Prince Andrew 'fails to cooperate' with FBI

[CathyorClaire]

www.thesun.co.uk/news/10832298/prince-andrew-provides-zero-cooperation-after-fbi-ask-to-interview-him-over-epstein-links/

No surprise there, then.

Do we think he'll hold out for the threatened subpoena or will the renewed public spotlight mean he jumps before he's pushed?

Juan that very visible nerve is called sticking to the law and not categorically but falsely accusing someone of a crime for emotive reasons. I will point it out when that doesn’t happen.

Well, when Anne Sacoolas is returned to the UK to face justice for manslaughter, then we talk about Prince Andrew, until then the USA and particularly Trump can go fuck themselves.

So the women who were trafficked can "go fuck themselves"? No justice for them?

I’m shocked at the number of people apparently fooled that the royal family inc the queen give one tiny shit about anyone outside their immediate circle!

They don’t and never have.

They’re only interested in keeping ordinary brits sweet enough not to demand a republic!

There’s a long history of royals sleazy and abusive behaviour this is nothing new.

But they anachronistically still think we will accept that and turn a blind eye.

I for one have absolutely had enough of the whole shower!

Do away with the lot!

“after everything she has sacrificed for crown & country” oh puhlease! What sacrifice?!

“If Andrew had sex with the woman who is accusing him no law was broken, as I understand it. She was of age to consent in the UK.” Jesus! What misogynistic sycophantic crap is this?! There’s more to consent than age!

I very much doubt Virginia roberts was his only victim!

“the possibility never occurred to him” far more likely he plain didn’t care!

“no decent man would have chosen to put himself in those situations” exactly! No decent man would even have been there in the first bloody place!

The queen should have reined him in AGES ago, there’s absolutely no question she had the power to do so not least because Andrew so clearly enjoys the benefits of his privilege in terms of money, travel etc

I too know a number of people who’ve worked with Andrew and its long been known what a bloody nightmare he is. I very much doubt the royal family and queen didn’t know this.

Cake wow that photo. She looks so tiny and young and misplaced in that crowd of well-dressed adults. And no one thought to ask questions.

So would the people talking about the legal age of consent be OK with PA rolling up outside their DD's sixth form to pick up a 17 year old? I wouldn't. The optics aren't great are they. We tend to try and protect girls that young from older men, not talk about the legalities of it.

OK - so the Americans can have him if we get Anne Sekoolas? Fair swap.

Comparisons between the Queen’s reactions are only to be expected, given the timeframe of both. Trying to shut down that debate isn’t helpful. Context is all.

We tend to try and protect girls that young from older men, not talk about the legalities of it.

If it's legal there's fuck all to be done, pointless pretending otherwise.

Overstating the case as @Graphista has done is also pointless and somewhat ridiculous. He denies ever having sex with the young woman and there is absolutely nothing to prove otherwise. If he sticks to that there's nothing that can be done.

He's an awful specimen but there has to be evidence or wrong doing. And it seems, so far, that there is none.

The FBI are hoping to get names from PA, is my guess.

*evidence of

I think there's been too much focus on legal age of consent in whatever country this is all alleged to have happened in and not enough focus on the fact that trafficked women can't give consent, no matter what age they are.

fact that trafficked women can't give consent, no matter what age they are.

^ THIS

@DandyAndFine sorry, you are right about the importance of language and I don't want to detract from the seriousness of his actions, so I'll support the ammended statement the poster made.

As a right of reply, then I'll not mention MM again as I don't want to derail anything I'll just say I really don't have "a bitter bee in your bonnet about how MM is discussed." It's not bitterness, it's disgust. But posters don't like people disagreeing on that thread & paint that as the extreme position. Please don't target me, I wouldn't disrespect the victims in this case. I hate misogyny in all forms.

Well written Graphista.

People are quite lazy at opening links so I would appreciate it if someone with more tech savvy than me can copy the photo I posted earlier of VR straight on to the thread. She is so obviously a child when this abuse took place.

Is it this one cakes?

Of course Prince Andrew is scummy, as is Ann Sacoolas, both go without saying.

