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

[otto]

Telegraph

I cannot find confirmation that Giuffre filed a formal statement or complaint against Andrew in the UK. I see references to TV information, civil suit and liaising with other police forces, but no confirmation that Giuffre filed a formal complaint with London Police.

"The Metropolitan Police has reviewed a document released in August 2021 as part of the civil action in the US. They also reviewed information passed to them by the media in June 2021.​

​

In both instances, the police said in October that the review was complete and no further action would be taken.​

...​

​

Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested by the FBI in July 2020 and held in jail until her trial. In December 2021, she was found guilty of recruiting and trafficking underage girls to be sexually abused by Epstein.​

​

Maxwell was found guilty on five of the six charges she faced - including the most serious - of sex trafficking a minor.​

​

She was found not guilty of one count - enticement of a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts."​

What are the accusations against Prince Andrew?

Here's what you need to know about the sex abuse claims being pursued by Virginia Giuffre in the US.

www.bbc.com

"In August it was reported that Andrew was considered a “person of interest” in the investigation into Epstein and Maxwell.​

​

The phrase “person of interest” is used by law enforcement to refer to someone who has not been arrested or formally accused of any crime, but can refer to someone who may have information that would assist the investigation."​

Met police drop investigation into Prince Andrew in Virginia Giuffre case

Officers made decision after reportedly talking to Giuffre and a review of documents

www.theguardian.com

"The Sunday Times reported this week that London police had spoken to Giuffre regarding her allegations.​

​

"The Metropolitan Police Service continues to liaise with other law enforcement agencies who lead the investigation into matters related to Jeffrey Epstein," the police said in their statement."​

UK police: no further action over Prince Andrew, Epstein allegations

British police said on Monday they would be taking no further action after conducting a review of evidence relating to sex crime allegations against Queen Elizabeth's son, Prince Andrew, and the late U.S. financier Jeffrey Epstein.

www.reuters.com

"Last night it remained unclear whether the Met had taken a formal statement from Giuffre, who now lives in Australia. “We would not confirm who we may or may not have spoken to,” the force said in a statement."​

October 2021

Met officers quiz Prince Andrew’s sex accuser Virginia Giuffre

Scotland Yard has spoken to the woman who claims she was raped and sexually assaulted by the Duke of York on three occasions when she was 17.Officers are unders

www.thetimes.co.uk

 

[otto]

With all due respect to Telltale I think I'll rely on the word of Channel 4 that VG made a complaint in 2015 to the Met.

View attachment 624123

10K views · 1.6K reactions | A police investigation should have taken place when Virginia Roberts Giuffre first made a complaint about Prince Andrew in 2015, the former chief prosecutor at the Crown Prosecution Service, Nazir Afzal, tells Channel 4 N

A police investigation should have taken place when Virginia Roberts Giuffre first made a complaint about Prince Andrew in 2015, the former chief prosecutor at the Crown Prosecution Service, Nazir...

www.facebook.com

This article mentions 2015 and Channel 4, but it is not reported that Giuffre filed a formal complaint with London Police.

2019

Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein: what you need to know

The relationship between the Queen’s second son and the late wealthy sex offender may have been closer than previously realised

www.theguardian.com

 

[Telltale]

In fairness to me. I was speaking on an article I read 5/6 years ago. I believe at one point there was a statement of the sort but I may be remembering wrong.

If Virginia was a co-operating witness willing to give evidence, it would be harder to defend not even opening an investigation, even if most offending was in the US. Andrew is a British national and at least once instance occured on British soil. They should at least expand upon their reasoning.

I would not judge her for going after the money and not wanting to pursue criminal prosecution. On its face, proving a sex crime that old is incredibly difficult. If it even got to trial, it would be a gruelling and defamatory experience for her in full view of the public.

I will add that making a complaint and supporting prosecution are two different things. Many crimes are reported to the police without the victim being then (or later withdrawing) support for prosecution or declining to give a statement.

 

[Legally Bland]

This article mentions 2015 and Channel 4, but it is not reported that Giuffre filed a formal complaint with London Police.

2019

Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein: what you need to know

The relationship between the Queen’s second son and the late wealthy sex offender may have been closer than previously realised

www.theguardian.com

Here's part of a transcript from a Channel 4 News item which was complained about by Maxwell. It looks like it was 2016 when VG personally complained.

