Ghislaine Maxwell trial

Potatoeman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119278380#Comment_119278380

Was Epstein’s called the ‘Live forever’ ?

Caquas

Ghislaine says “sorry for your troubles, Andy” . Last person he wanted to hear from.

No sign of any more prosecutions, of course, but some very, very rich men are dreading the interviews she has given from prison for a forthcoming documentary. Maxwell’s Israeli connection again - the filmmaker is a cousin of Ehud Barak, former PM and Chief of IDF.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/16/ghislaine-maxwell-says-she-feels-bad-for-dear-friend-prince-andrew

So…..recollections do vary! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11408937/Prince-Andrew-FOOL-settling-sexual-assault-lawsuit-Virginia-Roberts-source-claims.html

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119856046#Comment_119856046

I have expressed my reservations about Roberts elsewhere in this thread- I never believed that she was the “victim” she wished to be portrayed as - yes she had a difficult early life, then met Epstein and we know the rest- so I do have some sympathy for her- but there is plenty of testimony from others that she was also a willing participant for a time -

I do believe this latest admission throws a big shadow over anything she might say- for all we know she bedded a Prince Andrew lookalike and was told this is Prince Andrew - anything is possible at this stage, especially considering she has now stated she was young and confused - but how dare she allege she slept with someone and then retract it- that’s just a horrible thing to do to someone- I don’t buy her “I was mistaken” line now.

Andrew is still though persona non grata- his un-empathetic performance on News Night interview, his lack of remorse about his connection to Epstein and his unwillingness to assist the FBI are still enough to keep him out of public duties - its his own dumb fault if he settled with Roberts when he didn’t in fact have any dealings with her.

cap.in.hand.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119857044#Comment_119857044

If it went to trial.... It could expose prince Andrew with sleeping with lots of young women by being in the Epstein/Maxwell environment which he may have well did.... so I suppose this was limitation damage keeping it to maybe just 1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119857158#Comment_119857158

On that point you would imagine if it happened as you describe, then at least some of those women would have come forward at this point- they haven’t; so I’m willing to give the benefit of doubt that there were “others” similar to Roberts that slept with him.

As for did he didn’t he? Who knows - well he does, and she thinks she does. It was a convenient excuse story to settle the case because of the queens jubilee year- a story that was spun but something I never truely believed- a trial would certainly have exposed Andy’s love life and hard questions would have been asked of him- that in itself may have been enough for him to settle- even if he hadn’t participated in anything untoward with Roberts

cap.in.hand.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119857206#Comment_119857206

Andrew has never denied he was in all of Epstein/Maxwell houses,islands.... you'd have to question his need to be there seemingly on a nearly constant basis as being a UK envoy he would have access to the best hotels already paid for...it certainly didn't seem he took his envoy role too seriously but jetting off away to the usa thanks to that envoy role... gave him more freedom in the US than the UK he may have been thinking.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119857331#Comment_119857331

I’ve explored the possibility that considering Roberts MAY have had access to dates/times that Andrew was in those residences and that Roberts could also have been there at those dates and times, that the accusation then grew and centered around those coinciding dates- but I dropped that theory as being somewhat far fetched - and I think the balance of probabilities he did do the durty with her.

but yeah, he visited those residences far more times than let’s say, would have been healthy or necessary- after all he downplayed his relationship with Epstein in the news night interview- you can’t have it both ways matey- by visiting his many residences many times and flying on his Lolita express many times , you nailed your colours to the mast 😂

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119857044#Comment_119857044

If you listen to Duffray in the Netflix documentary, you'll have absolutely no doubt that she was a victim. The fact that she was paid by Epstein, as were many other girls does not make her a willing participant. He chose girls from dysfunctional families who absolutely needed money, and had no other reasonable option to earn money. Many of them were homeless, not living in a stable family home, not educated enough to know when they could safely say no. 

Dershowitz seems happy that her allegations were made in good faith. He's not going after her for costs.

She's no more a willing participant than the two Blackrock boys who were abused by the priest who gave them a computer for the family home. It's just grooming of underage kids for sex.

BattleCorp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858083#Comment_119858083

You'd also have to question Virginia Robert's parents too. Her Dad used to drive her to Epstein's house for her to give him massages when she was just 17.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858083#Comment_119858083

She’s alleged to have helped recruit other girls for Epstein - she’s not totally without fault here -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10149657/amp/Prince-Andrews-lawyers-expose-sex-kitten-past-Virginia-Giuffre-blistering-reply-lawsuit.html

cap.in.hand.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858471#Comment_119858471

I'd agree with you ..and some of girls from Eastern Europe he had seem to have gone on to successful careers..one being a pilot...

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119857044#Comment_119857044

I do believe this latest admission throws a big shadow over anything she might say- for all we know she bedded a Prince Andrew lookalike and was told this is Prince Andrew

Wow what are the chances Epstein was friends with Andrew and an Andrew lookalike.

Amazing he didn't go with that story before he handed over millions he didn't have to a woman he swore he never met.

🤷‍♂️

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858686#Comment_119858686

oh give over it’s obvious it was a glib comment - take your mock shock elsewhere it’s boring at this stage

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858780#Comment_119858780

Glib comment about a girl who was groomed, trafficked and raped? 😕

More like a hilariously desperate attempt to suggest the nounce is innocent.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858804#Comment_119858804

Hardly considering I’ve already stated my view above - but keep trying to bait me and I’ll just keep reporting your posts 🙂

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858829#Comment_119858829

You mean this

I have expressed my reservations about Roberts elsewhere in this thread- I never believed that she was the “victim” she wished to be portrayed as

Why have you victim in quotes?

She was groomed and trafficked at 15.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860238#Comment_119860238

Your challenge was about Andrew not Roberts and I answered that -you’re clearly not happy that I agree that Andrew likely had sex with Roberts on the balance of probabilities and are trying to bark up a different tree now.

