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!

@Eachdaygoesby - you have said it SO much better than me!

Im sure andrew sat with his brother edward and his family, dont know why pp said he sat at the back?

As a previous poster has said - if a woman is trafficked, then she is not freely consenting, so regardless of her age at the time, the legal age of consent in that jurisdiction, or how she behaves - it is still rape

Only if the law on trafficked women says so. Which it did not at the time in UK- the changes were later. Which US (state/federal) law/s covered trafficking at the time?

(PS: just because something is not criminal does not make it right. And appropriating the language of crime doesn't really achieve

@ssd

Im sure andrew sat with his brother edward and his family, dont know why pp said he sat at the back?

I think PPwas suggesting where she thought he should be sitting.

"He has engaged in morally very dubious behaviour, but then so has his accuser, who has been vulnerable to incriminating herself because of her own behaviour around Epstein.

This is victim blaming, pure and simple. VG was a teenager, manipulated and groomed by GM and JE, and probably other adults around her too.

And given the difficulty of proving rape, and the low likelihood of getting a conviction even when there is forensic evidence, the fact that he hasn't been convicted only means that he is not guilty in the eyes of the law - it doesn't make him innocent, morally and ethically, of the crimes alleged. If I had a teenage daughter, I would not want them hanging out with PA.

It was part of Andrew's plan all along to let us all know he isn't going anywhere. It was a statement.

Here I am.

It was aggressively entitled, typical of the type of man that thinks he can do as he pleases (and has just proved he can) and he traded his own father's lasting memorial and his mother's reputation in order to achieve it.

Sadly it will just make people detest him even more. Slow clap for the dunce at the front.

I have no idea what the half sibling thing is about. He was seated at the back of the siblings as far as I recall where he didn’t stand out much. That was the sort of thing I meant. Put him out of the limelight

He was sitting with siblings in birth order, not at the back.

I took the 'at the back' but to mean literally at the back.

It did take him out of the goldfish bowl though. Remember the whooo haaa about William and harry and what order they walked into the church, who ignored who and who spoke to who. It avoided all of that palaver. I think that may have been the reason more than anything else.

Let's imagine that in alternative universe he put the Royal Family and his father first for once. Slipped in quietly into the pew without a word and was the epitome of discretion and left without a word, no one would have said anything at all about him, some may even considered him to be a decent chap after all, but no one thinks that now.

We all know what he is, we can all see what he is doing, he fools no one apart from his mother (and I am not even sure she is on board)

It is SO depressing how on any thread about this subject there are so many posters who seemingly have absolutely no understanding of grooming. I would expect better of a majority female forum. I hope these people aren’t raising children.

@ssd

The andrew apologists on here are really mind boggling. The trying to make the focus just about the fact he was going to his dads memorial with his old mum. Not the focus he's paid out 12million to someone accusing him of assault. Which he denied and has been kept well out the way for as long as possible. Until now. No one cares if he's there or not. No one expects him not to be there. But the fact is he's centre stage walking in with the queen, not avoiding the press, not going in quietly. There's no more prominent position than next to her. That's why people are angry, not because he was there in the first place.

Completely agree with this

@Swayingpalmtrees you have totally misinterpreted my point. You can't post things like that as it is libelous. I have asked MNHQ to remove it for you - you're welcome

@DingleyDel

It is SO depressing how on any thread about this subject there are so many posters who seemingly have absolutely no understanding of grooming. I would expect better of a majority female forum. I hope these people aren’t raising children.

It is so very depressing DingleyDel

If anyone is in any doubt then this is a good document to read:

www.nspcc.org.uk/what-is-child-abuse/types-of-abuse/grooming/

@SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius

"He has engaged in morally very dubious behaviour, but then so has his accuser, who has been vulnerable to incriminating herself because of her own behaviour around Epstein.

This is victim blaming, pure and simple. VG was a teenager, manipulated and groomed by GM and JE, and probably other adults around her too.

And given the difficulty of proving rape, and the low likelihood of getting a conviction even when there is forensic evidence, the fact that he hasn't been convicted only means that he is not guilty in the eyes of the law - it doesn't make him innocent, morally and ethically, of the crimes alleged. If I had a teenage daughter, I would not want them hanging out with PA.

