nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Andrew formally known as Prince in jep?

Hitchens

"Suggestion of impropriety with minors untrue," says Buckingham Palace after Prince Andrew named in US sex lawsuit

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30659629

this is surprising if it's true

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Peist2007

NSAman wrote: »

"forced" hmmmm was she held in a confined space ? Something just does not add up. I am sure she enjoyed all the travel and the top class treatment. While young, she was obvious naive or stupid. What were her parents thinking she was doing at the age of 17 travelling the world? Sounds like someone who had a lifestyle and lost it and is now bitter.... but that is just my thoughts.

Have no time for anyone who forces anyone into a sexual relationship, but if forced, why did she continue in this situation?

She was after all above the age of consent?

I think your sense of logic isnt adding up. The allegation is the sex was forced ie not consensual. The girl being over the age of consent is another issue.

Venus In Furs

Lots of people are forced into sex and they're over the age of consent. What the hell difference does age make?

Roquentin

NSAman wrote: »

"forced" hmmmm was she held in a confined space ? Something just does not add up. I am sure she enjoyed all the travel and the top class treatment. While young, she was obvious naive or stupid. What were her parents thinking she was doing at the age of 17 travelling the world? Sounds like someone who had a lifestyle and lost it and is now bitter.... but that is just my thoughts.

Have no time for anyone who forces anyone into a sexual relationship, but if forced, why did she continue in this situation?

She was after all above the age of consent?

the psychology of who we are changes with age. as we mature we look back at things we did when we were young and say that we were taken advantage of.

She will try and make a bit of money from it which is understandable.

having said that the law is the law. Same thing happened berlusconi with his parties.

really the prince shouldnt be keeping company with questionable characters such as epstein. You are the people around you

RobYourBuilder

Lawyers acting for the woman who alleges she was forced by a multimillionaire financier to have sex with Prince Andrew when she was 17 are formally requesting that he respond under oath to her accusations.

Details of the request, contained in a letter addressed to Andrew at Buckingham Palace asking him to take part in a two-hour interview, were contained in a new legal submission filed by the woman, Virginia Roberts, in a Florida court on Wednesday.

The court bundle also contains a sworn affidavit from Roberts, providing new details about the sexual encounters she alleges she had with Andrew on three separate occasions beginning when she was 17 and working for Jeffrey Epstein, a former hedge fund boss since convicted for soliciting sex with a minor.

Roberts alleges she was paid $15,000 by Epstein after she claims she first slept with Andrew partly “to keep my mouth shut about ‘working’ with the Prince”. She also claims she was involved in an “orgy” in the US Virgin Islands with the duke, Epstein, and eight other girls, who she said all appeared to be under 18.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/21/woman-affidavit-prince-andrew

Muahahaha

Squeaky bum time for the Prince. The photo of him with his arm around her looks really bad, she is clearly very young in that photo. If Randy Andy doesn't respond to the claims he can expect a law suit in London to be filed and then he's going to have this girl chase him on home soil, in the full glare of the media and British public.

banoffe2

Watched a documentary on Prince Andrew last night - will this be another cover up? lots of evidence and photos, him and Fergie best of friends, the Queen's golden boy.

Inquitus

banoffe2 wrote: »

Watched a documentary on Prince Andrew last night - will this be another cover up? lots of evidence and photos, him and Fergie best of friends, the Queen's golden boy.

His defense in the upcoming BBC interview is weak at best.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50431163

ILoveYourVibes

I never knew he existed until this I don't know a lot about royals. Its awful. He seems horrible.

Coillte_Bhoy

tdf7187

[Deleted User]

https://twitter.com/danleburrowhole/status/1195661444668416000?s=20

*Shudder*

Bobblehats

Rate his gurn

tdf7187

Let's face it, who among us has not been compromised in a manner that involves fraternising with notorious sex pimp traffickers while being a member of a royal family because we were simply TOO honourable.

Galwayguy35

He was a bit of a horndog back in the day so it's no surprise really that it's coming back to bite him now.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Being a Prince in the British Royal Family is the ultimate pull card. I'd say Andrew rode all around him back in the day. He'd a reputation for being a 'horndog' as somebody mentioned above.

Prestige, power, wealth.

Richard Hillman

You can tell her majesty hasn't taken it too well. "A constant sore in the family", then saying "the whole family knew him" .

I reckon he has been unofficially cut from the family and his argument is "You all knew him too".

micar

Medical reason why he doesn't..... I mean didn't sweat.....what nonsense.

I've love to educated in reading body language and the use of language.

[Deleted User]

micar wrote: »

Medical reason why he doesn't..... I mean didn't sweat.....what nonsense.

I've love to educated in reading body language and the use of language.

https://twitter.com/MorsStupebit/status/1195861088329457664?s=20

Twister2

I'd be more worried about the people he's associating with there:D

Paddy Cow

Billy86 wrote: »

I would say Harry to be honest, once he got over his teenage phase with things like the Nazi Halloween costume he has gone on to be easily the best walking, talking PR machine for the royals since his mom died.

As for Andrew I guess I wouldn't be shocked if it is true, but as people have said this trial by media/guilty until proven innocent nonsense is nothing short of a blight on modern society.

How quickly the tide turns. Since marrying Meghan he's become a sap and his popularity has plummeted. Although I do think Harry and Meghan have become scapegoats to take attention away from other royal indiscretions *cough* William cheating on Kate *cough*.

[Deleted User]

Really?I never heard about him cheating.
I'm no expert in body language but Andrew seemed to be under severe pressure and going around in circles with vague non direct answers, I didn't believe him tbh.

