Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

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

866 replies

TallerSally · 04/01/2024 14:50

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
40
alltootired · 05/01/2024 17:33

@BigMandsTattooPortfolio so the only people who criticise Andrew are Harry and Meghan fans?
I think you will find most of the public loathe Prince Andrew. It is those defending him who are out of step with public opinion.

CC49 · 05/01/2024 17:35

Livingtothefull · 05/01/2024 13:50

Here is Prince Andrew mentioned by name on official Court documents - a total of 67 times! - yet Buckingham Palace continues to state that the allegations are 'categorically untrue', ie that his accusers are liars.

So there is to be no police investigation into the allegations. His brother Charles, our Head of State, publicly shows support for him - again implying that the accusers are liars.

Alongside this, Charles's son and his wife (not accused of any crimes) are publicly alienated from him and receive far more vilification and hatred from the media and some members of the public, than Andrew. Andrew, unlike Harry, is invited to Sandringham at Chrismas and is greeted by 'well-wishers' on a walkabout.

So many members of the public (including some posters here - on this site of all places) are apologists for sex trafficking, rather than standing up for victims. Maybe these people need to reflect on how all this makes our country look; it utterly disgusts me and is making me ashamed of being British right now.

" Buckingham Palace continues to state that the allegations are 'categorically untrue'," -- how recently has the palace stated this? Thank you.

BigMandsTattooPortfolio · 05/01/2024 17:37

Sigh….I am NOT saying that! Someone posted that people who condemned Andrew and were critical of the royals were likely to be H&M fans. I am saying no - it is possible to be anti royal and critical of H&M at the same time

Samcro · 05/01/2024 17:41

I’m not sure what a Stan is as I’m a grown up, this thread is about Andrew

BigMandsTattooPortfolio · 05/01/2024 17:43

A superfan or obsessive fan, m’lud.

Thatbloodyhedge · 05/01/2024 17:45

This thread is getting ridiculous and needs deleting.
The Royal Family wouldn't know a normal persons life if it kicked them up the arse.
Andrew is a nonce and a sexual predator enabled by others.
Nothing will be done so don't understand the uproar?
Untouchable

Angrycat2768 · 05/01/2024 17:50

BigMandsTattooPortfolio · 05/01/2024 17:37

Sigh….I am NOT saying that! Someone posted that people who condemned Andrew and were critical of the royals were likely to be H&M fans. I am saying no - it is possible to be anti royal and critical of H&M at the same time

Agree. I happen to think Harry is the spoilt, entitled idiot ( and he is a ' blood Royal') yet Meghan is the one being blamed for his behaviour. He was the one who didn't get help for her when she was unwell. He was the one who told her that someone had made comments about Archies skin colour. He was the one who told her Archie wouldn't be a Prince, and then let her believe that it was based on his race rather than because Charles has been talking about this for years ( Oprah was prerecorded. He could have said that wasn't correct) He didn't because he was angry and resentful of his family and wanted to upset them. He was the one who wrote the book. This is all coming from him. She has enabled him, yes, but the narrative is all ' evil narcissist Meghan has corrupted the poor Royal' He would be welcomed back with open arms as long as he ditched his wife and, as a resilt, his children.
However, he is right about his family using lower down members to protect the family. He is right about the press and Palace collusion. But he should know that is the price he pays to get unlimited money and privilege. He should not have used titles for hus children, and he shouldn't be moaning about security. But both of those things come from.the enormous sense of entitlement that comes from being brought up as a member of the Royal Family. What he hasn't done is consort with sex offenders. He has been cast out for talking about his own experience of his own family.

BigMandsTattooPortfolio · 05/01/2024 17:54

Thank you, Angrycat2768 that is what I was trying to ge across. It’s nuanced.

To be clear, I’m absolutely critical of Andrew and the RF.

alltootired · 05/01/2024 17:55

Epstein is the posh equivalent of Rotherham grooming gang.
The Royal Family denying all allegations against Andrew is the equivalent of one of the Rochdale abusers family saying he is innocent.
The difference is that the Royal Family have power so Andrew will never be convicted or even be charged.

The Royal Family have shown us again and again who they are with their friendship and support for Jimmy Saville and Peter Ball. Its about time we started listening.

goodbyestranger · 05/01/2024 17:59

Weird

On every thread about the rf a fan pops up to try to get into a slanging match about Harry and Meghan, I assume in the hope that MN will delete the thread.

New tactics required.

TallerSally · 05/01/2024 18:03

This thread is most definitely about Andrew and the lack of moral rectitude of King Charles and Prince William in their dealings with him.

Of course, part of their strategy is to use Harry and Meghan as diversions to distract the populace from undue focus on the disgusting behaviour amid their royal ranks.

But just like I don’t appreciate being manipulated by the RF and their supportive media, I’m not going to lose my focus on this thread, despite some transparent derailing attempts you can see coming a mile away.

Prince Andrew is not remotely “untouchable“. Last I checked the UK is a democracy, and if enough people keep up the pressure change is inevitable.

It’s folks who declare defeat without lifting a finger and agree to being manipulated into making everything about M&H who are themselves by their complacency and inaction enabling the likes of Prince Andrew to go unpunished.