Despite the high-profile scandal, all of this seemingly escaped the attention of the police here at Scotland Yard, until 2015 when a British child abuse campaigner filed a formal complaint claiming that Epstein and Maxwell had trafficked a woman to the UK for sex. The complaint was based on the court testimony of Virginia Roberts, who was just 17 when she said she was pressured by Epstein to have sex with Prince Andrew in London. But astonishingly, as Channel 4 News previously revealed, the Specialist Crime and Operations Section that handled the complaint decided not to investigate. We can also reveal that Virginia herself made a complaint directly in 2016. She offered additional evidence, and even suggested potential witnesses. But once again the police failed to investigate. The Met have never acknowledged that this happened. When we put it to them in writing in 2019, they simply ignored the questions. In a statement the Met told us they were ‘not the appropriate authority’ to investigate and that any investigation would be ‘largely focused on activities and relationships outside the UK’. In November 2016, they said, a decision was made ‘not to proceed to a full criminal investigation’. And that was the end of it”.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/about-ofcom/bulletins/broadcast-bulletins/2022/issue-452/complaint-by-leverets-made-on-behalf-of-ms-ghislaine-maxwell-about-channel-4-news-channel-4-15-june-2021?v=328017

BBM.

(Link double checked and working.)

 

[JDG]

In fairness to me. I was speaking on an article I read 5/6 years ago. I believe at one point there was a statement of the sort but I may be remembering wrong.

If Virginia was a co-operating witness willing to give evidence, it would be harder to defend not even opening an investigation, even if most offending was in the US. Andrew is a British national and at least once instance occured on British soil. They should at least expand upon their reasoning.

I would not judge her for going after the money and not wanting to pursue criminal prosecution. On its face, proving a sex crime that old is incredibly difficult. If it even got to trial, it would be a gruelling and defamatory experience for her in full view of the public.

I will add that making a complaint and supporting prosecution are two different things. Many crimes are reported to the police without the victim being then (or later withdrawing) support for prosecution or declining to give a statement.

IMO, the investigations did not get off the ground in the UK because VG was of legal age to consent. She was 17, nearly 18 at the time of the alleged intimacy with Prince Andrew.

 

[JDG]

Here's part of a transcript from a Channel 4 News item which was complained about by Maxwell. It looks like it was 2016 when VG personally complained.

Despite the high-profile scandal, all of this seemingly escaped the attention of the police here at Scotland Yard, until 2015 when a British child abuse campaigner filed a formal complaint claiming that Epstein and Maxwell had trafficked a woman to the UK for sex. The complaint was based on the court testimony of Virginia Roberts, who was just 17 when she said she was pressured by Epstein to have sex with Prince Andrew in London. But astonishingly, as Channel 4 News previously revealed, the Specialist Crime and Operations Section that handled the complaint decided not to investigate. We can also reveal that Virginia herself made a complaint directly in 2016. She offered additional evidence, and even suggested potential witnesses. But once again the police failed to investigate. The Met have never acknowledged that this happened. When we put it to them in writing in 2019, they simply ignored the questions. In a statement the Met told us they were ‘not the appropriate authority’ to investigate and that any investigation would be ‘largely focused on activities and relationships outside the UK’. In November 2016, they said, a decision was made ‘not to proceed to a full criminal investigation’. And that was the end of it”.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/about-ofcom/bulletins/broadcast-bulletins/2022/issue-452/complaint-by-leverets-made-on-behalf-of-ms-ghislaine-maxwell-about-channel-4-news-channel-4-15-june-2021?v=328017

BBM.

(Link double checked and working.)

Same response as above to this post.

 

[Legally Bland]

IMO, the investigations did not get off the ground in the UK because VG was of legal age to consent. She was 17, nearly 18 at the time of the alleged intimacy with Prince Andrew.

I think I'll have to respectfully disagree with you, I think the context of whether VG was able to consent is all important. She was literally travelling with a convicted (at the time the complaint was made) child sex offender. It really should have set some alarm bells ringing. At the bare minimum they should have investigated Epstein. IMO.

 

[otto]

Here's part of a transcript from a Channel 4 News item which was complained about by Maxwell. It looks like it was 2016 when VG personally complained.

