Prince Andrew Thread 2

[Roussette]

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4442126-Prince-Andrew

Here is previous thread.

I've started a new thread because today and tomorrow is crucial as far as the pending civil case.

And I also had a few comments I wanted to say to posters at the end of the last thread, but it ran out.

@Roussette

bubbles So agree with your post.

To my mind, the RF should be beyond reproach and set an example. HMQ is Head of the Church, PA still holds all these Heads of military divisions (hopefully, soon to be axed) and each one of them are patrons of charities a lot connected with children.

To turn a blind eye to all of this is incomprehensible to me. And it's why I've gone from quite the royalist decades ago to completely the opposite now.

This

Marking place. I agree that GM won’t go for a plea bargain until or unless a tedious round of appeals and attempts to overturn the verdict are exhausted.
Too many powerful people would be pissed off.

I have no proof of course but it simply cannot be that only western girls were involved in this. I have read (unsubstantiated) accounts of girls being trafficked to the island from poorer countries, their passports removed and they were served up to the male visitors

There is more than one report out there of three poor 12 year olds shipped from Paris to US as a birthday present for Epstein.

The bastard is going to get off Scot free isn't he?

Not really, no. He'd doubtless be glad of anything which will make the case go away, but I wouldn't have thought an agreement which means she can't sue him was very satisfactory reputation-wise

No matter what he'd done he'd never see the inside of a courtroom, far less a jail cell, and any fine would be paid by mummy us, but if this works for him, forever after it'll be "He'd have gone down if it hadn't been for that agreement"

I know this is a deeply upsetting delicate case but fact he's having to defend his sweating, its so undignified!* It amuses me.*

I have a feeling that in the highly unlikely event that he's being cross-examined in a US court, he may rediscover his ability to sweat. Profusely.

They were 12 year old triplet girls.

nypost.com/2019/08/19/jeffrey-epstein-was-sent-three-12-year-old-french-girls-as-birthday-gift/

The bastard is going to get off Scot free isn't he?

Aye, probably

I do wonder if VG is still, whilst undoubtedly having been treated appallingly by JE/GM and their vile friends, is being exploited by incredibly rich people with their own agendas. Her legal costs must be astronomical and outstrip any SA she had.

Must be plenty of, say, rich (see also ex) Australians where she now lives, who hate the British Monarchy enough and who hated GM's father enough to bank roll all this. The outcome for those people wouldn't be to necessarily get justice for VG, but the ripple effect would be their preferred outcome if there were to be a referendum in Australia or the Uk.

Following- I think he's guilty, but I also think he's so arrogant he didn't realise how seriously wrong his behaviour was.

Interesting, role that private jets play in all of this.

@100problems

I do wonder if VG is still, whilst undoubtedly having been treated appallingly by JE/GM and their vile friends, is being exploited by incredibly rich people with their own agendas. Her legal costs must be astronomical and outstrip any SA she had.

Must be plenty of, say, rich (see also ex) Australians where she now lives, who hate the British Monarchy enough and who hated GM's father enough to bank roll all this. The outcome for those people wouldn't be to necessarily get justice for VG, but the ripple effect would be their preferred outcome if there were to be a referendum in Australia or the Uk.

That’s an interesting theory. You’re right, her costs must be astronomical.

@IntermittentParps

Marking place. I agree that GM won’t go for a plea bargain until or unless a tedious round of appeals and attempts to overturn the verdict are exhausted. Too many powerful people would be pissed off.

I have posted about this elsewhere. The ONLY route for appeal for Maxwell is to show that the judge has erred in law AND that the error has affected the verdict reached by the jury. This is difficult.

For example, the judge granted anonymity to certain witnesses. Assuming that her team try to claim the judge erred in law here, that is not sufficient. They also have to show that not granting anonymity would have changed the verdict the jury reached. Clearly it would not have done so.

All legal commentators agree that, at best, Maxwell's team have a very steep hill to climb to win an appeal. She might think she has nothing to lose, and I suppose she doesn't, but given that sentence hasn't been passed yet it would be unwise to antagonise the judge too much.

