Poor baby - run home to mummy!

Petera, it’s nothing to do with whether it not I have compassion for HM.
If I was asked if my child had confessed it to me and he/she hadn’t then I’d have no hesitation in saying no. Would you say yes because you had a suspicion it might be true even if you only had hearsay to go on?

Whatever you might think of Prince Andrew, he hasn't been charged with anything. There is publicity about the current civil case where the woman who has accused him is looking to have a settlement and expose what she is claiming happened, but so far there is no real proof. He has had some pretty dubious, ghastly 'friends' and I'm extremely glad he isn't my son, but why hasn't he been charged by the American Law authorities? Until he is the rest is all speculation.

Mr Roberts said his daughter is honest, he regrets he didn’t know what was happening when he use to drive her to Epstein’s house for a massage !

He also said ‘she is very good actress’

Sadly my response to what Mr Roberts says is ‘he would say that wouldn’t he?’

Ch'ching!

She honestly told her dad what was going on and he still took her? Being a good actress is a benefit here?

He thought she was going to Epstein’s home to give him massages,
she didn’t tell him what was really allegedly going on and didn’t show any distress because she is a good actress !

But why would any responsible parent take their 17 year old daughter to give massages to grown men? It’s unbelievable. I would never have done that. I would have thought it extremely suspect, and not a suitable activity for my daughter. It screams sleazy to me, and not an activity suitable for a young girl.

Perhaps that goes to show that young women from dysfunctional backgrounds are all the more vulnerable to becoming prey to men.

Rosie51

Petera can you please quote the section of the law that supports your claims, then I'll run it by one of the police in my extended family.

It's not about a section of the law - you are confusing, I assume, a) when a successful protection can take place with b) the fact that the offence took place. They are quite different - you can commit an offence without subsequently being charged or prosecuted.

It is alleged that I had breakfast this morning and it is alleged that my mother knew and cleaned up after me. The fact that the police have not charged me with having breakfast or charged my mother with being an accessory after the fact that I had breakfast is entirely irrelevant to the fact of whether I had breakfast or not or the fact of whether or not my mother cleaned up.

It is alleged that PA raped a child and it is alleged that his mother knew. The fact that the police have not charged PA with raping or child or charged his mother with being an accessory after the fact that he raped a child is entirely irrelevant to the fact of whether he raped a child or not or the fact of whether or not his mother cleaned knew.

And thank you for the offer of running it past the police members in your extended family but I’ve already discussed it with the lawyers in my family.

Aveline

This is an American civil case. It's all about money. Cynical? Moi?

If the offence is true I would not grudge Guiffre a single cent of even the most obscenely large settlement.

Mollygo

Petera, it’s nothing to do with whether it not I have compassion for HM.
If I was asked if my child had confessed it to me and he/she hadn’t then I’d have no hesitation in saying no. Would you say yes because you had a suspicion it might be true even if you only had hearsay to go on?

No, but I would also expect that I should make myself available to clarify that they hadn't; just as in you reply you said you implied you would. Shall we ask the queen?

My opinion only. I very much doubt that the Queen knew what Prince Andrew was allegedly up to when he went to these gatherings. However the Queen knows now what has been alleged. Whether or not Prince Andrew is guilty, he should stop dodging the delivery of papers and he should give his evidence as requested. The Queen knows what he’s doing just as well as we do, and by her apparent acceptance of him dodging the papers, she appears to be condoning his behaviour. She should not allow him to hide out at Balmoral. As I said, this is my opinion only.

Again Maddy what do you expect the Queen to say and do?

Should she tell the world - ‘I think he is guilty’

Should she tell his legal team what to do and say ?

I think she should not have allowed him to hide out at Balmoral Annie. I don’t think she is guilty of any criminal offence but I do think this situation reflects badly on her, which is a shame as she has had a long reign free from any undesirable accusations. It seems to me that she is allowing her own morality to be questioned.

Looks like Guiffre already had a large settlement. I'd rather that focus was in the abuse if vulnerable girls here in UK by largely Muslim men.

Maddy I can’t agree her morals are being questioned , well
I am not questioning her morals.

Well actually I think PA behaving as he has could have some influence on men who think girls and women are just there to satisfy their own sexual demands. After all if the highest in the land are doing it (having sex with underage girls) why shouldn't the rest of them? If rich men have paedophile gangs why shouldn't poor ones? Whatever their religion. So not cooperating is sending out a really bad message.
As for the settlement if you get knocked down by one car and claim damages does that mean you can't claim damages when a second car hits you?

maddyone

I think she should not have allowed him to hide out at Balmoral Annie. I don’t think she is guilty of any criminal offence but I do think this situation reflects badly on her, which is a shame as she has had a long reign free from any undesirable accusations. It seems to me that she is allowing her own morality to be questioned.

The whole extended family have “hidden out at balmoral” every summer for as long as I can remember!

The father travelled with her from the USA to London then waited around whilst the “massage” supposedly took place. No masseuse available in London then? Is her dad really that dim?

I respect your point of view Annie.

Andrew could put an end to all this speculation by cooperating with the authorities. I agree with trisher in that his behaviour is sending a very poor message to the country. Most of us don’t have large estates to hide in.

If sex with a 17 year old is ‘having sex with underage girls, why
is marriage to a 16 year old,with parents consent legal

Odd when you consider that, in some USA states it’s legal to marry at 14 and some don’t specify an age at all.

www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/12-year-olds-married/

Anniebach

If sex with a 17 year old is ‘having sex with underage girls, why
is marriage to a 16 year old,with parents consent legal

Sex with a 17-year old is legal if he or she is able to consent freely. A 17-year old is still legally a minor. Therefore sex with minors is legal in certain circumstances.

The issue with PA is consent, not age. If this ever gets to a court and his legal team can show that she freely consented (and that means a lot more than saying 'yes'as any vulnerable woman of any age could explain) he will not be guilty of any crime, but he will still have had sex with a minor.

Will the father be charged as a pimp?

As there was no 3rd person in the bedroom it’s impossible to
decide was it with or without consent