Prince Andrew Thread 3

[Roussette]

Here is the previous thread...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_royal_family/4443261-Prince-Andrew-Thread-2?watched=1&msgid=114083283#114083283

There's a massive amount of people who feel like your MIL does LakieLady. Even on here and on these threads in the past.

People often put it down to age, but I'm pretty old and I don't feel like your MIL!

I read or heard late yesterday (can't remember where, might have been on Sky whilst I was catching up with the events surrounding our dear leader)... that his interview may well be used in court.
That will be interesting (understatement)

My MIL(83, but very intelligent and still with all her marbles in place) loves them all, to the point where she refuses to believe that Andrew has, or even may have, done anything wrong. Ah those evil MILs

I had to explain to her that trafficked women and girls can't freely give consent, but are under duress. She then decided that, if anything happened, PA can't have known VG was trafficked, and is therefore blameless.

I agree with her to a certain extent. I'm not convinced he did have sex with the woman. I've seen interviews with her and find her unconvincing as far as PA goes.

And if they had sex she was over the UK age of consent. So no law broken here. He cannot be expected to know if a willing sexual partner had been trafficked.

He's a total sleaze, I have no doubt, but I'm not close to being convinced about this case. Too much money involved for lawyers and attention seekers.

I do believe G was exploited by Epstein in many ways and deserves the compensation she's already received but am utterly unconvinced that PA knew about it.

I meant to add this woman s still being exploited by old white men for their own selfish ends.

This problem would all go away if one of the protagonists dies. That isn't hyperbole but a statement of fact.

If - as many, myself included - you believe that Epsteins premature demise was possibly assisted in anyway, then the "logic" that underpins that also underpins the notion that dark forces are at work. Hence my concern for VG whose only official protection is being provided by a mechanism that is ultimately presided over by the mother of her opponent. And it's a matter of fact that her madge has stuck her nose into Australian affairs over the heads of elected advisers back in the 1970s. Not that we would have known this if it had been up to her.

However, Prince Andrew is also under the same protection. Or "protection" and is much much easier to access. Bearing in mind George V was effectively murdered to get his death reported in the "right" papers, it's impossible not to accept the Monarchy can be ruthless when it needs.

I believe the trial is slated to September some time ? As long as he keeps his head down it might not sully too much of the platinum jubilee.

On a human note though, none of this can be doing a 95 year old great grandmother any good health wise. If her majesty should pass away in the next few weeks, it would be impossible not to think the stress and strain of this situation exacerbated it. Especially as she's probably already aware of what the last significant news story of her reign might be.

Those MILs were impressionable teens when the 1953 coronation was broadcast. It's like pope worship, you can't reason with them.

Well, his other option is to win the lawsuit. I think that would go some way to clearing his name. He will have to tell the truth when giving evidence, and I expect that that will conflict somewhat with the guff he gave to Emily Maitliss, but if the truth is that he didn't know she was trafficked and that she appeared and maybe actually was a willing participant, then he should win.

He's a horrible sleaze whichever way you look at it, really, but that's different from the stigma of "rapist."

On a human note though, none of this can be doing a 95 year old great grandmother any good health wise.

It's hard not to feel sorry for her. Royal circles seem to be packed with entitled, sleazy men, but you still don't expect your own son to slope around with known paedophiles.

And if they had sex she was over the UK age of consent. So no law broken here. He cannot be expected to know if a willing sexual partner had been trafficked

It's been repeated on these threads time and time again. The civil case is in the US. The case talks of three places they had sex. One was NY. It was illegal there. It's nothing to do with 'here'.

Whether he knew or not, how vile to think a 40 year old man sleeping with a 17 year old. I know he can't be tried for being unsavoury and abhorrent, but really.... I hope he doesn't rest easy again.

Plankton No chance. He abused her 3 times, not just in London but in JE's NY mansion full of weird paedo art, photos and cameras. And on Little St James. No way did he not know what JE and GM were doing.

I agree NiceShrubbery I've said this many a time on these threads.

Young girls going in and out of rooms, giving foot massages, girls looking about 14 or whatever. A human sized chess board in the NY mansion. A wall of tits. Erotic pictures everywhere. Massage rooms and so on...
Can he really be that dim.

He looks guilty as hell from where I'm sitting, I agree. But she still has to prove her case.

I suppose they'll go after VG and try to show her motives for lying. I wonder if it will come out how much she has been paid in secret settlements, and by whom. That would be interesting.

That he justified all of it to his overentitled self is certain, though. In his tiny reptile brain it was all absolutely fine.

And a plane nicknamed the Lolita express.

@PlanktonsComputerWife

On a human note though, none of this can be doing a 95 year old great grandmother any good health wise.

It's hard not to feel sorry for her. Royal circles seem to be packed with entitled, sleazy men, but you still don't expect your own son to slope around with known paedophiles.

It's actually quite easy not to feel sorry for her when you suddenly remember how much wealth she has had these past 70 years while people have literally starved to death waiting for benefits claims.

Then you remember she's the head of a church that owns fucktonnes of land (more than you would every guess) while people go homeless whilst at the same time preaching charity.

Trust me, she is well saved. You don't need a song for that.

As the proverb has it: there's none so blind as those who will not see

It's been repeated on these threads time and time again. The civil case is in the US. The case talks of three places they had sex. One was NY. It was illegal there. It's nothing to do with 'here'.

No, it wasn't. The age of consent in New York is 17. It was 17 at the time of the alleged encounter (although 14-year-olds could marry in New York at that time - that was changed to 18 in 2017, but the age of consent for sex is still 17). Giuffre was, therefore, over the age of consent.

Ok. Thanks for the correction. I believed it to be a gray area. I got that wrong then!

It's actually quite easy not to feel sorry for her when you suddenly remember how much wealth she has had these past 70 years while people have literally starved to death waiting for benefits claims
Then you remember she's the head of a church that owns fucktonnes of land (more than you would every guess) while people go homeless whilst at the same time preaching charity. It's all about money in your world isn't it.

AndAnotherNewOne

VG is the only one who's managed to get to trial. What makes you think she was the only one he abused?

How many blameless law-abiding men do you know that accept blow-up dolls of themselves from their friends while sitting on a sofa surrounded by the art mentioned upthread, and then say they didn't know their friends were sociopathic paedophiles?

www-vanityfair-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/08/prince-andrew-puppet-jeffrey-epstein-virginia-giuffre-assault-allegations/amp?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16420660123381&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=Da%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vanityfair.com%2Fstyle%2F2020%2F08%2Fprince-andrew-puppet-jeffrey-epstein-virginia-giuffre-assault-allegations

It's all about money in your world, isn't it?

Not in our world. In the queen's world. Money, horses, other people's resources. That's all she cares about. What's she going to do with it all when she goes? That's right, leave it tax-free to a bunch of benefits cheats.

@NiceShrubbery

It's all about money in your world, isn't it?

Not in our world. In the queen's world. Money, horses, other people's resources. That's all she cares about. What's she going to do with it all when she goes? That's right, leave it tax-free to a bunch of benefits cheats.

So the Queen has never felt any human emotion in her whole life? She married a poor man for love. Does that count?

How many blameless law-abiding men do you know that accept blow-up dolls of themselves from their friends

A Spitting Image puppet is not in any way a blow-up doll. There is nothing sexual about it at all.

Let's not go there, prh47bridge. Let's really not even go there, it just takes up thread space.

PA is a proven liar and dodger of legal process who's now having to account for what he did and disprove for the benefit of his small fanclub what the rest of the world knows to be true. Those are the facts, sorry if you don't like them.