Prince Andrew Thread 4

[Roussette]

I'm starting a new one as events seem to be moving again. Sorry I can't do a link to no. 3

@MayThePawsBeWithYou

I wouldnt have gone back after the first session if any client was being inappropriate and I was there as a professional masseuse

Particularly if the DM is correct and he insisted on having the massage in his bedroom, with only a towel on.

The article mentions he wore a robe, is it normal just to wear a towel, I have never had a massage.

@MuffinStrops

The other thing I simply can’t understand is why SF seems to think he’s so wonderful. Is she complicit and as morally bankrupt as he is? I do wonder.

Yes and yes.

@MuffinStrops

The other thing I simply can’t understand is why SF seems to think he’s so wonderful. Is she complicit and as morally bankrupt as he is? I do wonder.

We don't yet know that he is morally bankrupt.

I don't believe her though.

I missed this in the news , eww he really is a piece of work isn't he/

We don't yet know that he is morally bankrupt

Well, yes we do.

See dodgy dealings and rumblings of disquiet throughout his manufactured role as 'trade envoy' as a starter then progress to enjoying the hospitality of a convicted sex offender.

Latest allegations are unfortunately for him all too believeable. Awful lot of people wih no apparent skin in the game but a lot to lose in a potential defamation case seem to be coming forward.

From how it's written she was disgusted & intimidated but meeting him was a referral from SF via being a client. Maybe she was worried about losing multiple clients.

It's just disgusting this can happen

What stood out for me is Andrew telling her ‘you can’t talk to me like that’. He’s obviously so arrogant he thinks it’s okay to humiliate and embarrass a woman who is there to do a job . It sounds like some kind of power trip for him. He also seems to equate masseuse with whore. Which is interesting.
I don’t think there is any doubt at all he is morally bankrupt.

Ferguson's loyalty to this delightful specimen is perhaps not entirely divorced from financial interest.

Did Major Ron Ferguson go to massage parlours or am I misremembering?

@upinaballoon

Did Major Ron Ferguson go to massage parlours or am I misremembering?

The News of the World ran a story about his membership of the Wigmore Club which they described as a health club and massage parlour in London. The newspaper alleged that the female staff offered sexual services to members. He maintained that he had used it for massage only.

@MayThePawsBeWithYou

The article mentions he wore a robe, is it normal just to wear a towel, I have never had a massage.

Nor have I but films and TV shows certainly suggest that is normal. The Wellness Council say on their website, "Once you get to your appointment, what usually happens is your massage therapist will ask you to undress to whatever level you are most comfortable with. This could mean wearing underwear or even going completely nude. At the end of the day, it’s completely up to you how much to undress." So it looks to me like that part of the reporting is the press trying to make something out of nothing. His reported words were, of course, highly inappropriate if Ms Gruenbaum's claims are correct.

@MuffinStrops

The other thing I simply can’t understand is why SF seems to think he’s so wonderful. Is she complicit and as morally bankrupt as he is? I do wonder.

She lives a luxury lifestyle, is permanently in debt and appears to be quite shameless. Those headlines about selling access to Andrew just sum her up, really.

The other thing I simply can’t understand is why SF seems to think he’s so wonderful

He's her meal ticket...

Maybe the benefits of being his exw outweighs the negatives

I'm away and a lot of US news is being fed to my phone. I'm a bit out the loop
Just seen NY Post's headline...

PRINCE ANDREW OBSESSED WITH ANAL SEX

That is what the masseuse said about him, not the paper.

I do not believe in the masseuse! Who knows what the papers paid her and is that really her in the photograph? It just doesn't ring true.

@Roussette

I'm away and a lot of US news is being fed to my phone. I'm a bit out the loop Just seen NY Post's headline...

PRINCE ANDREW OBSESSED WITH ANAL SEX

Oh pul-eeze! What will they come up with next? They really are scraping the bottom (no pun intended) of the barrel now.

It did make me laugh though....

It's not a crime with a consenting adult, is it?

Hi @Roussette - I thought I hadn't seen your posts for a while - are you away somewhere nice ?

On my way home now! Yes, a lovely holiday, although the hoops you have to jump through to go and return are pretty stressful, luckily it was all worth while.

@upinaballoon

It's not a crime with a consenting adult, is it?

No, it isn't. It used to be a capital offence - consent was not a defence, nor was the parties being married. The death penalty was removed in 1861 in England and Wales, with Scotland catching up in 1887. In 1967 it became legal for males over 21, but anal sex between a man and a woman did not become legal until 1994. At the same time, the age of consent for homosexual acts was reduced to 18 - this was a compromise after Edwina Currie tried to get it reduced to 16. It was further reduced to 16 in 2000.

However, there are still many people who consider anal sex to be wrong. The fact that it was still a criminal offence within living memory may be a factor.

Ghislaine's motion for a new trial was unsealed today. Interesting that it has nothing to do with the juror who had been abused in the past.
Nothing about Juror 50 and the questionnaire.

The first ground for a new trial relates to counts one through four, and whether or not the abuse had to take place in New York in order for Ghislaine to be convicted on those counts.

The second major ground for a new trial is that there was not enough evidence to convict Ghislaine on all three counts of conspiracy because the conduct across the three counts overlapped. "the proof at trial established, at most, a single conspiracy,"

The motion then repeats their pre-trial argument that the trial was unfair because of delay in bringing the charges. And finally, the motion argues that Ghislaine should get a new trial because "the government failed to prove each element of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt."