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

[otto]

Diana, Meghan have their fans abroad.
But this case is sinister, sexual predators preying on vulnerable teens are generally loathed and despised.
Why wasnt this situation dealt with earlier and quickly?

It is festering now and is casting a long dark shadow on the whole RF.
I write this with heavy heart.

Prince Andrew is in his sixties. There should be decades of child victims that can testify that Prince Andrew is a pedophile. We know that pedophiles do not change, not even after imprisonment.

 

[UK Girl]

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

To be honest Andrew isnt that liked anyhow. I know I dont like him and never really have come to that but...the problem for a lot of people yes he made bad calls in his friends although he was friends with GM long before he/she met Epstein. Personally...I dont get why he went to America to see him after he had been convicted. IF they had any business he should have emailed him/phoned him not gone there but I think for many people that doesnt necessarily mean he raped her even because all we have seen is a photo. Dershowitz has a point when he says people are asking why the Prosecution didnt call her as witness. Personally...Yes i believe they possibly had sex in London but...do I think it was by consent or not? I dont know. The problem is he isnt helping himself and that makes him look bad. The Pizza thing and Sweat thing..was stupid...and the BBC interview was meant to help him but....well it failed. The thing i think is stupid also is about this spitting image puppet. Its pretty obvious that is true...that Johanna said about it ( she was complimentary about Andrew incidentally) and that a photo was taken so.... he denies it when knowing the police or one of the females could have a copy which again would make him look bad so..I dont get it. About the Royals...what exactly do you think they could do? its been said over and over that he does as he likes. He has told them reportedly over and over that its lies. The British police have said there is no case to answer. Hes not getting money from the Queen now and isnt doing any work for the Royals...if you was the family do you believe Andrew when the Police have said there is no case...or VG..someone who has apparently accused a lot of men of things and then been discredited...which would be the one thing I dont understand. Why is Andrew the only man shes actually taken/got as far as court with?

 

[Dotta]

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. Queen Elizabeth's sister, Andrew and Harry, all second born, have made a mess of their lives. Fortunately, the second born is irrelevant to the future of the Royal Family.

Haha
I like this down to earth attitude!
Typical male speaking

 

[UK Girl]

Prince Andrew is in his sixties. There should be decades of child victims that can testify that Prince Andrew is a pedophile. We know that pedophiles do not change, not even after imprisonment.

thats the big issue I have. He has never been out with anyone not of a similar age to himself . All the women who went through Epsteins doors and only one has accused him of anything. With the MeToo movement why havent people come forward? why didnt they when VG reported it? normally once someone comes forwards others flood thinking they will have support and not be the only one but....it just hasnt happened but even then the London time....she was above the age of consent and NY too i thought?

 

[UK Girl]

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. Queen Elizabeth's sister, Andrew and Harry, all second born, have made a mess of their lives. Fortunately, the second born is irrelevant to the future of the Royal Family.

Anne is older than Andrew

 

[tayaway]

Prince Andrew is in his sixties. There should be decades of child victims that can testify that Prince Andrew is a pedophile. We know that pedophiles do not change, not even after imprisonment.

Pedophile is prepubescent, not teen. PA is clearly not being accused of pedophilia.

MOO: The royal family needs to go away. As a Canadian, I absolutely loathe the fact that the queen is still our official leader. It symbolizes the colonialism that destroyed so many peoples around the world, the after affects which we still suffer today through generational trauma and living on reservations (at least here and in the US, not sure about other colonized lands). The museums and such can return all the stolen artifacts yesterday, while we're at it. I'll stop there, as the list is endless.

On an individual level, @otto has it spot on with 2nd born royalty; it's a cruel injustice that they can live a somewhat freer lifestyle than the firstborn, who must be groomed from birth to present a public façade of shiny service to the peasants they exploited for generations. Screw that. Also, damn, PA, pull up your knickers and let your ancient mother have some peace before she dies, you selfish little whiny twat. I'm only 50 and I'm too tired to put up with that sh*t if my son tried to pull it. Mummy! Mummy! Mummy make the bad woman go away, I need more lawyer money! - NO.

 

[Dotta]

Sure.
I meant what the general public abroad thinks looking at headlines where JE is called a p. And PA is described as his friend.

 

[tayaway]

I was responding to @otto's post.

 

[UK Girl]

Pedophile is prepubescent, not teen. PA is clearly not being accused of pedophilia.

MOO: The royal family needs to go away. As a Canadian, I absolutely loathe the fact that the queen is still our official leader. It symbolizes the colonialism that destroyed so many peoples around the world, the after affects which we still suffer today through generational trauma and living on reservations (at least here and in the US, not sure about other colonized lands). The museums and such can return all the stolen artifacts yesterday, while we're at it. I'll stop there, as the list is endless.

On an individual level, @otto has it spot on with 2nd born royalty; it's a cruel injustice that they can live a somewhat freer lifestyle than the firstborn, who must be groomed from birth to present a public façade of shiny service to the peasants they exploited for generations. Screw that. Also, damn, PA, pull up your knickers and let your ancient mother have some peace before she dies, you selfish little whiny twat. I'm only 50 and I'm too tired to put up with that **** if my son tried to pull it. Mummy! Mummy! Mummy make the bad woman go away, I need more lawyer money! - NO.

to be honest i would rather have the Royal family than a President in charge and its actually good for this country....well normally at least

Have to say your post made me laugh though

 

[minusfour]

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. Queen Elizabeth's sister, Andrew and Harry, all second born, have made a mess of their lives. Fortunately, the second born is irrelevant to the future of the Royal Family.

It's not what Andrew has or has not done for me, (although I do hold rather firm opinions, on the little we do know), it is that they do not seem to be acting in any way that will have this matter investigated properly. I am a keen history reader, and have just finished a fine book about Charles II. His brother's Catholicism nearly brought the throne down then. This would not be a problem now of course, times change. In these times, the Monarchy has a very different role, and are not assured of ongoing survival in the manner in which they exist now, not even for decades. How relevant is a Monarchy these days? What about one that is perceived to be shielding it's members from the legal consequences of their conduct? It certainly matters to me.

 

[minusfour]

Prince Andrew is in his sixties. There should be decades of child victims that can testify that Prince Andrew is a pedophile. We know that pedophiles do not change, not even after imprisonment.

She was a minor, not a child. Perhaps he has slept with other minors, who knows, surely I read something in the Daily Mail about another young lady yesterday? Perhaps he is lucky that other allegations have not yet been made. If I recall, there were mumblings about Bill Cosby, Rolf Harris, and Harvey Winstein for many years before there convictions.

I think your logic is faulty in this case. I think we might see more accounts coming out. (Of course then everyone will ask why-it's it's true-they didn't complain earlier. Sometimes you just can't win)

 

[UK Girl]

It's not what Andrew has or has not done for me, (although I do hold rather firm opinions, on the little we do know), it is that they do not seem to be acting in any way that will have this matter investigated properly. I am a keen history reader, and have just finished a fine book about Charles II. His brother's Catholicism nearly brought the throne down then. This would not be a problem now of course, times change. In these times, the Monarchy has a very different role, and are not assured of ongoing survival in the manner in which they exist now, not even for decades. How relevant is a Monarchy these days? What about one that is perceived to be shielding it's members from the legal consequences of their conduct? It certainly matters to me.

But if Scotland Yard said they looked at the case twice and interviewed Virginia and they didnt want to proceed then for the Queen is it a case of shielding its members from the supposed legal aspect of their conduct? or simply believing the police force that their is no case to answer?

 

[UK Girl]

She was a minor, not a child. Perhaps he has slept with other minors, who knows, surely I read something in the Daily Mail about another young lady yesterday? Perhaps he is lucky that other allegations have not yet been made. If I recall, there were mumblings about Bill Cosby, Rolf Harris, and Harvey Winstein for many years before there convictions.

I think your logic is faulty in this case. I think we might see more accounts coming out. (Of course then everyone will ask why-it's it's true-they didn't complain earlier. Sometimes you just can't win)

to be fair there has been 10 years for them to come forward...and no other woman has said they slept with him as a minor

 

[minusfour]

But if Scotland Yard said they looked at the case twice and interviewed Virginia and they didnt want to proceed then for the Queen is it a case of shielding its members from the supposed legal aspect of their conduct? or simply believing the police force that their is no case to answer?

Sexual abuse cases, especially historic ones, are so tricky to try successfully that hardly any-the number I've read is about one in a hundred-proceed far enough for the police to consider charges. If Scotland Yard don't want to proceed any further at the moment, that doesn't mean that there is nothing to the allegations. The FBI apparently want to talk to him, process servers, (civil, with a much lower bar to prove) were reported being ducked whilst Andrew hid out on some royal property or another. I think Andrew should be strongly encouraged to do the right thing, and answer any questions that he needs too. I think that would be the right thing for the Royal Family to do.
<modsnip - off topic>

 

[Lilibet]

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.

“Innocent until proven guilty” or presumption of innocence is a legal principle that a defendant in a criminal case does not have to prove their innocence. This is not a criminal case and Websleuths is not a court. This principle does not apply in these discussions. What does apply is that WS is victim friendly and whether Virginia wins or loses her lawsuit against PA, she was a victim of Epstein and Maxwell and whatever friends of theirs took advantage of her.

 

[Dotta]

Sexual abuse cases, especially historic ones, are so tricky to try successfully that hardly any-the number I've read is about one in a hundred-proceed far enough for the police to consider charges. If Scotland Yard don't want to proceed any further at the moment, that doesn't mean that there is nothing to the allegations. The FBI apparently want to talk to him, process servers, (civil, with a much lower bar to prove) were reported being ducked whilst Andrew hid out on some royal property or another. I think Andrew should be strongly encouraged to do the right thing, and answer any questions that he needs too. I think that would be the right thing for the Royal Family to do.

<modsnip: Off topic>

"Hiding on the Royal property"
What a shame!

<modsnip: No source for information stated as fact>

 

[Dotta]

https://www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.amp...rtable-having-drink-health-Prince-Andrew.html

Im very comfortable to drink to your health dear WS posters
Happy New Year!

 

[UK Girl]

https://www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10363371/amp/Grenadier-Guards-officers-uncomfortable-having-drink-health-Prince-Andrew.html?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw==#aoh=16411830039884&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10363371/Grenadier-Guards-officers-uncomfortable-having-drink-health-Prince-Andrew.html

Im very comfortable to drink to your health dear WS posters
Happy New Year!

The Mail....isnt the most reliable papers here and I dont believe he will ever lose his title BUT i do believe he should step down from his military roles...IF thats what the Military request.

 

[Kristin Esq.]

After catching up on this thread, here is my take:

Not all women, or sexual assault victims (no matter the age or gender) feel comfortable coming forward and speaking out against their abuser. I can only imagine that this may be MORE so because he is of the Royal Family.

 

[UK Girl]

After catching up on this thread, here is my take:

Not all women, or sexual assault victims (no matter the age or gender) feel comfortable coming forward and speaking out against their abuser. I can only imagine that this may be MORE so because he is of the Royal Family.

to be fair they came out against Epstein and Weinstein who are very powerful men. In some ways they were both more powerful than Andrew. She also claimed there was another member of a Royal family ( not the British one )but didnt name him