OP posts:
goodbyestranger · 05/01/2024 18:08

Five star posts OP, thanks 👏

Livingtothefull · 05/01/2024 18:10

CC49 · 05/01/2024 17:35

" Buckingham Palace continues to state that the allegations are 'categorically untrue'," -- how recently has the palace stated this? Thank you.

I have addressed this upthread. BP previously stated that the allegations are untrue; they have done nothing to refute or qualify that statement so their position on this stands.

In the light of the court documents they have recently stated that as Andrew is no longer a working member of the Royal Family they don't comment on him; that is a transparent and cowardly cop out.

goodbyestranger · 05/01/2024 18:14

Agree. Andrew was a working member of the Royal Family at the time of the alleged abuse. They can't wriggle out of that.

goodbyestranger · 05/01/2024 18:15

Except they appear to be trying to do so. More fool them.

LindyLou2020 · 05/01/2024 18:20

I haven't read every post on this thread, so I apologise if someone has already made this plea......
I urge all of you on MN to join Republic. It's not expensive, and they are not a political party.
Have a read as to what they're about - easy to "google"!

shockthemonkey · 05/01/2024 18:27

My husband is a member already, Lindy. I am sorely tempted but I kind of ride on his membership actually. Get all the updates etc.

Roussette · 05/01/2024 18:27

Thank you @LindyLou2020 Good post.

I rejoined after the dreadful treatment of those from Republic who arranged with the Met over months for a safe and suitabe place to protest. And were then arrested and locked up all day.

shockthemonkey · 05/01/2024 18:34

Samcro · 05/01/2024 17:03

What have H&M got to do with what Andrew has done?
why do they get shoe horned into these threads. It’s like posters want to derail

I think you'll find that @Livingtothefull introduced the H&M topic herself at 13.50 today. That's how it got "shoe horned in", by someone who was making the point that H&M are used to distract from Andrew.

Think you'll find that quite a few of us are able to conceptually separate both issues, and be critical of both Andrew and H&M.

Livingtothefull · 05/01/2024 18:46

shockthemonkey · 05/01/2024 18:34

I think you'll find that @Livingtothefull introduced the H&M topic herself at 13.50 today. That's how it got "shoe horned in", by someone who was making the point that H&M are used to distract from Andrew.

Think you'll find that quite a few of us are able to conceptually separate both issues, and be critical of both Andrew and H&M.

The initial reference to Harry & Meghan was in the Op's first post. I think it is very relevant given the violently contrasting treatment of H&M vs Andrew by the royal family and the media. It is fine for people to be critical of H&M quite separately from their views on Andrew; though I point out that H&M have not been accused of serious crimes committed at a time they were performing royal duties, and are not living off the public purse.

Maireas · 05/01/2024 18:59

That's certainly possible, @shockthemonkey and I don't know why people think it can't be the case.

LolaSmiles · 05/01/2024 20:54

Epstein is the posh equivalent of Rotherham grooming gang.
This.
What's really depressing is the same, or very similar, rhetoric about the victims has been circulated across some outlets and comments online. The girls are adultified, it's suggested they knew what they were doing and getting into, they didn't complain or say no at the time, they're making up stories for attention/money, anything than acknowledge that predatory men behave like predatory men.

For the men who have enough money, power, and probably access to dark secrets on others in the circle, they're relying on never being brought to justice.

Maireas · 05/01/2024 20:57

BBC News - Rotherham man who sexually assaulted 15-year-old girl jailed - BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxe4p3lx4d0o
So it continues, @LolaSmiles - at least this man was jailed

Colin Shaw

Rotherham man who sexually assaulted 15-year-old girl jailed

Colin Shaw has been jailed for the attack on his 15-year-old victim.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxe4p3lx4d0o

Livingtothefull · 05/01/2024 21:29

goodbyestranger · 05/01/2024 18:14

Agree. Andrew was a working member of the Royal Family at the time of the alleged abuse. They can't wriggle out of that.

Yes indeed. Also, the Sandringham church service is recorded in the Court Circular - therefore Andrew was taking part in a public engagement. So for the Palace to claim he is 'no longer a working member of the Royal Family' and they cannot therefore comment on the latest revelations is disingenuous.

TallerSally · 05/01/2024 21:51

LolaSmiles · 05/01/2024 20:54

Epstein is the posh equivalent of Rotherham grooming gang.
This.
What's really depressing is the same, or very similar, rhetoric about the victims has been circulated across some outlets and comments online. The girls are adultified, it's suggested they knew what they were doing and getting into, they didn't complain or say no at the time, they're making up stories for attention/money, anything than acknowledge that predatory men behave like predatory men.

For the men who have enough money, power, and probably access to dark secrets on others in the circle, they're relying on never being brought to justice.

This absolutely.

We’ve even had posters up thread describing how they were party girls growing up and implying that this was the case with the victims of Epstein et al.

It doesn’t take much Googling to learn that many of the girls were lured in by the promise of jobs then groomed into sexual activity. One had her passport seized and threatened unless she complied. Three 12-yr olds were in effect ’sold’ by their destitute and clearly failed parents in exchange for large sums of money. Many were supplied by French model agent and paedo Jean Luc Brunel, possibly vulnerable girls from disadvantaged backgrounds duped by the promise of a career.

You know when people have lost their moral compass (if they ever had one) when they are so desperate to deny that their venerated royals have or are behaving like despicable cowards, that they resort to shameful victim-blaming instead.

OP posts: