Who advised the Queen to walk into the Abbey escorted by Andrew??

[TinyTortoise]

This seems to be the most tone deaf and damaging decision. It's a public facing event with international leaders and royals. If it was a closed family gathering I could understand it - he is her son still- but why on earth would they allow him to escort her to her seat?! He should be invisible from now on and never represent the RF again. He could have attended and stood somewhere out of the way. She could have chosen anyone to escort her. It's staggeringly awful!

@Swayingpalmtrees

moggy please see my links, I do not agree with you.

Yes, and I think you are factually wrong

@Swayingpalmtrees

moggy please see my links, I do not agree with you.

I said I give up but I really can’t!!

Again your links are to a CIVIL CLAIM not a criminal one. Understand when people more experienced than you in this field try to explain it.

@User76745333

£12 million is a lot to pay if he was innocent. If he had nothing to hide, why not have your day in court??

Because it would have cost millions anyway to defend the claim and in the meantime the publicity and stress causes even greater damage to those involved and their families. Any lawyer would have told him to settle (and I speak as one).

But if he's got his mums millions going spare, wouldn't defending your name be the only thing that mattered to you?

Among the most prominent was Prince Andrew, the British royal who was sued for damages in August 2021 by alleged Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre for allegedly raping and sexually abusing her when she was 17. “I am holding Prince Andrew accountable for what he did to me,” Giuffre said in a statement. “The powerful and the rich are not exempt from being held responsible for their actions.” The prince certainly qualifies as part of that cohort: As Queen Elizabeth’s third child, he is ninth in line to the British crown*

It is alleged VG was forced, and it clearly states the lawsuit beneath. To save time I have linked it below.

I am linking the Intelligenca so you can see the whole article:

nymag.com/intelligencer/article/prince-andrew-epstein-sexual-abuse-lawsuit-latest-updates.html

There is no question what the lawsuit was about, and how much was paid to make it go away.

Stop muddying the waters, it is insulting.

And if you want to defend your name
If you want to clear the cases made against you, you DONT pay off the victims!

You go to court, you stand in the dock and your prove your case beyond all reasonable doubt. A jury or Judge finds you innocent and you return to your life with your reputation, integrity and creditability in tact.

You do not get Mummy to pay millions to make your wrong doing disappear.....that just makes you look guilty as hell.

If she was underage, then technically it was rape. But I don't suppose she was dragged to bed, kicking & screaming. Epstein had apparently told her to see that Andrew "had a good time".
She had worked for Epstein for some time, her father, it is said, had driven her to Epstein's home. Is she suing him for trafficking? Or did he think she was being flown around on millionaire's jets to serve the tea?

You're disgusting. I hope you're a man as I cannot believe a woman would state what you have just written.

Paying out £12M may have been much less than proceeding to Court in the US. Payout could have been huge. I understand why it is upsetting but VG would not have got that suing in a UK Civil Court. I’m dismayed she settled for money but it is a huge amount.

@Swayingpalmtrees

And if you want to defend your name If you want to clear the cases made against you, you DONT pay off the victims!

You go to court, you stand in the dock and your prove your case beyond all reasonable doubt. A jury or Judge finds you innocent and you return to your life with your reputation, integrity and creditability in tact.

You do not get Mummy to pay millions to make your wrong doing disappear.....that just makes you look guilty as hell.

So why didn't she insist on going to Court rather than accepting the money?

I am pretty sure if that were me I would want my day in Court especially if my allegations were against someone famous.

Oh and I wish posters would stop saying she was under age. In the UK she WAS NOT

BadgerB you have NO idea. She lived on the streets at a young age, her father probably thought he could make some money out of her. What victim blaming. Embarrassing for you.

Would you be happy if your DD (if you have one) working for a man like Epstein at age 15?
No. Thought not.

@ididntevennotice

I watched it. You barely saw him. Last to arrive, first to leave and no close ups. He was as close to invisible as it’s possible to get.

Yet it's front page news for tomorrow - he wasn't invisible.

Front page news in our scum newspapers - who cares?

None of the people I have spoken to are upset by Andrew being there. They all say the same that he was fully entitled to be at his own father's memorial, he was perfectly entitled to help his very elderly mother walk in and out of the Abbey.

So why didn't she insist on going to Court rather than accepting the money?

You obviously have NO idea about the whole sordid thing. Victims had tried for years to get the case to court. Do you know about his first conviction? Do you know about the two sisters who had reported to the FBI what he was doing? Do you know about the inaction?
VG did not have a lot of choice.

In the UK she WAS NOT

It didn't all happen in the UK.

The rape and Andrew apologists on this thread should be ashamed of it. I don't know why they just don't say 'she was asking for it' and be done.

None of the people I have spoken to are upset by Andrew being there

How many times does it have to be said. NO ONE is saying he shouldn't be there, it was his father FFS.
It was the 'escorting the Queen in' bit.

Entitled. Yep...you've got it. That's been Andrew all his life. Nothing changes

It is far from clear that there would have been a guilty verdict had the case gone to court.

It would have to have been established that VG was technically underage in the location that any sexual contact took place (assuming that it took place).

Also, it seems more than possible that she appeared consenting (or even may have appeared to initiate such contact).

