Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit

[equationgirl]

It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.

Not necessarily. Depends on the state.

 

[Orang Utan]

It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.

i think they have civil juries - the OJ case had one

 

[Pickman's model]

It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.

au contraire

 

[dessiato]

I love the too honourable quote. Not a single person who watched it believed the nonce.

My sister did, and continues to do so.

 

[MickiQ]

Even my father-in-law who might have been willing to cut him some slack and attach some weight to his word otherwise simply because he served in the Navy doesn't believe him.

 

[equationgirl]

Even my father-in-law who might have been willing to cut him some slack and attach some weight to his word otherwise simply because he served in the Navy doesn't believe him.

I daresay Brenda doesn't believe him either, seems to be only the Met that do. Or they can't be arsed and are doing the 'move along, nothing to see here' thing.

 

[MickiQ]

I daresay Brenda doesn't believe him either, seems to be only the Met that do. Or they can't be arsed and are doing the 'move along, nothing to see here' thing.

I don't think there is anything to see tbh, He Who Cannot Sweat has a done a truly magnificent job of convincing everyone he is a lying imbecile with a massive sense of his own entitlement but this is a 20 year old case that basically comes down to her word against his. I suspect not many in the Met believe him but there's just no evidence to prove he's a liar even though he has managed to convince huge numbers of people he is.

 

[Pickman's model]

I daresay Brenda doesn't believe him either, seems to be only the Met that do. Or they can't be arsed and are doing the 'move along, nothing to see here' thing.

when they sent the vice squad to chat to andrew many people believed they were police with an interest in prosecuting vice. sadly the opposite was true.

 

[equationgirl]

I don't think there is anything to see tbh, He Who Cannot Sweat has a done a truly magnificent job of convincing everyone he is a lying imbecile with a massive sense of his own entitlement but this is a 20 year old case that basically comes down to her word against his. I suspect not many in the Met believe him but there's just no evidence to prove he's a liar even though he has managed to convince huge numbers of people he is.

There is evidence. He claims he never met her. She has produced a photograph that proves that they did, at least once, at Maxwell's London townhouse. I believe the photograph has been authenticated.

 

[Chilli.s]

Knowledge of intimate birthmarks, tattoo, piercing etc would be a fair indication that she met him.

 

[equationgirl]

And given that she can prove he lied once, it throws everything he says into question.

 

[Chilli.s]

Fingers crossed then

 

[equationgirl]

He might even have a tragic walking accident whilst walking the clifftop near the Castle of Mey (furthest north coastal residence of the royals I can think of, although the QM may have passed it to Charles when she died).

Some kind of permanent solution to the problem is likely in his future...

 

[gosub]

He might even have a tragic walking accident whilst walking the clifftop near the Castle of Mey (furthest north coastal residence of the royals I can think of, although the QM may have passed it to Charles when she died).

Some kind of permanent solution to the problem is likely in his future...

It was a tragedy, falling off that cliff whilst trying to save those puppies. Selfless to the end

 

[danny la rouge]

My sister did, and continues to do so.

Wow. I’ve never heard of anyone else who did.

 

[1927]

It's a Civil case, so presumably there will be no jury.

there are juries in civil cases.

 

[Pickman's model]

He might even have a tragic walking accident whilst walking the clifftop near the Castle of Mey (furthest north coastal residence of the royals I can think of, although the QM may have passed it to Charles when she died).

Some kind of permanent solution to the problem is likely in his future...

charles has it

 

[eatmorecheese]

My sister did, and continues to do so.

So does Mrs Cheese's aunt. The crux of her argument is the idea that victims should come forward straight away, not years later. I told her that she fails to understand how abusive power dynamics, shame, blame etc works. She said it was all about money. I called him a dirty shithouse and we left the conversation there.

 

[equationgirl]

So does Mrs Cheese's aunt. The crux of her argument is the idea that victims should come forward straight away, not years later. I told her that she fails to understand how abusive power dynamics, shame, blame etc works. She said it was all about money. I called him a dirty shithouse and we left the conversation there.

Yeah, victims don't come forward for a whole variety of reasons.