Despite the high-profile scandal, all of this seemingly escaped the attention of the police here at Scotland Yard, until 2015 when a British child abuse campaigner filed a formal complaint claiming that Epstein and Maxwell had trafficked a woman to the UK for sex. The complaint was based on the court testimony of Virginia Roberts, who was just 17 when she said she was pressured by Epstein to have sex with Prince Andrew in London. But astonishingly, as Channel 4 News previously revealed, the Specialist Crime and Operations Section that handled the complaint decided not to investigate. We can also reveal that Virginia herself made a complaint directly in 2016. She offered additional evidence, and even suggested potential witnesses. But once again the police failed to investigate. The Met have never acknowledged that this happened. When we put it to them in writing in 2019, they simply ignored the questions. In a statement the Met told us they were ‘not the appropriate authority’ to investigate and that any investigation would be ‘largely focused on activities and relationships outside the UK’. In November 2016, they said, a decision was made ‘not to proceed to a full criminal investigation’. And that was the end of it”.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/about-ofcom/bulletins/broadcast-bulletins/2022/issue-452/complaint-by-leverets-made-on-behalf-of-ms-ghislaine-maxwell-about-channel-4-news-channel-4-15-june-2021?v=328017

BBM.

(Link double checked and working.)

It sounds like the issue was filing against Epstein and Maxwell in London rather than against Andrew.

Everything I've read says that the London Police believed the culprits to be Epstein and Maxwell, and London had no jurisdiction since Epstein, Maxwell, their employees, and the trafficking, occurred out of the US.

We need police statements to confirm or deny that there were formal complaints, who the complaint was made against, and who had jurisdiction.

 

[Legally Bland]

It sounds like the issue was filing against Epstein and Maxwell in London rather than against Andrew.

Everything I've read says that the London Police believed the culprits to be Epstein and Maxwell, and London had no jurisdiction since Epstein, Maxwell, their employees, and the trafficking, occurred out of the US.

We need police statements to confirm or deny that there were formal complaints, who the complaint was made against, and who had jurisdiction.

I can't be bothered to format this time, so may look a bit weird:

Mr Guru-Murphy: “Because just on Prince Andrew the police did confirm that a
complaint had been looked into, but then it wasn’t taken any
further. Does it worry you at all that this is still the focus of
enquiries in the United States but not here where the matter is
supposed to have taken place?
Dame Cressida Dick: No. The locus and focus of any investigation in relation to Jeffrey
Epstein for example is clearly in America. And, you know, if the
Americans need our assistance at any stage, then we will give
them that”.
The programme returned to footage of Ms Newman’s interview with Mr Afzal:
Mr Afzal: “What we’ve always needed is a proper investigation. We
cannot outsource our investigation to the FBI or the
American Attorney’s Office. We have crimes allegedly
committed here in London that ought to be prosecuted here in
London or at least be investigated here in London. And on the
basis of what I’ve read there is more than a reasonable suspicion
that crimes have occurred. These are very serious allegations.
There is no time limit in the United Kingdom in relation to
serious offences. So, there is no legal bar here at all.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/about-ofcom/bulletins/broadcast-bulletins/2022/issue-452/complaint-by-leverets-made-on-behalf-of-ms-ghislaine-maxwell-about-channel-4-news-channel-4-15-june-2021?v=328017

BBM.

 

[otto]

IMO, the investigations did not get off the ground in the UK because VG was of legal age to consent. She was 17, nearly 18 at the time of the alleged intimacy with Prince Andrew.

That's an important point, as is the unfolding of the story from paid sex with her bosses client, to rape.

This article, based on an interview with Giuffre, describes a shopping trip for new clothes, getting ready for dinner in her own bedroom at Maxwell's house, flying to several exotic locations, gifted $15k, having dinner, going dancing, and asking to take a photo with Andrew to show her mother.

Giuffre does not say that she wanted a photo to prove anything about Andrew, only that she wanted to show her mother that she had met Andrew. I find it confusing, and I do wonder whether these is evidence to support a rape claim.

“It Was Catastrophic”: Inside Prince Andrew’s Misguided Bid to Explain Away Epstein

In the wake of Jeffrey Epstein’s arrest and apparent suicide, Prince Andrew moved from the fringe of a swirling underage-sex scandal toward its white-hot center. His clumsy attempt to clear his name, in a no-holds-barred interview with BBC ‘Newsnight,’ set the stage for his royal demotion—and...

www.vanityfair.com

 

[otto]

I don't know what to think about the night that Epstein, Maxwell, Andrew and Giuffre had dinner and dancing in London. I do trust that the UK Police are better able to investigate than the US Oversight Committee who, per their letter to Andrew, are basing their interest on Giuffre's book.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Could someone please define what is termed ‘alleged intimacy’ in this thread?