Paddy Cow

Deleted User wrote: »

Really?I never heard about him cheating.
I'm no expert in body language but Andrew seemed to be under severe pressure and going around in circles with vague non direct answers, I didn't believe him tbh.

It was all over twitter a few months ago. He cheated with one of their country friends. The press were starting to hint at it and William brought in the lawyers to shut them up. You can't stop twitter though.

[Deleted User]

Paddy Cow wrote: »

It was all over twitter a few months ago. He cheated with one of their country friends. The press were starting to hint at it and William brought in the lawyers to shut them up. You can't stop twitter though.

If you stop and think about it the whole family have/are cheating ,bonkers lol.

1641

Pizza Express in Woking have had some interesting very recent reviews on Tripadvisor!

anewme

1641 wrote: »

Pizza Express in Woking have had some interesting very recent reviews on Tripadvisor!

They are hilarious.

anewme

What not to do in Rule 1 of PR for Dummies.

Came across as a complete arrogant toad. No mention of any of Epstein’s victims.

I remember seeing that photo of Andrew with his arm around Virginia years and years ago.

Proof that chickens always come home to roost, no matter how long.

ruwithme

Shame emily didn't wear something racy and bring her seat closer to the Prince. get the blood circulating and test that sweat claim

[Deleted User]

Prince Andrew was lying through his massive teeth.

Stating "I have no recollection", then going on to say, "That didn't happen". Both of those statements cannot be true. It's either one or the other.
Stating he worked closely with children's abuse charities etc., and knew what to look for, yet couldn't find an iota of suspicion - nothing, nada - with Epstein or in any of Epstein's properties.
Stating that he didn't want to be seen in public with Epstein (who wasn't a "close friend") after his release from prison in 2010, yet had to meet him in order to say that; and stay for 4-days, one of which was a dinner party, in Epstein's properties at the same time ("it was a convenient place to stay", as if a member of the Royal family would find it difficult to procure accommodation in the US). Weird way to split up a friendship and not be seen in public.
Showing no remorse for Epstein's victims, which says a lot about how he must view his own victims.
Throughout the program, he nods his head (a sign of agreement) whilst disagreeing with something Maitlis is saying; that's often a micro-expression for lying (example: 27 minutes 45 into the program.
When asked about the photo of himself with Victoria in one of Epstein's properties, he claims that he has "no recollection" and that he "never went upstairs", despite the fact the photo shows him upstairs. Even if he claims the photo is a fake, how could he know what upstairs in Epstein's property looks like?
When asked if he met Victoria in the Tramp club. He denies this and says "he doesn't drink", even though a) that's not the question b) he wasn't asked if he drank alcohol or bought her an alcoholic drink, it could be non-alcoholic etc. for both and c) claimed he doesn't know where the club is, then 2 sentences later he slips out the words, "whenever I went there".
His bizarre claim to remember an outing in Pizza Express on 10 March 2001. I can barely remember the dates of meals from last month, let alone almost 20 years ago. This claim simply cannot be true.
His even more bizarre - and false - claim that he cannot sweat. Even if that were true, it wouldn't nullify the claims against him as a sex offender.
His general demeanour throughout the interview, discomfort at the questions, and general obfuscation with his answers.

I could go on, but it was a quite catastrophic performance on a gigantic scale.

omerin

I wonder were the questions given to him prior to the interview?

dubrov

Deleted User wrote: »

Prince Andrew was lying through his massive teeth.
Stating "I have no recollection", then going on to say, "That didn't happen". Both of those statements cannot be true. It's either one or the other.

Stating he worked closely with children's abuse charities etc., and knew what to look for, yet couldn't find an iota of suspicion - nothing, nada - with Epstein or in any of Epstein's properties.

Stating that he didn't want to be seen in public with Epstein (who wasn't a "close friend") after his release from prison in 2010, yet had to meet him in order to say that; and stay for 4-days, one of which was a dinner party, in Epstein's properties at the same time ("it was a convenient place to stay", as if a member of the Royal family would find it difficult to procure accommodation in the US). Weird way to split up a friendship and not be seen in public.

Showing no remorse for Epstein's victims, which says a lot about how he must view his own victims.

Throughout the program, he nods his head (a sign of agreement) whilst disagreeing with something Maitlis is saying; that's often a micro-expression for lying (example: 27 minutes 45 into the program.

When asked about the photo of himself with Victoria in one of Epstein's properties, he claims that he has "no recollection" and that he "never went upstairs", despite the fact the photo shows him upstairs. Even if he claims the photo is a fake, how could he know what upstairs in Epstein's property looks like?

When asked if he met Victoria in the Tramp club. He denies this and says "he doesn't drink", even though a) that's not the question b) he wasn't asked if he drank alcohol or bought her an alcoholic drink, it could be non-alcoholic etc. for both and c) claimed he doesn't know where the club is, then 2 sentences later he slips out the words, "whenever I went there".

His bizarre claim to remember an outing in Pizza Express on 10 March 2001. I can barely remember the dates of meals from last month, let alone almost 20 years ago. This claim simply cannot be true.

His even more bizarre - and false - claim that he cannot sweat. Even if that were true, it wouldn't nullify the claims against him as a sex offender.

His general demeanour throughout the interview, discomfort at the questions, and general obfuscation with his answers.

I could go on, but it was a quite catastrophic performance on a gigantic scale.

To be fair, only the third point you made could be classed as valid evidence.
The rest is all conjecture.

I doubt we'll ever know the truth