To think this is odd in view of what’s already been said

I’m just waiting for the next one.

I think the his position changed when an email surfaced from Maxwell to his lawyers stating she thought that photo was real

I do hope so.

I know he is a member of a very rich family, but just how does Andrew, and the profligate ex wife of his, afford the lifestyle they have? As i understand it, his only real income is £260,000 from the Queen and £20,000 RN pension. Yes, I know it is a lot of money to most people, but in income terms, it does not support their spending. They are reported to both be dreadful with money, in fact Epstein bailed out Andrew's ex wife, Sarah, to the tune of £15,000 I believe. I appreciate there is a lot of money in assets in the family, but to my mind, it is inherited, such as art, property etc., and they are custodians for the next generation. I wonder if this pay out is seen as Andrew getting his 'share' early? Not really apropos of anything, just musing and curious.

Could be. I expect HM and Charles are having to bail them out from their personal money. He’s only 62 and unemployable, don’t know what she does, and I expect they will consider themselves entitled to carry on with their expensive lifestyles. Could live for another 40 years.

I think we are going to see serious changes when the Queen dies. Charles has always said he will slim 'The Firm' down, so I suspect this business will lend more power to this plan. I have no issue with the Queen, but even before this disgusting debacle, I wouldn't have walked to the Coop to see Andrew. Andrew and ex are living in Royal Lodge in Windsor for a peppercorn rent, perhaps they will have to cut their coat to suit their cloth and move to a considerably smaller property and with less no staff, neither of them are working as far as I can see so they can cut their own grass and polish their own silver. I have this image of Kate talking to William 'Do we have to have your creepy Uncle Andrew over to dinner?'

Smileless2012

Being randy doesn't make you a rapist Kalu.

Where did I say or imply PA was a rapist!? Good grief, that was a bit of a stretch.

Counting out £12m in fivers is going to make him sweat. Oh, hang on a minute..............

Smileless2012

Being randy doesn't make you a rapist Kalu.

Having sex with an under-age girl in the States is statutory rape.

I agree Iam64

I also wish it was 18 here.

I still don't think he did have sex with her. I suspect she was told that a 'British prince' might be at a party but would probably not be able to tell one middle aged man from another.
He must deeply regret his association with Epstein and want to get this all over asap. He's robustly defended himself and even offered to appear in court in America which was a grave risk. I don't think he's the brightest and certainly miscalculated by giving that TV interview which he hoped would end all the speculation.
My personal opinion is that she's an opportunistic besom and that her parents knew fine well what was going on. She's not a poor wee thing and was absolutely beaming in that photo which has mysteriously disappeared.

Oh please don't start victim blaming underage girls again.

Adults are at fault here.

It is so horribly off putting to read

I agree VioletSky

I thought we'd gone past that.

I agree it's a bit of a stretch Kalu so why did you mention rape in your earlier post.

"I have read/heard of many women in the UK who decide not to report being raped for fear of not being believed. PA however, has a reputation which earned him the name Andy Randy which speaks volumes".

So what did you intend to say or imply?

Yes I agree too VS.

Having sex with trafficked people is illegal. It doesn't matter their age.

Andrew has paid out sooner than prove he had no idea of the trafficking.

That is the short and long of it.

Smileless the way you are speaking to Kalu is very confrontational

The man has been accused of sex with a minor which is statutory rape. I view her as incredibly brave as it is true that many are afraid to come forward with that sort of allegation incase they are not believed.

Despite his reputation some are still willing to absolutely trounce a person who was a minor at the time of these events and it is shocking to me when women should be holding each other up.

An old boss of mine always said when a case goes to court it can go either way. Looks to me that both parties wanted to settle.

Keeper1

An old boss of mine always said when a case goes to court it can go either way. Looks to me that both parties wanted to settle.

Your friend is incorrect as far as these sort of cases in the USA . The cases tend to go in favour of the claimant.

Aveline

I still don't think he did have sex with her. I suspect she was told that a 'British prince' might be at a party but would probably not be able to tell one middle aged man from another.
He must deeply regret his association with Epstein and want to get this all over asap. He's robustly defended himself and even offered to appear in court in America which was a grave risk. I don't think he's the brightest and certainly miscalculated by giving that TV interview which he hoped would end all the speculation.
My personal opinion is that she's an opportunistic besom and that her parents knew fine well what was going on. She's not a poor wee thing and was absolutely beaming in that photo which has mysteriously disappeared.

Aveline my personal opinion is that she was a trafficked 17-year-old. Even if she was lying with her legs in the air screaming "**** me Andy" it was still a crime if it happened and the 41-year-old bears, not just some but, all of the responsibility.

"if it happened" and of course we'll never know now for sure.

Surely, if he had a shred of decency, he would have looked at some of the girls and thought "They're just children, not much older than my own little girls. I can't bear the thought of middle aged men taking advantage of Beatrice and Eugenie were circumstances different. I must do something to stop this".

He knew, he colluded and did nothing even if he didn't rape any of them.
He is a disgrace.

Not sure about that, there are people, who were witness to the truth and there are people who can see through the abusers of this world who will know it too.

Smileless2012

"if it happened" and of course we'll never know now for sure.

Yes I know what I wrote thanks Smileless2012. It still doesn't contradict the facts - and I use the word “facts” deliberately and carefully - that a trafficked 17-year-old girl is being publicly described as "opportunistic".

I weep for our daughters and granddaughters.