Tell me, do you think it’s right that a man’s life could be wrecked by someone publically claiming she was forced to have sex with someone and later turns around, after getting a substantial million dollar payout from another person she accused, and says actually no, I’m mistaken- do you think that’s right? Or are you going to excuse that behaviour in some way to suit your agenda?

Regardless of what Roberts did or didn’t experience, calling out a man, actually no, multiple men, in public, and then retracting at least one name years later, is just plain wrong.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860272#Comment_119860272

Your challenge was about Andrew not Roberts and I answered that -you’re clearly not happy that I agree that Andrew likely had sex with Roberts on the balance of probabilities and are trying to bark up a different tree now.

You mean sexually abused her on multiple occasions? She was a groomed and trafficked minor.

So not a "victim" but a victim and not as you said a "willing participant", she was a groomed and trafficked child who was serially raped or as she described it "passed around like a platter of fruit".

Correct?

Tell me, do you think it’s right that a man’s life could be wrecked by someone publically claiming she was forced to have sex with someone and later turns around, after getting a substantial million dollar payout from another person she accused, and says actually no, I’m mistaken

Sounds to me given the tone and low key nature of the dropping of the suit, there was some sort of settlement

Dershowitz is actually a man of means, he wouldn't have to borrow it off his Mummy.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860338#Comment_119860338

So you’re now making assumptions of what happened in that case - again to suit your agenda

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860366#Comment_119860366

I'm giving a measured opinion, it's not like I suggested he was a body double.

Also what agenda am I trying to suit?

I assume we are both on the same page that Maxwell, Epstein and their rapist associates were abhorrent individuals who wrecked so many victims not "victims" lives?

Correct?

Potatoeman

The Andrew situation happened in England first where it was legal then NY where it would be illegal, all allegedly. The problem with the whole situation was that it took the spotlight off the real underage victims. There were actually children involved with Epstein but all that was pushed back as Virginia put herself in the spotlight to accuse Andrew. It always looked like a money grab. It’s even worse now that she recruited other girls. What age was she when that happened and how young were the girls? Surely these girls deserve compensation from her after her payouts.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860427#Comment_119860427

The Andrew situation happened in England first where it was legal

Pretty sure precuring and trafficking minors and coercing to them to be sexually abused is very much not legal in England.

Potatoeman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860463#Comment_119860463

She wasn’t underage in England. The age of consent is different in the UK. Andrew wasn’t the one that trafficked her either, that would be Epstein. You also glossed over Virginias role in recruiting and her victims right for compensation from her.

rogber

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858686#Comment_119858686

It weren't me, guv'nor. It were the bloke in the blue jumper, honest

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860512#Comment_119860512

You are confusing age of consent with sex trafficking, there is no age of consent. It's illegal.

You also glossed over Virginias role in recruiting

Have you evidence she recruited anyone, it was Prince Andrews allegation through his lawyers that she did, the same person who can't sweat and never met her. 😂

Anyway, a court dismissed it.

This is victim blaming on an absolute epic scale by the way. Fair play to you. 👍️

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860372#Comment_119860372

Roberts can be a victim and a “victim” at the same time - certainly she was a victim of Epstein - but she was a “victim” of the guy she’s now totally cleared -I don’t agree with how she’s conducted herself - she has publicly named politicians, a lawyer and a Prince at the very least but no criminal trial has taken place; only an out of court civil settlement for loads of money.

- the biggest issue here is that aside from Epsteins previous trials before he died where he admitted his abuse and hence is obviously now rightfully classed as an abuser of kids and Maxwells trial where she was found guilty also of her crimes, we don’t have any other criminal trials here - and criminal trials are how we describe people of being guilty or not guilty of the crimes they’ve been alleged - not pronouncements on social media -

we only have US style civil suits where money is the main motivator and that’s been very clear in the outcome of Andrew’s case- it’s his business if he wants to settle such a legal proceeding but in my view he’s a fool for doing so if he didn’t do it, and a creep if he did.

But I’m not going to be told I should believe that Roberts is all sweetness and light and that just because she was a victim of Epstein that she’s not now capable of pursuing civil cases for personal gain even though the people she’s pursing deny any involvement and in one case to date have been proven to be not involved - so yeah, victim and “victim”

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860607#Comment_119860607

But I’m not going to be told I should believe that Roberts is all sweetness and light and that just because she was a victim of Epstein

And Prince Andrew like you have already stated and many others.

It's beyond weird the level people on here are trying to discredit a child that was groomed, trafficked and serially raped.

Also the statute of limitations had expired on the criminal trials, she had not option but to go the civil route because of a change in the law, didn't stop Prince Andrew trying to argue she wasn't a child because she was 17. 😕

Wowsers.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860688#Comment_119860688

I see throughout this discussion you have conveniently refrained from providing your view on people accusing others of abuse on social media and accusing totally innocent people who had no involvement in abuse of the accuser- you’re pushing the agenda that Virgina Roberts, because she was abused, shouldn’t be held accountable for her actions on social media and public statements made elsewhere- we can be sympathetic towards Virginia to her past plight but that doesn’t mean we can’t criticise her for other things that she has done since.

According to you, if we don’t call Andrew a nonce and don’t fully sign up to everything Virgina says as the gospel truth, then we’re no better than Epstein - even though there’s no criminal trial for these particular cases - I’ve no doubt had I questioned Roberts accusation against Derchowitz a few weeks ago before this news broke, I would have had to endure the same nonsense from you.

Jequ0n

@Boggles One should be allowed to view testimonies with a critical eye, particularly if large sums of money are involved. I will never understand why some people think they you should whole and unreservedly believe someone who presents themselves as a victim of any sort.