It also seems very possible that Andrew did not know she was underage (not particularly interested or asking about it) and did not know she was trafficked.

Had the case gone to court VG might have incriminated herself further re getting other young girls involved with Epstein.

I think she did pretty well out of the settlement all things considering, possibly because the royal family did not want the court case further distracting from the Queen's Jubilee.

Andrew has been further punished with the loss of titles, roles and the damage to his reputation.

He behaved unwisely and rather callously no doubt. He has faced the consequences of that.

@Roussette

So why didn't she insist on going to Court rather than accepting the money?

You obviously have NO idea about the whole sordid thing. Victims had tried for years to get the case to court. Do you know about his first conviction? Do you know about the two sisters who had reported to the FBI what he was doing? Do you know about the inaction?
VG did not have a lot of choice.

In the UK she WAS NOT

It didn't all happen in the UK.

The rape and Andrew apologists on this thread should be ashamed of it. I don't know why they just don't say 'she was asking for it' and be done.

She certainly did have a choice. She could have gone to Court but no she decided to take a large sum of money.

'None of the people I have spoken to are upset by Andrew being there. They all say the same that he was fully entitled to be at his own father's memorial, he was perfectly entitled to help his very elderly mother walk in and out of the Abbey.'

Yes and we don't have to like it but let's put the increasingly frail looking 95 yr old's wishes first. He avoided the public and the media, we went in the side door escorting his dm. Seemed a perfect solution imo.

@Roussette

None of the people I have spoken to are upset by Andrew being there

How many times does it have to be said. NO ONE is saying he shouldn't be there, it was his father FFS.
It was the 'escorting the Queen in' bit.

Entitled. Yep...you've got it. That's been Andrew all his life. Nothing changes

He helped his very elderly and frail mother to walk into his father's memorial.

You can use the word "escorted" to make it sound worse but he walked her in and out of a side door.

She may not have much time left and if she wanted him to be the one to help her and he wanted to do so then that's all there is too it.

No matter what he did, where he sat etc some posters would moan and groan and be furious. The papers would also make a great fuss as our awful press love to do. Showing one of his daughters visibly upset is pretty disgusting

@Swayingpalmtrees

It is making my blood boil as well. As a survivor I take great exception to the minimising going on here purple

Adding another rape victim's voice to the disgust at the apologism whenever a woman dares to speak openly about her experiences. What's the problem, are we making men look bad?

The post claiming to know the 'technicality' of rape based upon age is also not only offensive but wildly inaccurate. That poster could do to familiarize themselves with the law before embarrassing themselves with such ignorance.

Frankly, I hope the Windsors continue to do precisely what they do. People are bound to be asking more questions about the future of this dinosaur following two monumental blunders in a week: the ghastly, ill-advised 'tour' complete with dreadful landrover pose and yesterday's debacle. The convictions of his 'friends' vindicates the victims' stories, and Windsor knowingly fraternized with one of them post that conviction. This wasn't an old lady's private memorial for her late husband. It was a public-facing event, broadcast on national TV, involving our Head of State being escorted by a man who knowingly associated with human traffickers. Not good enough. Nowhere near good enough.

He avoided the public and the media

He stood in the centre of the fucking abbey with the Queen in front of a ton of cameras!

The very idea he shuffled in discreetly is truly ridiculous.

Front page news in our scum newspapers - who cares?

The Times, the Telegraph and the Guardian?

I rather imagine Princes Charles and William care quite a lot about mummy's latest misstep.

She may not have much time left and if she wanted him to be the one to help her and he wanted to do so then that's all there is to it.

Except clearly there was more at stake because it’s on the front page of most newspapers. There are discussing it on the news. Only the most naive sycophant could think there would be no reaction to this at all.

It was a choice to have Andrew do this and and it was always going to get this reaction. It’s the queen saying “screw you subjects, I don’t give a shit any more”.

Andrew be in no doubt is trying to resurrect himself into public life, he has no money, no career, no savings and no future beyond being exiled into obscurity. This is his last ditch attempt with the one person he knew would not say no to him. This is him trying to say he is back.

When the Queen is no longer here to pander to him he will be truly kicked into the long grass, and he knows it. For most of us, not a minute too soon.

There is so much that is not the public domain - we do not know the full facts and never well, that is is the same for many many issues so the facts are; anyone in the UK is who is not convicted of a crime is innocent. We have to accept this - had this been a member of the public and not a member of the royal family I would like to think people were understanding an individual is innocent. The royal family has made a decision that Andrew is withdrawing from public life - but he is a member of a family and as a member of a family I think they are doing the right thing involving him in a family event. The fact he walked his mother to her seat in my view was no big deal - it might have been different had it been the full isle - as I would have expected that to have been Prince Charles. I don't really think it matters, far more important issues in the world

The rape and Andrew apologists on this thread should be ashamed of it. I don't know why they just don't say 'she was asking for it' and be done

I’m not an apologist at all. I’m pointing out the law. A fact which a number of some on here are ignorant about. A person is deemed innocent until guilty.

Had VG felt strongly that she wished to have her day in court or was convinced she would succeed then she would not have settled. But she did settle; so I suspect she may have found it hard to prove her case to the burden of proof required.

For me trafficking, rape and sexual assault is important, very important, it might not be for you twelly but you do not speak for the majority.