UK - Prince Andrew accused of underage sexual relationship, 1999 - 2002

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #321
Dotta, it's a long article, but if you read it, you'll see that the DM did their due diligence and actually had 2 clothed people get inside the tub. It's not big enough for the er, action.
So, let's say pre-action b/c they ended in the bedroom.
 
  • #322
So, let's say pre-action b/c they ended in the bedroom.

Yes! Apparently the tub was/is too small a space for um, foreplay?
 
  • #323
Yes! Apparently the tub was/is too small a space for um, foreplay?
Hahaha
The Latin proverb says
Per Aspera Ad Astra
meaning
Through suffering to the Stars!
 
  • #324
But seriously, Im sure JE/GM have pics/videos of these "meetings" with the rich and famous.
 
  • #325
  • #326

Honestly I do not believe he will be asked to step down. If it was a criminal trial MAYBE but even then...the Mail has said for nearly two years now that Harry will be told he is to lose his title but it has never happened and I doubt it will. I dont believe Andrew ever will as long as his mother is alive either.
 
  • #327
Honestly I do not believe he will be asked to step down. If it was a criminal trial MAYBE but even then...the Mail has said for nearly two years now that Harry will be told he is to lose his title but it has never happened and I doubt it will. I dont believe Andrew ever will as long as his mother is alive either.

So many people are making statements as though Giuffre has won her action against Prince Andrew. It seems that guilty until proven innocent is the new reality.
 
  • #328
  • #329
So many people are making statements as though Giuffre has won her action against Prince Andrew. It seems that guilty until proven innocent is the new reality.
Hmmm...
"Caesar's wife must be above any hint of suspicion".

That's harsh reality - Nobility obliges, no?
 
  • #330
Hmmm...
"Caesar's wife must be above any hint of suspicion".

That's harsh reality - Nobility obliges, no?

Not really. We have had several famous soap stars here suspended from their jobs accused of rape and gone to court and been found not guilty. Rightly or wrongly hes not been convicted of anything or even charged in a criminal court to be fair. Equally IF innocent...and people are calling you a rapist...thats also harsh. My personal opinion right now is he should tell the truth whatever that is as it could backfire on him.
 
  • #331
Not really. We have had several famous soap stars here suspended from their jobs accused of rape and gone to court and been found not guilty. Rightly or wrongly hes not been convicted of anything or even charged in a criminal court to be fair. Equally IF innocent...and people are calling you a rapist...thats also harsh. My personal opinion right now is he should tell the truth whatever that is as it could backfire on him.
The saying means that prominent figures, and being a member of Royal Family certainly applies, must avoid attracting negative attention.

There is a vast distinction between the symbol of a country and a TV soap opera star, isn't there?

But hey, Im a republican from another country :)
 
  • #332
The saying means that prominent figures, and being a member of Royal Family certainly applies, must avoid attracting negative attention.

There is a vast distinction between the symbol of a country and a TV soap opera star, isn't there?

But hey, Im a republican from another country :)

to be honest...i think regardless of who it is..and seriously..i dont like Andrew I think he is an arrogant mummys boy...but...i think for whoever it has to be horrible to be called a rapist when its not been confirmed in court and pft hes not the symbol you think and he never really was
 
  • #333
to be honest...i think regardless of who it is..and seriously..i dont like Andrew I think he is an arrogant mummys boy...but...i think for whoever it has to be horrible to be called a rapist when its not been confirmed in court and pft hes not the symbol you think and he never really was
No comment :)
 
  • #334
Out of curiousity has Andrew said who his witnesses will be yet?
 
  • #335
  • #336
So many people are making statements as though Giuffre has won her action against Prince Andrew. It seems that guilty until proven innocent is the new reality.

Prince Andrew seems to have enjoyed the presumption of innocence for quite a long while. He certainly has the best legal advice that money can buy, and not many people are able to hide from process servers on a royal estate. Instead of talking to the FBI, as has apparently been requested, he gave that interview in which he supplied an alibi, (apparently cannot prove), gave the non sweating defence, (apparently cannot prove), and forgot to mention any degree of sympathy for the minor victims of his convicted friends crimes. There are suggestions, in the media at least, that the infamous photo of him and VG was faked. (To be fair, GM had not been convicted at that time, but she had been accused) Now there seems to be technicalities that Prince Andrew is relying upon so that he doesn't have to answer these allegations- prior agreements between victims and JE, the living arrangements of VG.

Perhaps Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing more than having poor taste in friends, and poor judgement in other areas of his life. How can we know, he has so far refused to talk to investigators? I have read, on social media, the most awful attacks against his accusers. Lolitia's who "knew exactly what they were doing", and much worse.

Going back centuries to the Magna Carta, the British Royal Family are not meant to be above the law. It would behove him to stand up like an adult, and answer the investigators, instead of relying upon the presumption of innocence for any longer. (Technically GM was innocent a month ago too)

As an Australian, the apparent protection of Prince Andrew by the royal machine makes me sick, and makes me think about the role of the Royals in the future.
 
  • #337
Prince Andrew seems to have enjoyed the presumption of innocence for quite a long while. He certainly has the best legal advice that money can buy, and not many people are able to hide from process servers on a royal estate. Instead of talking to the FBI, as has apparently been requested, he gave that interview in which he supplied an alibi, (apparently cannot prove), gave the non sweating defence, (apparently cannot prove), and forgot to mention any degree of sympathy for the minor victims of his convicted friends crimes. There are suggestions, in the media at least, that the infamous photo of him and VG was faked. (To be fair, GM had not been convicted at that time, but she had been accused) Now there seems to be technicalities that Prince Andrew is relying upon so that he doesn't have to answer these allegations- prior agreements between victims and JE, the living arrangements of VG.

Perhaps Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing more than having poor taste in friends, and poor judgement in other areas of his life. How can we know, he has so far refused to talk to investigators? I have read, on social media, the most awful attacks against his accusers. Lolitia's who "knew exactly what they were doing", and much worse.

Going back centuries to the Magna Carta, the British Royal Family are not meant to be above the law. It would behove him to stand up like an adult, and answer the investigators, instead of relying upon the presumption of innocence for any longer. (Technically GM was innocent a month ago too)

As an Australian, the apparent protection of Prince Andrew by the royal machine makes me sick, and makes me think about the role of the Royals in the future.
Im also a foreigner and I watch from the sidelines.
Sadly, for the British RF, "the milk has been spilled" so to speak.
People abroad dont really know who is who - they just read lurid headlines about British Royal Family involved in sordid phedophile scandal.
It is sad really, but the attitude towards British Monarchy is changing.
Im not sure if people in the UK realise that.
 
Last edited:
  • #338
Prince Andrew seems to have enjoyed the presumption of innocence for quite a long while. He certainly has the best legal advice that money can buy, and not many people are able to hide from process servers on a royal estate. Instead of talking to the FBI, as has apparently been requested, he gave that interview in which he supplied an alibi, (apparently cannot prove), gave the non sweating defence, (apparently cannot prove), and forgot to mention any degree of sympathy for the minor victims of his convicted friends crimes. There are suggestions, in the media at least, that the infamous photo of him and VG was faked. (To be fair, GM had not been convicted at that time, but she had been accused) Now there seems to be technicalities that Prince Andrew is relying upon so that he doesn't have to answer these allegations- prior agreements between victims and JE, the living arrangements of VG.

Perhaps Prince Andrew is guilty of nothing more than having poor taste in friends, and poor judgement in other areas of his life. How can we know, he has so far refused to talk to investigators? I have read, on social media, the most awful attacks against his accusers. Lolitia's who "knew exactly what they were doing", and much worse.

Going back centuries to the Magna Carta, the British Royal Family are not meant to be above the law. It would behove him to stand up like an adult, and answer the investigators, instead of relying upon the presumption of innocence for any longer. (Technically GM was innocent a month ago too)

As an Australian, the apparent protection of Prince Andrew by the royal machine makes me sick, and makes me think about the role of the Royals in the future.

Honestly I have my own views on that too. I think he is putting the Royal family in danger although once the Queen dies he wont really be part of it anyway. I hate what he is doing to his mother when she has been through enough already the past couple of years and also risks overshadowing this special year for his mum. I guess Harrys book does also come to that. I do think he should answer questions although...the cops apparently spoke to VG and didnt think there was a case to proceed in this country and apparently the Americans wanted him as a witness rather than anything. I DO think he needs to tell the truth because lieing will make him look bad and make him look guilty even if he isnt. I personally...dont think getting the case dropped is a good move as it would just look like he is hiding rather than trying to sort the problem. For me the issue is...in this country she wasnt below the age of consent and I believe NY the same. I suppose it then comes down to whether he forced her or not which could i read something in the Mail which here link to a lot where she allegedly told the bf at the time she didnt want to go to London but...she wanted the money to keep up their life style which then confuses me where the charges are concerned. I just want the truth and the whole truth to come out whatever it is.
 
  • #339
Im also a foreigner and I watch from the sidelines.
Sadly, for the British RF, "the milk has been spilled" so to speak.
People abroad dont really know who is who - they just read lurid headlines about British Family involved in sordid phedophile scandal.
It is sad really, but the attitude towards British Monarchy is changing.
Im not sure if people in the UK realise that.

why would we not know? though I dont think Harry and Meghan have helped that situation either tbh. Although I guess it went further back to Charles and Diana and then her death ugh. Also not really thrilled at the thought of having Camilla as the Queen tbh
 
  • #340
If Royal Families had to be abolished each time the second born embarrassed the heir to the throne, they would have never survived this long. <modsnip - off topic>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
3,178
Total visitors
3,310

Forum statistics

Threads
632,567
Messages
18,628,496
Members
243,199
Latest member
ghghhh13
Back
Top