UK - (Former prince) Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor accused of underage sexual relationship, 1999-2002 *settled* #2

[SouthAussie]

Exactly. Maxwell has answers. There's nothing that Andrew can add.

According to Virginia, others also have answers.

Eg: Larry Visoski Jr, one of Epstein's pilots. Visoski had refused to hand over his Epstein flight records. Epstein had gifted him 40 acres of land.
Eg: Emmy Tayler, Maxwell's personal assistant.
Eg: Sarah Kellen, Epstein's assistant.

Source: Nobody's Girl by Virginia Roberts Giuffre

imo

 

[JDG]

Apparently he could be tried in the UK for misconduct in public office, for attempting to smear Virginia as she was releasing her allegations.


An email obtained by Britain's Daily Mail newspaper, and published earlier in October, claimed that Andrew asked his Metropolitan Police bodyguard to investigate Virginia Giuffre shortly before her accusations against him were made public in 2021.

The newspaper reported that Andrew passed British police Giuffre's date of birth, U.S. social security number and suggested she had a criminal record. Andrew has not publicly responded to the accusation. The Metropolitan Police said they were looking into the claims.

Dai Davies, the former head of royal protection for the British monarchy and now a royal commentator, says that if the Mail's report turns out to be accurate then it means Andrew committed a criminal offense. Says Lownie: “Misconduct in public office, which carries life imprisonment, could be what they bring against him, quite apart from the sex trafficking allegations."

Could Prince Andrew go to jail? Royal experts answer burning questions

By stripping Prince Andrew of his titles, King Charles may have protected the royal family. But the former duke still faces legal risks.

www.usatoday.com

Respectfully, unless/until there are charges brought against Andrew he is an innocent man.

Andrew has had no charges nor convictions up to this point in time.

 

[JDG]

Respectfully, it does not seem that the age of ‘consent’ is relevant to what it had seemed IMO were allegations of rape or coercion or trafficking or the like, or similar offenses. MOO

Without any charges being brought the age of consent is very relevant.

Is there any proof that Andrew knew VG was being trafficked?

Is there any proof of rape or coercion?

If not, perhaps that is why there have not been charges to date.

 

[SouthAussie]

Respectfully, unless/until there are charges brought against Andrew he is still an innocent man.

Andrew has had no charges nor convictions as to this point in time.

True. He hasn't been charged or convicted. That is what the discussion is about.

But he had 3 sexual encounters with a (US) underage and trafficked girl, as stated in her biography.

Belgravia (London UK) - Maxwell's house
New York - Epstein's house
Little Saint James, US Virgin Islands - Epstein's island retreat

Source: Nobody's Girl by Virginia Roberts Giuffre
(I'm only halfway through the book)

 

[JDG]

True. He hasn't been charged or convicted. That is what the discussion is about.

But he had 3 sexual encounters with a (US) underage and trafficked girl, as stated in her biography.

Belgravia (London UK) - Maxwell's house
New York - Epstein's house
Little Saint James, US Virgin Islands - Epstein's island retreat

Source: Nobody's Girl by Virginia Roberts Giuffre
(I'm only halfway through the book)

I think the word ‘alleged’ or ‘allegedly’ should be added here……

 

[Dotta]

I think the word ‘alleged’ or ‘allegedly’ should be added here……

Didn't this person write to the convicted criminal/sexual predator
"We will play soon"?

What "play" did this person mean?
Chess??

Honestly,
This beating of the dead horse is getting boring now.
I mean
I've been following this thread for a few years
and the same excuses are returning like boomerangs

Can you imagine,
some would still curtsy & bow while meeting this person?



Shaking my head and rolling my eyes

JMcommoner'sO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Without any charges being brought the age of consent is very relevant.

Is there any proof that Andrew knew VG was being trafficked?

Is there any proof of rape or coercion?

If not, perhaps that is why there have not been charges to date.

A good question.

As to the question of proof of what the former prince knew or did, or didn’t do, I wish that I and the general public did know. And that it had been fully disclosed. But I fear that we do not. And IMO I wouldn’t believe much of what has been stated. Sadly, one side of the case is now deceased.

As to whether or not charges have or have not been brought, without direct knowledge I don’t have an answer one way or the other. It is unfortunate that additional charges have not been brought. Perhaps if no further charges are to be brought…… then the entire case file(s) should be released, unredacted, to the public.

