Andrew breaking the law

[Gizzagizza]

So, can I just get this straight - at the time Prince Andrew slept with the 17 year old Virginia Giuffre - was it illegal in the UK to have sex with a prostitute who was under 18? Was illegal to have sex with someone who had been trafficked? I know it is now.

I'd assume that if Virginia Roberts Giuffre had brought a private prosecution against Andrew, the CPS would have taken it over and then discontinued it. Because they could.

After all, they're the Crown Prosection Service. Apparently the government thinks these days any organisation with 'Crown' in the name is run by the monarch. How convenient.

But her age was part of the conversation, she made that very clear in her book. He explained he was able to guess her age correctly(17) because his own daughters were only slightly younger than Virginia Giuffre.

Gross

Fancy even bringing up his daughters when he was in a sexual situation with a young woman. That's vomit inducing.

😡

I agree with you I was just trying to illustrate some of the difficulties in obtaining a prosecution or conviction in the U.K. ( regardless of what the legislation says ) The fact that the victim wouldn’t speak to police obviously adds to that.

A PP suggested that she’s seen conversations elsewhere, where people didn’t believe Virginia, and defended Andrew.

I want to point out again that no one on this thread has said that. Just pointed out the difficulty of proving anything, given the limited understanding of that era.

If a 42 yr old slept with a 17yr old American girl at a party house now, do you think they’d bring charges? I’d like to think so, but honestly I’m not convinced. Given that ‘we don’t have grooming gangs in London’ 🙄.

We know what Virginia went through, and it colours our perceptions.

Just to reiterate, there was no sleeping involved...

A 17 year old was flown by her two wealthy employees (who had already sexually assaulted her and were using threats to her family against her), in order to meet a powerful, rich royal in a foreign city. There was a brief conversation, a hot bath and sex. Then the minor was paid.

It's not the same as just happening to meet someone in a party and deciding to have sex with them.

If the sexual abuse charges against Andrew are hard to prove across two jurisdictions, even though no one pays large sums such as £12 million to make a court case go away if they believe themselves to be entirely blameless, then why is not everyone pursuing him for the financial misdemeanours he carried out while being paid by British tax payers when acting as trade envoy?

There are plenty of witnesses who saw women being brought to his room in Thailand. There were plenty of written complaints about his inappropriate behaviour written by FO staff. Didn’t one of them say, “I’m a diplomat not a pimp” when asked to procure young women for Andrew?

Lownie believes there is enough financial evidence of corrupt and fraudulent behaviour, which apparently the late QE2 knew about, to convict Andrew with anti-corruption offences and that frankly might be the best and simplest route of seeking justice for Virginia Giuffre?

His sexually abusive behaviour would presumably be revealed in any thorough investigation of his time as trade envoy and would be exposed in court?

Well said.

I have no idea how he has got away with so much for so long without ever being held to account
Even when it became obvious that he was abusing his position as Trade Envoy, his mother let him set up Pitch at Palace which was another grifting opportunity for him as he creamed off percentages of any business done. And the Chinese spy was involved
Why was he allowed to set this up after being sacked from envoy role? It beggars belief

Yes. It was illegal then. But the official narrative from prosecutors was that no criminality occurred because she was at the age of consent (barely).

But I’ve been saying this for years - she was 17 - she couldn’t have given consent to be trafficked. Which makes what happened to her a sexual assault.

I think all the posters who are busy saying Andrew would have had no idea she was trafficked are overlooking this part of his interview with Emily Maitlis.

"And if there was, you have to remember that at the time I was patron of the NSPCC's Full Stop campaign so I was close up with what was going on in those time about getting rid of abuse to children so I knew what the things were to look for but I never saw them."

Well that’s quite naive OP - someone having done something illegal is absolutely no guarantee that further action can be taken.

So it is hard to work out what you were hoping to achieve with this thread - considering all the dozens of other threads here which have covered all this extensively.

I’ve always believed that Andrew doesn’t remember Virginia because she was just one of many interchangeable young women he has exploited. I’m sure he just felt entitled to it all.

But it’s clear now that he’s skirted around the edges of several areas of potentially illegal areas - trafficked women, financial dealings, foreign spies. Will anyone have the financial means or time to pick through it all and find the evidence needed for a prosecution in any of it?

Depressingly, probably not.

I think there is just SO much to investigate that it would probably take a team of people a decade to unravel it.

I don’t see what’s so hard to understand? I wanted to clarify whether Andrew had broken the law - as far as anyone can tell. Why shouldn’t I want to know this?

If you look at the depressingly more rates of convictions for sexual offences, even today in supposedly not enlightened times, it is clear that satan will be skating to work before Andrew is convicted of anything.

The one thing that is within his power is to help any investigations and i think we can all guess how likely that is.

complicated basically. Situation is very ick but not necessarily illegal. If she wasn’t being paid, consented and he wasn’t aware of trafficking then not illegal as over 16. In USA the age is 18 I believe so different situation.

Do I think he’s an immoral person, yes, could you secure a conviction unlikely

Totally illegal

Read up about traffic individuals

It is always illegal to rape someone.

Apparently it was not illegal to sleep with a trafficked 17 year old in the UK at that time. It should have been but it wasn’t. They have changed the law and it is illegal now but Andrew cannot be charged for an offence that happened before the law changed.

Legally it was not rape as it was not illegal to sleep with a trafficked 17 year old in the UK at that time.

He slept with her so say in Epstein's island where it WAS illegal

But why does it matter if it was or wasn't illegal? Still morally abhorrent

It is morally abhorrent, yes, but the law still matters.

Yes, looking 'enthusiastic' in a photo screams consent to me too.

@Gizzagizza I think you are forgetting that Virginia Guiffre accused Prince Andrew of raping her in New York and the British Virgin Islands, not just in London. So far as I understand it, what happened in New York was most certainly breaking the law because the age of consent in New York state is 18. I don't know about the BVI. Nobody has ever said that Andrew could be prosecuted for rape in the UK. What has got him into this position are multiple things, including lying about his contact with Guiffre & Epstein, having non consensual sex and bringing the Crown into disrepute.

You have no idea what she might have been threatened with if she didn’t appear ‘enthusiastic’ as you so revoltingly state.
That comment is utterly disgraceful.