Prince Andrew Was Lying (and Sweating) From The Start, Wasn't He?

[TallerSally]

So now we have it, the abject and in all likelihood criminal behaviour of Prince Andrew, still titled Duke of York and still eighth in the line of succession to the British throne, laid out for all to see.

Settled out of court as part of a grotesque cover-up.

Still denying knowing Virginia Giuffre, and presumably Johanna Sjoberg whose breast he allegedly fondled, who are undoubtedly the tip of the iceberg of the girls Prince Andrew and his paedo friend Jeffrey Epstein abused.

Still protected by Buckingham Palace who have gone out of their way to state the accusations as "categorically untrue", as if anyone believes them.

Still supported by the British Royal Family who seem desperate to "rehabilitate him" (and his grifter ex-wife), still living in a Royal Palace presumably at taxpayers expense (i.e. Grifter in Chief), still prancing around at official functions, still oozing a sense of arrogant entitlement, with no-one including King Charles having any sense of courage or moral rectitude to deliver to make him face the consequences of his repugnant actions.

Still being defended by the royal palaces briefing operations and the British media, and by those at ease with shameful double standards on various boards, including this one, who are happy spending their time posting 100'000+ messages a year attacking Meghan and Harry while turning a blind eye to a likely real criminal.

No amount of covering-up will ever rehabilitate Prince Andrew. All it'll do is drag the royal family further down in the esteem of folks with any sense of decency.

I couldn't agree more

problem is all the information we get is circumstantial and speculation

your own post includes “ in all likelihood and undoubtedly”
you obviously hate the RF
but after following this there’s speculation and association but we seem to be lacking facts and hard truths

facts and hard truths

The lack of "facts and hard truths" hasn't stopped the gazillions of speculative posts about Meghan and Harry or anyone else.

Cases of (child) abuse such as this, as with other forms of abuse including domestic abuse, follow a pattern - it's often very difficult to establish "facts and hard truths". In this instance, a multi-million pound settlement strongly suggests that Prince Andrew was lying through his teeth in claiming to have never met Virginia Giuffre, among his other denials, and Buckingham Palace was lying too in "categorically denying" the accusations.

There is no reason to attempt to excuse Prince Andrew's behaviour because of an apparent lack of "facts and hard truths".

Other than, of course, attempting to act in bad faith.

Agree Op

Read the earlier thread re: release of epstein files - fascinating

Agree with OP. But still the diehards will defend this liar.

@BigMandsTattooPortfolio
Some people are a lost cause

But when ‘royal’ issues are on main threads , we can see the truth of how the ‘royals’ are viewed

The Windsor’s protection of sex offenders , financial greed and manipulation of the media are all issues which should be on the main board

Yes it's hideous, but doubtless the palace have worked out that, if they make one paedophile pal pay too heavily, people might move onto the next one who just happens to have the "top job"

Then there are the details Andrew may be able to release if they upset him too much, so overall it may be thought better to keep him inside the tent pissing out, rather than risk attention spreading to others

Maybe.

But in befriending pigs, you get covered in mud.

I believe the Royal Family's defence of paedo Prince Andrew, especially when juxtaposed with their treatment of Harry and Meghan, is causing and will continue to cause significant damage to their image, which no amount of smiling photo ops and ceremonial robes will rehabilitate.

I haven’t read the threads or recent news. Going from the impression of the time- when sex trafficking was not understood the way it is now- it just looked like a man who partied in the kinds of circles where hostesses were expected at parties. As in, a man going to a party with beautiful women available for sex, would have assumed they were paid and chose to be there. He would have assumed it was ‘consensual’. He was viewed as a playboy- always.

I know that consent can’t be bought and we now understand how girls end up groomed and trafficked into those situations. People didn’t then, and some still wouldn’t now.

It still makes him a sleaze and it’s grim, but he wouldn’t have thought he was a pedophile or a trafficker. There are people who think sex work is ok. He would have considered them sex workers, not groomed children

Anyone that disagrees with you need to have a good look at why. The most likely cause is having been brainwashed and over reading rubbish news sources.

Frankly the fact that millions (of taxpayer money...) were paid in a settlement speaks volume.

If there was nothing dodgy they would not have needed to settle out of court.

This is a scandal that is not going away.

If he genuinely had simply had a few drinks with Epstein and it was a case of him being naive/dumb, he could simply have admitted a big error of judgement in having him as an acquaintance and that he had never witnessed and taken part in anything dodgy. he could have said he would happily cooperate in any investigation.

After all it is very likely that many celebrities innocently attended events where nothing happened and that the sexual activities with young girls took place at specific parties with selected guest who knew exactly what they were doing...

Not everyone who knew Epstein socially would have been aware of the wrong-doings.

But in Andrew's case it really looks like there is more to it than just a poor choice of friend and that it is possible he engaged in sexual relations.

Wether he thought they were willing, adult professionals who just naturally gravitate around rich men (let's not pretend that is not a common occurrence) rather than trafficked young girls who were forced into it, that's for the law to find out.

So the best case scenario here is that Andrew had sex with prostitutes who were not that much older than his daughters, then invited the people holding the sex parties round to meet his mother and the rest of the famiy several times, borrowed money from him to pay off his ex wifes debts then, after said purveyor of sex parties was convicted of child sex trafficking decided to ignore that and all the advice to distance himself and go and stay with him for a week. Happily waving off other young girls while there. But at least he hasn't slagged off the Royal family.

they pay because It’s cheaper just to pay to draw a line under it rather than fight it

to me it cast doubt on the person who is willing to be bought off smacks of being about money rather than justice

at work they have paid of loads of employment tribunal cases it’s quick and cheaper not an admission of guilt

He's revolting and should be banished.

What astonishes me is his total lack of self awareness about the whole situation.
That's some level of entitlement.

Sadly, as I said on the other thread, I feel that most of these men will not be brought to justice.

King Charles defended Savile and was best mates with him, helping him hide in plain sight and get his knighthood.

Not my king.

Not really. Really rich privileged bloke socialised with other really rich privileged blokes and thought nothing of it. Was surprised to discover that rich privileged mate was dodgy because people like him can do anything they like- poor guy must be being victimised… so carries on socialising.

Nothing to do with anyone slagging off the royals as far as I can tell.

Everything to do with privilege and wealth. And in Andrew’s case, being a bit dim. I don’t think his behaviour was out of line that of many men in similar positions.

Useful idiots, I think. The kind of people you’d cultivate if you wanted to look ‘above board’. Charles was groomed too, by cynical men who know what he could do for them.

I’m sorry, just no!

It is simply inconceivable that PA thought these girls were sex workers, and not trafficked girls. PA was very close friends with not only Epstein, but also his enabler Ghislaine Maxwell, who is now where Prince Andrew should be. Child sexual abuse was a crime then, as it is now.

There is simply no way PA never enquired where all these girls who looked and behaved like the vulnerable teenagers they were (and not professional sex workers) were coming from. One look at the photo of PA with his arms around Virginia Giuffre says it all. It gives me the absolute creeps, and anyone, let alone any parent, should be revulsed by it.

PA is wanted by the FBI, and cannot travel to the US without being arrested.

For good reason!

And yet he continues to lie, lie and hide - if he’s innocent, why not show some backbone and prove it in court? Harry endured a day and a half in the witness box being cross-examined by supposed rottweiler lawyers - that’s what testimony when you have nothing to hide looks like.

But for pansy Prince Andrew, it’s “I’d rather hide in my castle ordering my servants around and feeling superior as I’m protected by my bro”.

If you believe with 100% certainty Giuffre and her band of gold diggers then you're a fool.

That is a disgusting thing to say and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Do you honestly honestly think that Ghislaine Maxwell would be in prison for 20 years without evidence?

You quite obviously know absolutely nothing about sex trafficking. @THisbackwithavengeance

And I don't think he should be called a nonce or a paedo either. But to besmirch victims like you have done is appalling. I'd report your post but rather it stood by your name for everyone to see.

This

Well..... anyone who calls up a servant from three flights of stairs away to move the curtains half an inch is entitled. They all are.