No, it isn't victim blaming.

It is simple fact.

@Swayingpalmtrees

Let's imagine that in alternative universe he put the Royal Family and his father first for once. Slipped in quietly into the pew without a word and was the epitome of discretion and left without a word, no one would have said anything at all about him, some may even considered him to be a decent chap after all, but no one thinks that now.

We all know what he is, we can all see what he is doing, he fools no one apart from his mother (and I am not even sure she is on board)

It would however still have been in all the papers, and there would have been pictures of him in the pew on the front pages.

that is how the media works.

@DingleyDel

It is SO depressing how on any thread about this subject there are so many posters who seemingly have absolutely no understanding of grooming. I would expect better of a majority female forum. I hope these people aren’t raising children.

The grooming was by JE and GM, was it not?

It is reprehensible that DoY was and remained friends with them. But no-one has come forward to allege that he was a groomer or knew anything about it.

Of the groomers, both were convicted of various offences and one is now dead and the other one is in prison.

I’ll repeat Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
Like it or not whatever the allegations Andrew has not been found guilty in a criminal court. I’d imagine his civil settlement will have made no admission of guilt either.

So whatever Anyones view of him as a person lowlife he is entitled to be there. He’s stepped back from royal life or been sacked. He’s not really going to feature much going forward as I don’t think PC will risk it.

But until such time as a court of law finds him guilty, he is innocent. In any event no charges have ever been brought to prosecute him.

It’s a fact that VR was groomed by Epstein and Maxwell from a young age. Part of that was grooming her to recruit other girls (if that’s what you mean by incriminating herself). She has acknowledged this and the shame she’s had to live with. It’s part of the abuse. To blame her for this is absolutely victim blaming.

@DingleyDel

It is SO depressing how on any thread about this subject there are so many posters who seemingly have absolutely no understanding of grooming. I would expect better of a majority female forum. I hope these people aren’t raising children.

It’s also depressing that many on here do not know or care to know how the law works or that it’s innocent until proven guilty.

If you were alleged to have committed a crime would you like to be convicted before trial? Guilty before being found innocent? Told because someone started a claim for X in a civil court, which you settled on lawyers advice, you were guilty because you settled?

@BlanketsBanned

He was helping his elderly mum, they walked in the short route away from the main route, its their business, not ours and he was not there representing the RF.

I agree with this.

@DingleyDel

It’s a fact that VR was groomed by Epstein and Maxwell from a young age. Part of that was grooming her to recruit other girls (if that’s what you mean by incriminating herself). She has acknowledged this and the shame she’s had to live with. It’s part of the abuse. To blame her for this is absolutely victim blaming.

I'll also repeat, it is the case that her behaviour in recruiting other young girls potentially lays her open to charges herself.

This is an issue that her lawyers have had to negotiate and could well be part of the reason she settled out of court.

I'm not blaming her for that as such, just mentioning that it is one of the legal issues. No doubt there are mitigating issues, just as no doubt there were financial inducements for her at the time.

"Disgusting victim blaming, rape apologist bull shit. How dare you minimise what happens to those girls."
-----------------------
I'm minimising or apologising for rape. She was trafficked by Epstein - an evil man, who killed himself. Do you think he said to Andrew, "I've trafficked this young girl for you"? And why do you think she hasn't changed her father? Because he isn't as rich? Is it true that other rich men in the U.S. have paid her off?
You are maybe maximising?

EdithWeston no ones suggested PA did the grooming (just the rapes and sexual assaults and of course he knew all the young women around JE were groomed, he was very close friends with GM for years). My post was in response to posters who continually try to play it down by suggesting VG was essentially willing to have sex with him, was well rewarded, or even somehow responsible for the whole sorry mess. It’s absolutely disgusting.

Sorry - missed NOT in the first line. Rather important...

There are lots and lots of posts on here trying to convince us that Andy is a lovely lovely chap - nothing to see here at all. I wonder how they came to the conclusion that a huge multimillion pound settlement was Andy being helpful and cost cutting and not an admission of guilt, which seems wildly out of touch with the average person on the street's view of proceedings.

One can only imagine that the days are numbered for the RF as we know it.