But, and this is a big BUT - am I not right in thinking that the UK wants to do a post Brexit trade deal with the US? In which case I'm pretty sure that everything will go by the board for the big god Trade. Forget justice, it's all about business.

That's what the newspapers say. I don't understand what Prince Andrew is supposed to tell them that he hasn't already. He must be upset about what has been uncovered, especially regarding Ghislane Maxwell but he can't carry the can for everyone.

Epstein had far bigger fish in his sphere than Andrew, he was an extremely influential man in many spheres and until the sleazy business came out, they were grateful to him. No doubt some still are.

I doubt any of them knew about all the seedy stuff he was involved in, he was plausible even after his first conviction; he told people he plea bargained and that seemed reasonable.

The only reason the media are going on about Andrew is because he has a royal title, if he was an eminent scientist or a captain of industry, no one would recognise his name.

i don't understand what Prince Andrew is supposed to tell them that he hasn't already.

Has he already been questioned by the FBI then?

@rockingchaircandle thanks, all cool

So would the people talking about the legal age of consent be OK with PA rolling up outside their DD's sixth form to pick up a 17 year old? I wouldn't. The optics aren't great are they. We tend to try and protect girls that young from older men, not talk about the legalities of it

@JeansNTees

I certainly wouldn’t be happy, no! I wish I could unequivocally agree though that we tend to try and protect girls that young from older men; I’m not sure they society on a whole does. Instead girls & young women get shafted (sorry inappropriate double wording but can’t think of a better one). It is a lot better now these days thankfully. But it went unchallenged a lot more at the time Virginia Roberts was 17, and I think societal views then are a big factor in why Epstein & co was able to get away with what he did.

As for talking about the legalities of it, we absolutely have to be mindful of that and have a duty to do so when using this forum. It would be simplistic and idiotic to conflate matters and assume that just because someone objects to the term child rape being incorrectly and categorically used, they do not think that non-consensual sex occurred and trafficking offences were committed. Or that they think something was morally if not legally wrong. It’s important to separate out the different aspects and name them correctly and legally.

Or that they don’t think something was morally if not legally wrong that should read.

As others have said, the important point is that she was trafficked. She couldn’t give sexual consent. Whether PA knew this though is, or rather could reasonably assumed consent was given, is another matter.

I suspect that the FBI want to talk to PA mostly about what he knows about the workings of Epstein’s And Maxwell’s dealings & parties and who else was involved. But I don’t know of course.

So I gathered a while back.
i can't believe the FBI have actually told the media, "Prince Andrew is not being co-operative". That's newspaper talk, hearsay, the FBI would not be so blatantly indiscreet nor would they fixate on Andrew when so many others in high places were far more involved.

I'm not defending Prince Andrew, he may well have been a bit of a sleazeball but so have many others, even more so, and at least he was single. He wouldn't have known how old any woman was (if he did partake), and certainly not that they'd been trafficked. He was probably just partying and thought no more of it.

He's learned his lesson. The FBI are investigating a lot of people in this case, he is small fry.

He's learned his lesson? On what evidence do you base that assertion? When he gave the BBC interview, he didn't seem to have learned anything. He maintained being buddies with Epstein opened up opportunities for him.

@JuanSheetIsPlenty - Thank you!

It does make the subsequent posts of he would have had no idea how old she was look totally ridiculous. This is a father with daughters of a similar age, he knows what a very young girl looks like.

He wouldn't have known how old any woman was

He could have used his eyes and looked at her and thought “she looks very young, i’ll pass.” As any normal man would do.

He's learned his lesson.

What lesson?

It does make the subsequent posts of he would have had no idea how old she was look totally ridiculous. This is a father with daughters of a similar age, he knows what a very young girl looks like.

Exactly this^

One look at her would tell him (if he was in any way ruled by decency) to walk in the other direction. She looks incredibly young.

Well I’d certainly never heard that he’d given evidence to the FBI.

Regardless, he’s a person of interest to the investigation. He may be in a position to help their enquiries. And he said he would, in the televised interview.

What’s stopping him?