Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

danny la rouge said:
And that’s what everyone will think. The deal will refer to no admission of guilt, but everyone will think “but it is really”.
Click to expand...
That's my suspicion. For him, better to pay it off and have no formal finding or admission of guilt. For her, better to get a payout and the knowledge that everyone thinks his willingness to settle points to his guilt. A settlement is a win/win.
 
MickiQ said:
I'm not sure he'll settle since there is no way that he can do that without it appearing he's admitting guilt and paying her off to shut her up. His reputation is in tatters and he is just too high profile for it to be simply forgotten. If he is to return his previous life as jet setting benefit scrounger then he needs to discredit her.
We've got months of wild speculation to look forward to, well he hasn't but lots of people have.
Click to expand...
I think he'd settle in a heartbeat given the option.

And it would most certainly be forgotten, particularly among the people that he mixes with. It would be said that he was never found guilty and settled in order to end the whole episode. If he's found 'guilty' by a jury, then he may be cut adrift by elements of his social circle, but otherwise he'll be swanning around with them again within a couple of years.
 
Athos said:
That's my suspicion. For him, better to pay it off and have no formal finding or admission of guilt. For her, better to get a payout and the knowledge that everyone thinks his willingness to settle points to his guilt. A settlement is a win/win.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know. That’s what I’m saying. If he was convinced of his innocence (like if he could remember who he’d slept with, like I can), he’d be like “bring it on”. If he’s willing to settle then he’s willing for everyone to think he did it.
 
danny la rouge said:
Yes, I know. That’s what I’m saying. If he was convinced of his innocence (like if he could remember who he’d slept with, like I can), he’d be like “bring it on”. If he’s willing to settle then he’s willing for everyone to think he did it.
Click to expand...

People will think he did it regardless of the outcome of any court case. He's clutching at straws in a hope to limit the, already massive, damage to his reputation and to be able to cast an element of doubt on his guilt that he can reference in his future life. "I was never convicted, therefore I didn't do it". And there'd be plenty of people who'd go along with that. Also, by indicating he's prepared to go all the way in court, Giuffre's side are more likely to settle eventually.
 
Ah, facepalm myself for mixing up what you meant danny la rouge, sorry.

The reason for settling out of court is some variation on that "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt" isn't it? If he settles he can claim innocence forever, no matter what the world thinks. Go to court and, well...

It's common for people to plead innocence right up until the last moment isn't it, as some bargaining chip/desperate hope.
 
danny la rouge said:
Yes, I know. That’s what I’m saying. If he was convinced of his innocence (like if he could remember who he’d slept with, like I can), he’d be like “bring it on”. If he’s willing to settle then he’s willing for everyone to think he did it.
Click to expand...
They'll think that whatever. The best he can get from the situation now is to avoid a court finding that, such that he can assert the presumption of innocence.
 
Spymaster said:
People will think he did it regardless of the outcome of any court case. He's clutching at straws in a hope to limit the, already massive, damage to his reputation and to be able to cast an element of doubt on his guilt that he can reference in his future life. "I was never convicted, therefore I didn't do it". And there'd be plenty of people who'd go along with that. Also, by indicating he's prepared to go all the way in court, it's more Giuffre's side are more likely to settle eventually.
Click to expand...
I mean, anyone who watched that interview thinks he did it. Those were not the arguments of someone who knew they’d done nothing wrong.

Plus his previous defence that Epstein was Maxwell’s “plus one” is, shall we say, even less compelling now.
 
Everyone seems certain he is guilty, but guilty of what exactly? It seems to me there is a relatively broad range of things that he could be guilty of, whether from a technical or "moral" point of view. Maybe you take the view that it doesn't matter.
 
teuchter said:
Everyone seems certain he is guilty, but guilty of what exactly? It seems to me there is a relatively broad range of things that he could be guilty of, whether from a technical or "moral" point of view. Maybe you take the view that it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
Well, her claim is that he had sex with her knowing she'd been trafficked, such that she she wasn't able to consent.
 
teuchter said:
Everyone seems certain he is guilty, but guilty of what exactly? It seems to me there is a relatively broad range of things that he could be guilty of, whether from a technical or "moral" point of view. Maybe you take the view that it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
See Athos ‘s post above. That’s the allegation that Andrew made himself sound decidedly shifty in denying.

