More minimising!
The Queen was told about the then Prince Andrew’s antics by civil servants and politicians and Lownie said they were ignored or sent away with a flea in their ear!
Do you think the Queen (allegedly) paid out £12 million pounds to make a court case go away because Prince Andrew mistook under age girls for waitresses?
Remember that during the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former girlfriend, jurors heard that Andrew flew on Epstein's private plane with a 14-year-old girl in the mid-1990s.
There is a photo of seventeen year old Virginia Giuffre standing among a roomful of thirty, forty and fifty year old businessman in one of Epstein’s properties, and honestly she looked so out of place. She was wearing pastel coloured jeans and a simple t-shirt and she looked much more like school girl than party girl. Any normal person would have questioned her presence.
And if you think AMW mistook seventeen year olds procured by Maxwell as waitresses, how do you explain away the forty sex workers AMW invited to his hotel room in Bangkok over four days in 2006 while representing the UK as a trade envoy? That was only nineteen years ago. Andrew’s antics were witnessed, enabled and covered up by civil servants who were there at the time, according to Lownie, and they were also verified by a member of the Thai royal household and independently verified by another journalist.
How do you explain away that? Are you saying that Prince Andrew mistook the Thai sex workers for waitresses too? All forty of them?
And what about the response of the consul who was asked to find women for PA, with a specific preference for "blondes" and ballerinas. The book Entitled suggests that the prince's staff often facilitated these encounters, leading to the sharp retort from the civil servant who declined to engage in such activities, explicitly stating they were a diplomat, "not a pimp"?
I think you may not have read Entitled or else you wouldn’t be trying to explain away AMW’s behaviour as a bit of “ignorant” boys will be boys behaviour; prevalent at the time.
It went, way, way beyond that and was much more malevolent. Even Epstein thought Andrew was a sex addict and said so in private emails. Remember the nanny who had to leave Andrew’s employ because of his advances? Remember the dancers at the Royal Ballet who were warned about him?
Just study the timeline of events:
2008 - Epstein jailed for 18 months for sex offences when he admitted to prostituting minors.
2009 - Juan Alessi, an employee of Epstein testifies that Andrew had "daily massages" at the paedophile's Florida home.
2010 - Epstein released and photographed with Andrew having sent him an email that it would be good to catch up in person.
Are you arguing that PA was a normal, privileged, sexually active male who by accident decided to ignore his friend’s conviction for pardophilia?
And if you don’t think the SA of trafficked girls to be serious enough; how about all of the alleged financial corruption that he perpetrated while acting as trade envoy? The dodgy trades on the side that he did to profit himself which (allegedly) contravened laws governing behaviour while in public office?