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!

An interesting thought - if Andrew had been killed in the Falklands, and Harry in Afghanistan they would now be the Royal Family's War Heroes.

Instead of which they are the Villains likely to bring down the monarchy

@BadgerB

HardyBuckette Wed 30-Mar-22 11:58:12

The mish mash of random things you wrote are not a valid argument. You haven't even told us how you think they're relevant, which is not a great surprise. What exactly are you claiming that VG not having taken legal action against her parents tells us about her case against Andrew? Let's have it spelled out clearly so we can all see exactly what claim you're making here.
-----------------------
I wasn't making any argument here. I said nothing about V.G. and her parents, that was "queenofarles". It's difficult on MN to reproduce an argument/discussion between several people, at least, it is for me. What I said was, you have not answered any of "queenofarles" points, which you obviously don't agree with, but which are certainly not "meaningless".
"queenofarles" made several valid points. It is up to you to refute them.

Apologies for the confusion re usernames.

However, you're quite wrong. First of all, the reason they're not a valid argument is not because I don't agree with them. They'd be a mish mash without any actual argument advanced regardless of what I thought, and her post was meaningless before I pointed that out. And secondly, it's not up to me to refute what she wrote, it's up to her to provide some actual meaning given that she's the one who seemingly thinks the things she mentioned have some relevance.

[quote EthelTheAardvark]@TatianaBis, none of that evidences hebephilia by PA.[/quote]
If you read my posts I didn’t say it did. What I said was that no suggestion of it is not entirely accurate.

There is certainly a suggestion of interest: he hung around with a man with abused and exploited young teenage girls. We just can’t be sure of their ages or the extent of his involvement with them.

@Roussette

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

I think that's your true feelings coming out Badger

I also wonder what the girls that VG recruited into Epstein's world now think of her behaviour

What... the other girls apart from VG who were groomed and trafficked? Some posters just do not get it. They need to read how young vulnerable girls are groomed

There is so much victim blaming on this thread it makes me feel nauseous.

No it bloody ain't.

@EthelTheAardvark

So do you or would you spend your spare time hanging out on island full of middle aged millionaires and trafficked teens?

Irrelevant to the point I was making, @Thoosa

It’s either normal, upstanding behaviour or it isn’t.

I agree with a lot of that but the fact is Andrew has consistently denied having sex with her and there is no evidence that he did, yet so many people want to believe the worst of him

Aww poor Andrew. He's been such a beacon of moral fibre and integrity for decades hasn't he? We should feel so sorry for him being dragged through the mud like this.

WHEN has he consistently denied? One carcrash interview with more holes in his story than a string vest.

He is still her son, and Prince Phillip was his father, so being entirely absent is awful

For the thousandth time NO ONE ON THIS THREAD HAS SAID HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE.

Of course he was going to be at his Father's memorial service. But he could have been seated discreetly a row or two back before the service and not escorting (and yes it was escorting) the Queen in.

@JaniieJones

Well the 'air traffic controller' didn't do anything about it (what good eye sight they must have to view passengers from their position). How questionable that they didn't report the incidence of 'female children' being transported.

It's all just a hearsay circus now.

1. That’s not hearsay, which is reported conversation, it was testimony from a direct eye witness.

1. If you bothered to read the link, you would see why nothing was done. (Similar to the Rotherham and Oxford cases here):

The fact that young girls were getting out of his helicopter and getting into his plane, it was like he was flaunting it,” the employee says. “But it was said that he always tipped really well, so everyone overlooked it.”

In fact, it appears that local authorities did nothing to investigate Epstein’s repeated trips with young girls—let alone intervene—despite the fact that he was listed on the island’s registry of sex offenders. Chief William Harvey, a veteran of the Virgin Islands police department, tells Vanity Fair that he does not know who Epstein is, and is unaware of any investigation into him. Sammuel Sanes, a former senator for the Virgin Islands, says he is unaware of any special precautions taken by law enforcement to track the arrivals and departures of Epstein’s jet on St. Thomas, or the movements of his helicopter to and from his private island.

Lawyers for Epstein, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges of sex trafficking, say he “flatly denies any illegal involvement with underage women.” But those on the island who witnessed Epstein in action remain shocked that a convicted pedophile could brazenly continue to travel to and from the United States accompanied by young girls.

“My colleagues and I definitely talked about how we didn’t understand how this guy was still allowed to be around children,” says the former air traffic controller. “We didn’t say anything because we figured law enforcement was doing their job. I have to say that that is regrettable, but we really didn’t even know who to tell, or if anyone really cared.”

@EthelTheAardvark

So do you or would you spend your spare time hanging out on island full of middle aged millionaires and trafficked teens?

Irrelevant to the point I was making, @Thoosa

Relevant to your point is that PA did spend time hanging out with a man surrounded by trafficked teens.

@Roussette

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

I think that's your true feelings coming out Badger

I also wonder what the girls that VG recruited into Epstein's world now think of her behaviour

What... the other girls apart from VG who were groomed and trafficked? Some posters just do not get it. They need to read how young vulnerable girls are groomed

There is so much victim blaming on this thread it makes me feel nauseous.

Sorry Rousette.

Meant to be flippant - came out as swear-y

Don't worry Badger feelings run high on this issue

The age of consent in the US British Virgin islands is 18 years old which was one of the locations named in the law suit, and even with the case in New York it is 'unsettled' legally whether consent can be given between 17 and 18 years old given the disparity in age. He was a disgusting 41 years of age. Either way VG claims she was 'forced' and therefore raped, so the consent issue is largely irrelevant.

There can be no ambiguity about that claim PHD and she said it was several times with a list of different locations. In fact the dates, locations and times are supported by a log on the private jet used at the time.

As she was being trafficked at the time, and indeed Andrew was unable to even recall meeting her despite a contested photo with his arm around her waist, his creditability will have been immediately in jeopardy in court - had a hearing ever taken place when we consider the other mistruths about sweating and such like.

Andrew was mixing with a convicted Paedophile in plain sight AFTER Epstein's first stint in prison, Andrew was under no illusion who Epstein was and indeed publicly called him 'a good friend'

Yes, and when asked outright whether he regretted the friendship, it was a NO with lots of provarication on what the friendship had brought him.
Vile.

'But he could have been seated discreetly a row or two back before the service and not escorting (and yes it was escorting) the Queen in.'

Yes it does seem a strange decision. As I said upthread they don't help themselves and should've known some folk would have been outraged by him daring to walk his dm in and to sit next to his brother . Behind a pillar or perhaps next to that awful Duchess of somewhere would've diluted the horror a bit.

The Queen seems a strong woman though and won't be swayed by what the gossip rags will say.

@gogohm

He's her son, it's his dad's memorial. He's also the only one who is single (well publicly single who knows in private) . I don't think it means anything more than a son helping his frail mother who is stubborn and won't use a wheelchair.

Oh please. As if either of the other two wouldn't have happily done it. Or the archbishop. She made a statement, I've totally lost respect for her now.

And the very same man strolling through central park with his good friend theconvicted Peado Epstein, then pays 12 million pounds of his mother's money to shut down a court case outlining his part in her terrible abuse thinks somehow it is fine and dandy to walk the Queen into the Abbey as if nothing ever happened just a few weeks later.

What a total disgrace.

@Aworldofmyown

My immediate reaction was the same. Then I thought about and decided, as others have said, it was probably the best solution. He is still her son, and Prince Phillip was his father, so being entirely absent is awful. Just a difficult situation really.

This thread and all similar discussion show that it was definitely not the best solution. The best solution wouldn't have involved taking away from the tribute to the DoE, with this as a distraction. There was never any question of his being absent but he didn't have to be so prominent. She's really made a mistake here, standing beside a man who has recently paid £12 million to somebody he has never slept with or met.

've totally lost respect for her now

Me too.

Perhaps Philip was her strength and stay and her moral compass.

'Andrew was mixing with a convicted Paedophile in plain sight AFTER Epstein's first stint in prison, Andrew was under no illusion who Epstein was and indeed publicly called him 'a good friend'

Yes but he just comes across as very stupid rather than devious and someone knowingly colluding in Epstein's crimes.

More an over privileged man used to people throwing themselves at him (not regarding his civil case obviously.. just generally). His advisors and senior royals should've bollocked him years ago.

That said i don't think he should remain in solitary confinent for the rest of his life.

I agree that he comes across as really stupid. But does that explain why he is so tone deaf? Can he really be that thick?

Being 'stupid' is never a defence in the court of law.

The MailOnline now alleging Andrew was supposed to have handed Queenie over to the Dean ‘up church’ but clung onto her till he got to his seat and only then let her go!

Who’s leaking these bizarre allegations? It’s almost funny. But it isn’t.

@Swayingpalmtrees

Being 'stupid' is never a defence in the court of law.

Well no but we aren't in one are we.

Abusers of women do not need to be tone deaf or stupid to asset their sense of entitlement - particularly ones that appear above the law.

I think more likely he was throwing himself at people who were very very wealthy... oligarchs, despots, and the like. He was wowed by ostentation and money.
Hence his JE friendship.

His advisors did try to advise him but he used to tell them to fuck off and he was only answerable to HMQ
And that brings us to where we are today. All of his own making.