He knew the circumstances that led to her being in that position and he took advantage anyway. And of course it matters.
 
Magnus McGinty said:
Well he can hardly argue that he was unaware of the circumstances given he doesn’t acknowledge he was even there.
Click to expand...
Presumably that's another reason for him to avoid going to trial. Even if he is able to mount a successful defense it would presumably require him to admit more than he has done so far. At the very least he surely cannot maintain that the photo of them together is fake.
 
teuchter said:
That seems one of the areas where things are not very clear.
Click to expand...
He sought to deny that area of the allegation by saying Epstein wasn’t really his friend, he was just Maxwell’s “plus one”. That no longer puts the distance between him and the trafficking he thought it did.

Not to mention staying at Epstein’s house in order to be honourable and because it was convenient.
 
Spymaster said:
I think he'd settle in a heartbeat given the option.

And it would most certainly be forgotten, particularly among the people that he mixes with. It would be said that he was never found guilty and settled in order to end the whole episode. If he's found 'guilty' by a jury, then he may be cut adrift by elements of his social circle, but otherwise he'll be swanning around with them again within a couple of years.
Click to expand...
yeh but perhaps not in the surroundings he'd enjoy
1643640435602.png
 
justin credible said:
There 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
www.dailymail.co.uk

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 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.
Click to expand...
Summary. You cunt, fuck off.
 
justin credible said:
why ill timed?

He makes a good point, yes she can't just rock up and give evidence but it is curious that a) she wasn't called to give evidence and b) given that she is no stranger to making her voice heard in the media she did not kick up a fuss about not being called. I would have done in her position as would anyone I would have thought
Click to expand...
I find this second-guessing of the mindset of someone who may well have been trafficked and abused really very distasteful indeed. Given that you appear to be speaking as a victim of some sort yourself, I'd have hoped for a little more empathy.
 
Interesting claim in the Eye as to why TAFKAP is going for a trial rather than settling as (apparently) all the family want him too. He thinks that once he has been found to be pure as snow, he’ll get all his old titles back and can wear those navy badges again. The fuckwit.

2DA27310-C850-413C-B10B-FCA9BA26EA86.jpeg
 
Spymaster said:
People will think he did it regardless of the outcome of any court case. He's clutching at straws in a hope to limit the, already massive, damage to his reputation and to be able to cast an element of doubt on his guilt that he can reference in his future life. "I was never convicted, therefore I didn't do it". And there'd be plenty of people who'd go along with that. Also, by indicating he's prepared to go all the way in court, Giuffre's side are more likely to settle eventually.
Click to expand...
It worked for Michael Jackson, more than once. You don't have to everyone on your side, lots will do.
 
MickiQ said:
On that note apparently HWCS doesn't have much in the way of spare dosh either, it might be difficult for him to offer a generous out of court settlement if there is no guarantee that his Mum/Bro/British Taxpayer will sub him.
Click to expand...
Our Head of State has substantial "private" reserves salted away a few million spent to save a favourite son could easily be found
 
If he does settle he will have to hand over many millions to Giuffre.Not sure there's going to be much room left thereafter for talk of any "presumption of innocence"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Humberto
British Empire and Slave Trade Reparations
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
155
Views
6K
shambler
shambler
tony.c
Major suspect named in Stephen Lawrence murder by BBC
Replies
23
Views
2K
Saul Goodman
Saul Goodman
Elpenor
Prince William’s many good deeds
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
176
Views
10K
Petcha
P
BristolEcho
Modern Slavery at TN Trawlers
Replies
5
Views
594
CNT36
C
friedaweed
Gwynedd council calls for abolition of title Prince of Wales
Replies
2
Views
416
Serene
Serene
Back
Top Bottom