[quote Roussette]They were 12 year old triplet girls.

nypost.com/2019/08/19/jeffrey-epstein-was-sent-three-12-year-old-french-girls-as-birthday-gift/[/quote]
If the accounts of this article are true, and I strongly suspect they are, I am truly sickened.
The following line, in particular, stood out:
“Laughing the whole way through, Jeffrey thought it was absolutely brilliant how easily money seduced all walks of life, nothing or no one that couldn’t be bought.”

These children were never people to him; they were items to be bought, used and discarded.

Quite intriguing that this thread appears (so far) to be free of the low-quality thinking ("..but sex at 17 isn't a crime ...") that seemed so much a feature of the last thread.

Presumable someones shift hasn't started yet. Or is today a holiday in Russia ?

I'm hoping the US lawyers have a good double bluff game...he positions himself as part of the group of people excluded from VG being able to sue them...and then one of the other women sues him and they use it against him.

And it's why I've gone from quite the royalist decades ago to completely the opposite now.

You mean the whole iniquity and absurdity of having a Monarch - who in law is above you - wasn't enough ?

Must be plenty of, say, rich (see also ex) Australians where she now lives, who hate the British Monarchy enough and who hated GM's father enough to bank roll all this. The outcome for those people wouldn't be to necessarily get justice for VG, but the ripple effect would be their preferred outcome if there were to be a referendum in Australia or the Uk.

That thought had occurred to me too @100problems, someone wealthy with a desire to see Australia become a republic.

With regard to the unsealed documents showing Ms Giuffre's agreement with Epstein, her team (Ms Giuffre's) were remarkably relaxed about this when it was first mooted. They thought there was nothing there that would help Andrew.

On the face of it, it seems to be a 'get out of jail free' card. However, I think the problem is that it is simply too broad and too vague to be enforceable. In some ways it reminds me of a contract that directly contradicts statutory law. Such contracts are unenforceable. For example, if you sign a job contract that waives your right to sue for unfair dismissal such a contract would automatically be deemed unfair and unenforceable.

Similarly, if you sign a contract that is too broad and vague it is often unenforceable. Courts generally like documents that are precise and easily understood.

I think the judge's decision tomorrow will be interesting and I wouldn't be surprised if they say the agreement is essentially unenforceable.

That thought had occurred to me too @100problems, someone wealthy with a desire to see Australia become a republic.

Has that activated the Murdoch batphone ?

Good thinking @wheresmymojo, I wonder if there are others with a photo of PA anywhere. If he was stupid enough to me in one, you'd hope there might be others.

@SerendipityJane

And it's why I've gone from quite the royalist decades ago to completely the opposite now.

You mean the whole iniquity and absurdity of having a Monarch - who in law is above you - wasn't enough ?

It's worse than that. The Monarch is above the law. They are literally untouchable.

If the Monarch went on a killing spree there is literally no legal recourse.

The Monarch has no driving license, so it cannot be taken away from him/her as an example.

The Freedom of Information Act exempts the entire Royal Family - why is this do you suppose ?

I doubt a GDPR submission to the Royal Family would be filled, and now we have left the EU there is no appeal to any court that could enforce it.

The Royal Household is exempt from things like the Equalities Act, their wills are sealed (nobody else's will is sealed), they are exempt from tax...the list just goes on and on (and on).

@ParkheadParadise

The bastard is going to get off Scot free isn't he?

Aye, probably

Most likely - at the very least I hope this has swayed public opinion in favour of abolishing the monarchy all together.

@SerendipityJane surely not as a result of the musings of our little thread

@SerendipityJane

I am talking decades ago! Not recently. I educated myself.

Curzon dax.

According to VF article linked earlier. Epstein was living in a small condo.
By fateful manoeuvre he ends up meeting les wexler a man who said he had more money than he could ever spend.
Then seemingly somehow epstein has something on wexler or does something and takes his wealth. Its all linked to wexler and someone said at the end.. There is more to come out and I hope wexler oz dead when it does.

Living in a condo, disgraced in his job then suddenly he hits the jack pot with les, who also owns Victor's secret and history friendship either ghislane was incredible for him.
For that reason it doesn't surprise me at all he's laughing.
This is a reflection on our society really.