 

[equationgirl]

And I know a lot of people like Aunt Cheese think 'they should just go to the police', well, the rape conviction stats should make it clear why people avoid that route, never mind the lack of trust given recent events with Sarah Everard.

 

[dessiato]

So does Mrs Cheese's aunt. The crux of her argument is the idea that victims should come forward straight away, not years later. I told her that she fails to understand how abusive power dynamics, shame, blame etc works. She said it was all about money. I called him a dirty shithouse and we left the conversation there.

That's broadly the conversation with my sister.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Knowledge of intimate birthmarks, tattoo, piercing etc would be a fair indication that she met him.

Does Prince Andrew have a Prince Albert?

 

[MickiQ]

There is evidence. He claims he never met her. She has produced a photograph that proves that they did, at least once, at Maxwell's London townhouse. I believe the photograph has been authenticated.

That's proof he has met her and he's lying about it, neither of which are unfortunately actual crimes. Doesn't prove he's slept with her and is nowhere near enough to build a case on if that is all there is.

 

[Orang Utan]

That's proof he has met her and he's lying about it, neither of which are unfortunately actual crimes. Doesn't prove he's slept with her and is nowhere near enough to build a case on if that is all there is.

i suppose he could just say in court that he couldn’t remember meeting her. He’d just say he meets so many people how could he possibly remember? I probably wouldn’t remember meeting one person in a club once a few years back. would you? (of course he does remember her though, having more than just met her)

 

[equationgirl]

That's proof he has met her and he's lying about it, neither of which are unfortunately actual crimes. Doesn't prove he's slept with her and is nowhere near enough to build a case on if that is all there is.

You said there was no proof he had lied. There is.

 

[MickiQ]

You said there was no proof he had lied. There is.

Yes you're right bad choice of words on my part I should have been a little clearer, During his magnificent car crash of an interview he claimed he had no idea where the photo came from, I didn't believe him and I'm sure you didn't.
However there is nothing to stop him repeating that under oath. He's a prince and meets a lot of people it is not reasonable to expect him to remember every single person he's posed with.
Even then what does the photo actually prove, that he has met Giuffre? The Met don't have to prove that or that he was lying about it since even if he is posing for a picture with someone isn't a crime. They have to prove HWCS slept with her against her will since she was coerced by Epstein. That's a crime but there is no evidence of that save her word. I believe her not him but the fact that someone has been caught out lying about one thing doesn't support any claim that something else has happened.
Plod has to prove her version of events after the photo (or before I can't remember whether she claimed they had sex after or before the photo was taken) and that his denials of that are false.

 

[Raheem]

They have to prove HWCS slept with her against her will since she was coerced by Epstein.

I think they would only have to prove that she was trafficked, not that she was coerced on that specific occasion.

 

[Athos]

You said there was no proof he had lied. There is.

Is there? I thought he'd been very carful to say that he had "no recollection" of meeting her, rather than denying that he had?

 

[gosub]

Yes you're right bad choice of words on my part I should have been a little clearer, During his magnificent car crash of an interview he claimed he had no idea where the photo came from, I didn't believe him and I'm sure you didn't.
However there is nothing to stop him repeating that under oath. He's a prince and meets a lot of people it is not reasonable to expect him to remember every single person he's posed with.
Even then what does the photo actually prove, that he has met Giuffre? The Met don't have to prove that or that he was lying about it since even if he is posing for a picture with someone isn't a crime. They have to prove HWCS slept with her against her will since she was coerced by Epstein. That's a crime but there is no evidence of that save her word. I believe her not him but the fact that someone has been caught out lying about one thing doesn't support any claim that something else has happened.
Plod has to prove her version of events after the photo (or before I can't remember whether she claimed they had sex after or before the photo was taken) and that his denials of that are false.

Shame he can't face trial in Scotland. Can you imagine the tarnish to his honour a 'not proven' would bring

 

[Pickman's model]

Shame he can't face trial in Scotland. Can you imagine the tarnish to his honour a 'not proven' would bring

not as much of a tarnish as guilty on all counts