My understanding is that there were allegations of rape, trafficking, and other offenses. And prosecutions were made relating to that.

It seems IMO improper to refer to ‘intimacy’ in this case, and serves to diminish the findings in the GM case as that was prosecuted. It also IMO is inaccurate relating to the now deceased VG.

MOO

 

[Legally Bland]

That's an important point, as is the unfolding of the story from paid sex with her bosses client, to rape.

This article, based on an interview with Giuffre, describes a shopping trip for new clothes, getting ready for dinner in her own bedroom at Maxwell's house, flying to several exotic locations, gifted $15k, having dinner, going dancing, and asking to take a photo with Andrew to show her mother.

Giuffre does not say that she wanted a photo to prove anything about Andrew, only that she wanted to show her mother that she had met Andrew. I find it confusing, and I do wonder whether these is evidence to support a rape claim.

“It Was Catastrophic”: Inside Prince Andrew’s Misguided Bid to Explain Away Epstein

In the wake of Jeffrey Epstein’s arrest and apparent suicide, Prince Andrew moved from the fringe of a swirling underage-sex scandal toward its white-hot center. His clumsy attempt to clear his name, in a no-holds-barred interview with BBC ‘Newsnight,’ set the stage for his royal demotion—and...

www.vanityfair.com

It's proof VG met Andrew, and just a picture intended to show her mother.

As Andrew says he has never met VG it shows he's lying. It puts them together.

Nobody in their right mind would convict someone of rape solely on that picture.

But also in that picture is a convicted child sex offender (with hindsight) and allegedly it was taken by another child sex offender.

It's not proof of an offence but it certainly raises questions.

 

[Legally Bland]

I don't know what to think about the night that Epstein, Maxwell, Andrew and Giuffre had dinner and dancing in London. I do trust that the UK Police are better able to investigate than the US Oversight Committee who, per their letter to Andrew, are basing their interest on Giuffre's book.

They didn't investigate, they just reviewed the complaint and decided no further action was to be taken.

 

[JDG]

It's proof VG met Andrew, and just a picture intended to show her mother.

As Andrew says he has never met VG it shows he's lying. It puts them together.

Nobody in their right mind would convict someone of rape solely on that picture.

But also in that picture is a convicted child sex offender (with hindsight) and allegedly it was taken by another child sex offender.

It's not proof of an offence but it certainly raises questions.

I think it’s well known that Andrew is a creep and a liar.

So are many thousands of others and neither are crimes.

Yes, VG stated she wanted the photo for her mother.

 

[SouthAussie]

That's an important point, as is the unfolding of the story from paid sex with her bosses client, to rape.

This article, based on an interview with Giuffre, describes a shopping trip for new clothes, getting ready for dinner in her own bedroom at Maxwell's house, flying to several exotic locations, gifted $15k, having dinner, going dancing, and asking to take a photo with Andrew to show her mother.

Giuffre does not say that she wanted a photo to prove anything about Andrew, only that she wanted to show her mother that she had met Andrew. I find it confusing, and I do wonder whether these is evidence to support a rape claim.

“It Was Catastrophic”: Inside Prince Andrew’s Misguided Bid to Explain Away Epstein

In the wake of Jeffrey Epstein’s arrest and apparent suicide, Prince Andrew moved from the fringe of a swirling underage-sex scandal toward its white-hot center. His clumsy attempt to clear his name, in a no-holds-barred interview with BBC ‘Newsnight,’ set the stage for his royal demotion—and...

www.vanityfair.com

In my state (a world away) it is a serious offense to have sex with a minor due to .... The position of inequality between offender and victim and the lifelong effect on a victim (Link)

Our laws are very much based on British laws. So there may be a UK law that is the same.

Virginia was told who to "service", she was lavished with gifts and trips, she began to think of Epstein and Maxwell as 'parents' who were taking care of her. She had felt unparented and unprotected since she was 10. (as per her book)

If people are looking for rape. they are going to find coercion instead.

imo

 

[Legally Bland]

I think it’s well known that Andrew is a creep and a liar.

So are many thousands of others and neither are crimes.

Yes, VG stated she wanted the photo for her mother.

