Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Think there were more than the 2 nonces, Weinstein was there too I think from memory!
A nexus of noncery.
Think there were more than the 2 nonces, Weinstein was there too I think from memory!
So you don't trust the usual suspects?is there a trustworthy non-Mail/Sun/Express link for this Kevin Spacey stuff?
Or him saying he was coerced by the perverted princeSpacey is expected to throw himself onto the live grenade to save his royal arseness.
Spacey himself is a total egotistical bastard who thinks the world revolves around him.
I can’t see him even agreeing to give evidence.
probably not he was usually out sorting Pizza whenever they visited but you never know these days Maxwell and Epstein were supposed to have kept cctv and photos of celebs and we havent really seen much of what was in thier safes despite court casesFunny how Spacey was never previously mentioned! Are there photos of ExHRH and Kevin?
Whilst I have immense sympathy for you, and I truly do, perhaps you’d be better off with a separate thread where you’d be able to get help/advice that you’re unlikely to get here, because of the topic of this thread.Just an update of the arrests in this case, the people arrested are facing charges of conspiracy to murder. I have been following the activities of this network for some time. Since it started in fact, as the people invovled have network connections to the psychologist who abused me. I won't be commenting more in this case here as a) investigative journalists are all over it and b) I do not wish to prejudice any future trial. I would like to say that I am aware of, and can prove with evidence, that sinister actors (some working in NHS mental health services) have been abusing vulnerable people for some years and radicalising them. For the avoidance of doubt, I am not a fan of Prince Andrew, however the multiple connections of some of his accusers to the networks that abused me and have abused other vulnerable people need to be exposed before someone is actually murdered.
'Satanic ritual abuse' protesters gather at Waddesdon Manor
Whilst I have immense sympathy for you, and I truly do, perhaps you’d be better off with a separate thread where you’d be able to get help/advice that you’re unlikely to get here, because of the topic of this thread.
The thing more than anything that tells you that the whole idea of false memories in this case is a desperate and cynical diversionary defence strategy is that there has been no suggestion at any point from VG that her memories have been anything but continuously present. There is no rupture or “recovery” or period of forgetting. She has claimed that she had an experience that has affected her every day since it happened. That is absolutely not the pattern associated with implanted memories.
VG also failed to give evidence at Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial. I cannot understand why, if she is such a warrior for truth and justice, she would not wish to give testimony at the trial. It really does not make any sense at all.
a daily mail article slagging off prince Andrew's accuser? fuck offThere is also the issue of the fact that many victims of sex trafficking do not know that they are trafficked. Many perceive their traffickers as their friends. Many victims recruit other females (or in some cases males) to sex trafficking networks for various reasons. Those reasons can be on a continuum of motivations, with at one end the chance to make money and to please the trafficker (who may be perceived as a friend or lover) and at the other end there may be a genuine belief that the vulnerable person being recruited is being helped to better themselves, pay off debts or some other reason.
Most recruiting of victims happens somewhere in the middle of the continuum and significant cognitive dissonance is involved. If we consider this in a nuanced way then it is entirely possible that Prince Andrew could have had what he had every reasons to believe was consensual sexual activity with a young woman who was trafficked but who did not realise that she was trafficked. She may have acted as though she was consenting but later come to believe that she was under duress.
Virginia Giuffre was, according to various news reports of Epstein’s victims testimonies, nearer to the top of the exploitation pyramid than the bottom. While she was not as high up as Ghislaine Maxwell she bears significant culpability for the exploitation of many other young women and girls. VG has admitted that she recruited minor girls for Epstein. Carolyn Andriano , whom I consider to be a credible witness, has stated that Giuffre recruited her to Epstein’s sex trafficking pyramidal enterprise when Carolyn was 14 years old and Giuffre was an adult. If true this makes Giuffre someone who participated in the sexual exploitation and trafficking of minors.
This article casts a different perspective on things
also see
Jeffrey Epstein 'sex slave' was a 'money-hungry sex kitten'
Former companions said Virginia Roberts, 31, lived a lavish lifestyle and never seemed like she was being held captive as she was part of Jeffrey Epstein's harem in Palm Beach, Florida.www.dailymail.co.uk
VG also failed to give evidence at Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial. I cannot understand why, if she is such a warrior for truth and justice, she would not wish to give testimony at the trial. It really does not make any sense at all.
Of course I understand how it works.Giuffre was 17, FFS.
You do realise, don't you, that many of the Rotherham victims thought those abusing them were their boyfriends? Someone in that position isn't thinking straight.
A mail article featuring people who used to know Virgina Giuffrea daily mail article slagging off prince Andrew's accuser? fuck off
i think we can ignore articles that describe victims as money hungry sex kittens.A mail article quoting an Epstein survivor - so if a survivor is featured in the mail we should ignore her?
Thank you for your insight
I think the fact the prosecution chose not to call her isn't a great endorsement. It does seem odd, given how much she has to say about Maxwell's role in Epstein's network. The most obvious reasons not to call her would be concerns over her own credibility and culpability, which are the areas Andrew's lawyers will gun for.Neither the prosecution nor the defence asked her to. You can't just rock up at a criminal trial and start giving evidence.
I think the fact the prosecution chose not to call her isn't a great endorsement. It does seem odd, given how much she has to say about Maxwell's role in Epstein's network. The most obvious reason not to call her would be concerns over her own credibility, which is the area Andrew's lawyers will gun for.
- she wasn't asked. By all accounts they only asked 4 out of possibly >100, keeping it simple to reduce wiggle room.I cannot understand why, if she is such a warrior for truth and justice, she would not wish to give testimony at the trial.
it really depends upon which survivor you give more credence toi think we can ignore articles that describe victims as money hungry sex kittens.
Yes, the claim that she chose not to is misconceived. Mine was a separate point about why the prosecution chose not to call her.It has nothing to do with her though. I was replying to:
- she wasn't asked. By all accounts they only asked 4 out of possibly >100, keeping it simple to reduce wiggle room.
Yes, the claim that she chose not to is misconceived. Mine was a separate point about why the prosecution chose not to call her.
er, OK, maybe the Jan 22 Mirror article would meet your approvalDaily Mail doesn't have a lot of credibility when it comes to being an independent and unbiased source of news let alone a nearly 7 year old article that has long been overtaken by events.