The perspective IMO that consent is not relevant in matters of rape or similar accusations remains. Those matters IMO should not be conflated. IIUC consent is not a relevant factor in cases of rape or related offenses. IANAL. MOO

 

[JDG]

A good question.

As to the question of proof of what the former prince knew or did, or didn’t do, I wish that I and the general public did know. And that it had been fully disclosed. But I fear that we do not. And IMO I wouldn’t believe much of what has been stated. Sadly, one side of the case is now deceased.

As to whether or not charges have or have not been brought, without direct knowledge I don’t have an answer one way or the other. It is unfortunate that additional charges have not been brought. Perhaps if no further charges are to be brought…… then the entire case file(s) should be released, unredacted, to the public.

The perspective IMO that consent is not relevant in matters of rape or similar accusations remains. Those matters IMO should not be conflated. IIUC consent is not a relevant factor in cases of rape or related offenses. IANAL. MOO

I agree that consent is not relevant in cases of rape.

Why and when has a case file ever been made public?

I would think and hope that it remains a private matter between the accused and the state.

If no further charges are to be brought, I would assume there is not enough proof to move forward with the case.

IMO

 

[Dotta]

I agree that consent is not relevant in cases of rape.

Why and when has a case file ever been made public?

I would think and hope that it remains a private matter between the accused and the state.

If not further charges are to be brought, I would assume there is not enough proof to move forward with the case.

IMO

Oh ...
But there is a proof
A photograph.

Of a minor foreign girl,
GM (convicted of sexual matters & jailed)
and this person holding the girl at the waist.

I don't remember any other men photographing themselves with Virginia.

That is why this photo is so infamous.

JMO

 

[Dotta]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1986890426075209734

 

[Legally Bland]

The perspective IMO that consent is not relevant in matters of rape or similar accusations remains. Those matters IMO should not be conflated. IIUC consent is not a relevant factor in cases of rape or related offenses. IANAL. MOO

I agree that consent is not relevant in cases of rape.

RSBM. I think I must be misunderstanding these statements, I've been reading back to see what I've missed but I'm none the wiser.

I'm sure I must be missing something obvious.

In what context are you suggesting consent is not relevant in cases of rape?

 

[otto]

If Democrats want more information about Epstein, they should interview the employees he relied on to recruit victims. According to verifiable facts, Andrew received a "massage" from a women who was recruited by Epstein, Maxwell and their employees. Although Giuffre's book describes her experience and memories, it is not evidence.

Giuffre accepted a financial settlement from Andrew, and objected to a one year non-disclosure agreement. Most non-disclosure agreements are a lot longer than one year. Andrew's lawyers sought to discredit Giuffre, but that is standard practice in civil lawsuits - that's how many private investigators earn a living.

"After Mr. Epstein’s suicide in a Manhattan jail cell in early August, federal authorities have refocused their investigation on the more than half-dozen employees, girlfriends and associates whom prosecutors say he relied on to feed his insatiable appetite for girls, according to two people with knowledge of the inquiry. Ms. Robson, now 33, is among them.
...

A review by The New York Times of lawsuits, unsealed court records and depositions, along with new interviews, offers disturbing allegations about how this small cadre of women helped Mr. Epstein lure girls into his orbit and managed the logistics of his encounters with them.

Mr. Epstein is also accused in civil suits of relying on an organized network of underlings: those who trained girls how to sexually pleasure him; office assistants who booked cars and travel; and recruiters who ensured he always had a fresh supply of teenage girls at the ready.

None of Mr. Epstein’s associates have been charged or named as co-conspirators in Manhattan.
...

Four women were apparently so instrumental to Mr. Epstein’s operation that they were named as possible “co-conspirators” and were granted immunity from prosecution in a widely criticized plea bargain Mr. Epstein struck with federal prosecutors in Florida more than a decade ago. ... The four women — Sarah Kellen, Lesley Groff, Adriana Ross and Nadia Marcinkova — could still be subject to criminal charges in Manhattan."

How a Ring of Women Allegedly Recruited Girls for Jeffrey Epstein (Published 2019)

It’s not just Ghislaine Maxwell. A circle of Mr. Epstein’s girlfriends, employees and other associates faces scrutiny in the sex-trafficking scandal.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Telltale]

A good question.

