper of said files to have them released! Andrew, odious as he may be, made a very convenient fall guy to take the heat off the rest.

Re asking your security guy to check out someone who is causing you a headache, I’d be surprised if that was illegal. Hiring a private detective to see what they can find isn’t illegal. Handing over someone else’s social security number when you’re asked, which Virginia? I don’t know. Is it? I doubt it.

If your security guy is a serving police officer who does something he isn’t supposed to do, then I think that’s on him.

Don’t misunderstand me, it’s disgusting behaviour. But I really doubt it’s criminal even if there was evidence, which there doesn’t seem to be.

You can’t go round locking people up for being immoral sleazebags. Sadly.

i think there’s a lot more still to come.
None of the other famous people are named in Virginia’s book, which I am reading right now. But they will be. And I think the emails Epstein sent PA will come out, and evidence that his daughters took / benefited from Epstein money too.

It is a crime: sharing personal data without the owner's permission.

The Personal Protection Officer's brief was to protect Prince Andrew. If he acted on Prince Andrew's instruction ('Do it!') he should have gone through a disciplinary process.

My cynical braincells are telling me there will be no records held by the Met. I hopexI am wrong.

To add addition

If Andrew did have sex with Virginia Guiffre, he committed the crime of rape because she was a trafficked minor so couldn't by definition x 2 give consent.

No, that is not a crime. It depends on whether Andrew has a lawful basis for sharing the information. Consent is not the only lawful basis. In any event, it is highly unlikely he or any other individual would be prosecuted for sharing the details of one individual and, even if they were, the worst that would happen would be a small fine.

Unfortunately they have to prove he knew that.

My understanding of the Data Protection Act is that it can be a crime but I can see in this case action against him would be unlikely. Even if he were to be fined, I doubt he'd pay the fine. After all, he allegedly only pays his water bill from time to time.

She was not a minor, except in Florida. In the UK she was over the age of consent. There’s no reason to assume Andrew knew she was trafficked. We didn’t know much about trafficking and grooming then.

The same year this happened, the newspapers were counting down to Charlotte Church’s 16th birthday, if I remember correctly.

17yr olds sleeping with rich powerful men, hostesses at parties, women choosing to sleep with Andrew- none of it was unusual in 2000.

How disgusting can you be? These are girls and young women who were trafficked to be sold to the highest bidders.

Where does it say I think it’s ok? Fuck’s sake that’s an offensive allegation.

I’m telling you what things were like back then. He had many glamorous girlfriends. 18 Billie Piper married Chris Evans (just a touch younger than Andrew), round about then.

I’m saying that you’d have no chance of prosecuting him regardless of who he is, because she was over 16 and he had no reason to assume she didn’t want to be there.

How hard is that to understand? Is he a creep? Yes. Is he a perve? Yes. Would I cross the road to avoid him? Yes. Would I donate to charities supporting abused women? Yes. Was his behaviour illegal at that time? Very hard to say, harder still to prove he knew she was trafficked.

I do wonder why the special protection officers tasked to look after him (at great expense) didn’t step in earlier and put a stop to what he was doing.

No. Things were not “like that” b

Just to be clear, it is a crime if the person passing the information does not have a lawful basis for sharing the information. Consent is not the only lawful basis. If, for example, you enter into a contract with me and I need to pass your personal information to a third party in order to fulfil my side of the bargain, I can do so regardless of whether you consent.

There are six lawful justifications that can be used by someone sharing your information. Consent is one of them. If any of the others apply, it is not an offence to pass on your information without your consent.

I think it’s a distraction tactic from all the very rich businessmen also involved but they are more powerful/influential than the royal buffoon. The guy’s an idiot, the others would fire out truths they have on others and the wider world of rich arrogant men would be very vulnerable. Andrew seems to think to have played the game so he’s perfect - make everyone hate him and we stop asking for more names, because we have a big one.

He wouldn't have paid out 12m if he was innocent.

If the other people involved with Epstein are so rich and powerful why doesn’t Andrew just get money from them to keep his mouth shut. He hasn’t shown he is a man of honour in any way so he could make a ton of money from others who value his silence.

Also, people who are saying he did not do anything illegal in the UK because of our age of consent laws. Isn’t it illegal to have sex with someone who is trafficked?