I don't really know what your point is, but yes lying can be a crime, and I guess it depends on what you subjectively mean by being a creep to know whether that's a crime too.

 

[otto]

This information about 2001 is told by Giuffre in 2011, with an update in 2021. In 2011, she refers to Maxwell and Epstein as "her hosts":

"Sharon Churcher, who flew to Australia to meet Virginia Giuffre and told her story in an article published in The Mail on Sunday on February 26, 2011.
...

Among Giuffre’s memories of far-flung travels on Epstein’s jet was a six-week trip in March 2001 to “Paris, Spain, and Tangier,” with a stop in London, for which she said Epstein paid her $15,000. Landing in London, she, Epstein, and Ghislaine Maxwell were driven straight to Maxwell’s townhouse in the affluent neighborhood of Belgravia. Giuffre was given an upstairs bedroom, where, on their first morning, a “chirpy” Maxwell allegedly jumped on her bed and said, “Get up, sleepyhead, you’ve got a big day. We’ve got to go shopping. You need a dress, as you’re going to dance with a prince tonight.”

“She said I needed to be ‘smiley’ and ‘bubbly’ because he was the queen’s son,” Giuffre said. After a shopping spree at Burberry, they returned to Maxwell’s home, where Virginia showered and dressed before joining her hosts at around 4 p.m. “When I went downstairs, Ghislaine and Jeffrey were in the lounge. There was a knock at the door. Ghislaine led Andrew in, and we kissed each other on the cheek. Ghislaine served tea from a porcelain pot and biscuits. She knew Sarah Ferguson, and they talked fondly about Andrew’s daughters [Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie].”

The four of them went to dinner, then to the private nightclub Tramp, where, Giuffre said, Andrew danced with her. After an hour and a half at Tramp, they returned to Maxwell’s home. “All of us went upstairs, and I asked Jeffrey to snap a picture of me with the prince,” Giuffre told the Mail. “I wanted something to show my mom.”

As she shared her memories, Giuffre brought out a plain envelope filled with photographs. They were snapshots “of her time with Epstein from various trips she had done,” says photographer Michael Thomas, who teamed up with Churcher on the story. “I think there were about a dozen.”

They showed Virginia in Epstein’s world at 17: “shots of her on her own in Santa Fe, on a horse, in the snow at [Epstein’s] Zorro Ranch entrance, and at the Georgia O’Keeffe Museum.”

And there, among the travel pictures, was an extraordinary photograph of her, Prince Andrew, Duke of York, stood smiling, with his arm around her waist; on the other side was Ghislaine Maxwell, flashing a grin."
...

In August 2021, she filed Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-06702, Virginia L. Giuffre v. Prince Andrew, Duke of York, a/k/a Andrew Albert Christian Edward, accusing the prince of sexual assault and rape in the first and third degree when she was 17."

“It Was Catastrophic”: Inside Prince Andrew’s Misguided Bid to Explain Away Epstein

In the wake of Jeffrey Epstein’s arrest and apparent suicide, Prince Andrew moved from the fringe of a swirling underage-sex scandal toward its white-hot center. His clumsy attempt to clear his name, in a no-holds-barred interview with BBC ‘Newsnight,’ set the stage for his royal demotion—and...

www.vanityfair.com

 

[Legally Bland]

In my state (a world away) it is a serious offense to have sex with a minor due to .... The position of inequality between offender and victim and the lifelong effect on a victim (Link)

Our laws are very much based on British laws. So there may be a UK law that is the same.

Virginia was told who to "service", she was lavished with gifts and trips, she began to think of Epstein and Maxwell as 'parents' who were taking care of her. She had felt unparented and unprotected since she was 10. (as per her book)

If people are looking for rape. they are going to find coercion instead.

imo

These are the UK's Crown Prosecution Service's guidelines on consent. It's based on a 2003 legal definition of consent but it's retroactive, so it is applied to cases occurring before 2003.

This is probably the bit you're interested in:

https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/publications/what_is_consent_v2.pdf

(I've checked the link and it works.)

 

[otto]

In 2011, when Giuffre was interviewed in Australia, she (born: August 1983) was 28 years old. She was no longer a child, and she had a good understanding of meeting Andrew in 2001. At that time, she does not describe that meeting as rape, and she does not describe Maxwell and Epstein as her traffickers.

Investigators have to take everything into consideration, not just the most recent statement of 2021, when the 2001 meeting was described as rape.