As to the question of proof of what the former prince knew or did, or didn’t do, I wish that I and the general public did know. And that it had been fully disclosed. But I fear that we do not. And IMO I wouldn’t believe much of what has been stated. Sadly, one side of the case is now deceased.

As to whether or not charges have or have not been brought, without direct knowledge I don’t have an answer one way or the other. It is unfortunate that additional charges have not been brought. Perhaps if no further charges are to be brought…… then the entire case file(s) should be released, unredacted, to the public.

The perspective IMO that consent is not relevant in matters of rape or similar accusations remains. Those matters IMO should not be conflated. IIUC consent is not a relevant factor in cases of rape or related offenses. IANAL. MOO

As much as I hate to throw Andrew any bail.

I remember, when this first broke, a statement from the Met stating that Virginia had not provided them with a statement regarding the incidents that would fall under their justistiction (the incidents in London.)

Considering the age of consent was 16 and it was only in (I believe) 2002 the ago of consent for prostiution was raised to 18. Without a cooperating victim account it would not be possible to prosecute that kind of case. You would need to prove that he was aware or ought to be aware she was coerced (not merely compensated) for sleeping with him.

It feels gross to even type that out tbh, but the nuts and bolts of it is that unless Virginia provided an account to the police in the last decade, there is significant evidentiary issues in prosecuting him under the laws of the time. Even if she did, now she has passed on, Andrew could not face his accusator in criminal court.

 

[Dotta]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1987324288706154914

 

[Legally Bland]

As much as I hate to throw Andrew any bail.

I remember, when this first broke, a statement from the Met stating that Virginia had not provided them with a statement regarding the incidents that would fall under their justistiction (the incidents in London.)

Considering the age of consent was 16 and it was only in (I believe) 2002 the ago of consent for prostiution was raised to 18. Without a cooperating victim account it would not be possible to prosecute that kind of case. You would need to prove that he was aware or ought to be aware she was coerced (not merely compensated) for sleeping with him.

It feels gross to even type that out tbh, but the nuts and bolts of it is that unless Virginia provided an account to the police in the last decade, there is significant evidentiary issues in prosecuting him under the laws of the time. Even if she did, now she has passed on, Andrew could not face his accusator in criminal court.

I'm not sure anyone doubts that a prosecution may have been problematic, but there's a massive gap between allegations and prosecutions: investigation.

You don't know what the evidence is or what the evidentiary issues are unless you investigate.

There are other accusers of Epstein and Maxwell citing abuse in the UK.

Maybe the Met could have been proactive and at least taken statements from people accusing them of crimes in their jurisdiction.

 

[otto]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1987324288706154914

The word "may" tells us all we need to know.

Because the US Congressman has tossed out a sensational headline about Andrew, could this US Congressman explain who may have recruited another "woman" who may have met Andrew who may have been paid by Epstein? It may have happened, and it may not have happened.

It's my opinion that US politicians have been rather loose with truth for some time. Is this the Congressman's truth, or evidence-based truth? Has there been an investigation with that conclusion, or is this piling-on to get people worked up?

 

[otto]

I'm not sure anyone doubts that a prosecution may have been problematic, but there's a massive gap between allegations and prosecutions: investigation.

You don't know what the evidence is or what the evidentiary issues are unless you investigate.

There are other accusers of Epstein and Maxwell citing abuse in the UK.

Maybe the Met could have been proactive and at least taken statements from people accusing them of crimes in their jurisdiction.

Epstein's employees live in the US. His friends live in the US. Maxwell knows more about Epstein than anyone else and she is in the US.

The UK has investigated and taken decisive action.

Let's see the US take action beyond Epstein and Maxwell. Investigators have the names of women who recruited victims from schoolyards. Where are they today? Are they still preying on children? Investigators have the names of Epstein's close associates. Has Congress asked any of them to appear to answer questions?

If not, why not?

Why is Congress spending time pursuing information to validate a book written by a deceased person? The Oversight Committee clearly states that Giuffre's book is the reason for their curiosity.

 

[JDG]

Perhaps they need to cast a wider net and go after their own home grown participants.

As Otto says, they have Maxwell, ask her.

 

[JDG]

*

 

[JDG]

Btw, I very much appreciate the post by Telltale.

Thank you for your post Telltale.