Charles may pay for Andrew's security

VioletSky you are getting your emotions and the facts of the case confused. Whether you would want a child, grandchild, or yourself to be alone with PA is irrelevant. The circumstances in which this could happen would be so limited. Either this person would be someone who makes their living by selling themselves to have sex with clients, in which case they would know why they were there or they would be someone in his social circle.

No one has suggested that PA life is one we would want to know our sons or grandsons were living but all this is irrelevant.

We are talking about the facts of the case. The facts of the case are that you are the only person accusing him of rape or enjoying coersive sex because he enjoys the coersion. Just because you wish he had done these things to justify your own corrosive anger does not justify these totally unproven accusations

VioletSky we have a law in this country that every one is innocent until proved guilty. This is a protection against lynch mobs, extra judicial killings and people being the victims of mob justice. It is fine to ride your high horse, when thebperson you are attacking is a royal prince with a seedy background, but what if in a state as you seem to envisage. It was one of your family who was charged with a dreadful crime they did not commit and had a lynch mob out to get him and subject him to the punishment they think he deserves, without any eveidence that he did what he was accused of.

As for daughters and grand daughters being alone with PA, I would have no qualms at all about DD being alone with him, even when she was young and nubile. She would make mincemeat of him. he would have ended up the one trying to escape.

lemsip, yes it’s certainly had endless discussions but, it’s important stuff.
Smiles, it doesn’t bother me if VG accepted a 2nd out of court settlement. Adult survivors tend to have a less easy time than those of us who weren’t trafficked and used.

I understand what you're saying Iam, but this was the second time she accepted an out of court financial settlement. Unless the accused is 'famous' an out of court settlement is highly unlikely isn't it, and you don't get much more high profile than a prince.

oh fgs hasn't this been done to death already!

There would be very few circumstances in which I would advise someone to go to trial for these kind of offences.

Smilesless, I understand but disagree with the point about going to trial v accepting a cash settlement. Having sat through a number of trials involving children or adult victims and watched the rate of prosecution decline, seem many discussions like this one, I feel I’d be reluctant to push victims to trial

As Doodledog states, informed consent is the issue. VG was 14 or 15 when Maxwell identified her as vulnerable, a perfect target for grooming and sexual exploitation. It’s said she was 17 when she allegedly had sex with PA. I haven’t read the comments Annie quotes where she’s said to have been excited at the prospect of PA but if it’s true, I’m not in the least surprised.
The Rochdale and other exploited girls were dismissed as ‘sex workers’ making poor lifestyle choices. Very similar to the criticisms of VG though she’s viewed by many as having ‘enjoyed’ the lifestyle in `Epstein’s stable

Trafficked people aren’t seen legally AB’s able to give informed consent. Anyone who doesn’t understand the law should really read on it.

In the UK the chances of prosecution for rape are 1%, no idea what the stats are in the states but I would take a monetary settlement with those odds.

No, I wouldn't be happy with my 16/17 year old D being at a party with older men, so I wouldn't have been dropping her off which unless I'm mistaken, is what her father did on various occasions.

Of course I don't know, but I doubt PA ever had to pay for the attentions of women in his life and I don't believe if he did have sex with her that he knew she'd been trafficked. Why would he?

I don't see any 'victim blaming' here.

I wish it had gone to trial too Doodledog but it didn't. A financial settlement was offered and accepted and as I posted earlier on this thread for me, that doesn't make either of them look very good.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy1Nn-2KNLg

not quite as title suggests though! see what jenni bond explains.

Is anyone saying that they 'support' PA?

I'm certainly not. What I am saying, in case you are misreading, is that regardless of how odious he is, PA will need security, and if the king wants to pay for it, let him crack on - better than charging the taxpayer.

And no, I wouldn't want any woman to be have the presence of any man forced upon her - there should always be informed consent, particularly for vulnerable women and girls. Given the power imbalance, however, pretty much any woman is likely to be vulnerable in the presence of PA.

I firmly believe in safe places being protected, for women, not for predators - something you have argued against before now, VS. I'm really not sure who you are arguing with, really. You and Anniebach clearly disagree, but who is the 'you all' you refer to?

This thread is too depressing for Chritmas Eve

Hope you all find some joy

According to a witness at the Maxwell trial, Guffrie was very excited at spending time with her alleged rapist , so not against her will.

I really can’t think of a male who is so arrogant as Andrew thinking any girl has sex with him because she was forced to.

He could give after dinner speeches over Zoom.

Yest how dare we...

How dare we see him as anything less even though so many are happy to blame victims, how dare we say his lifestyle is disgusting

I'd pay his security for his home and very public events. That would be it. No safe places for shenanigans from me

VioletSky

So you'd be happy for your daughter or granddaughter to be alone with him if they were 16?

Would I want any young woman to be alone with him against her will? No.

Would I like to see laws tightened up to protect women and girls from all sorts of men with dubious motives, particularly when they are vulnerable? Absolutely.

Would I have liked to see PA tried properly in a court of law? Yes, I think that would be the fairest thing to happen.

Does any of the above mean that the king is wrong to pay the security bill? No, I don't think so. By dint of his birth and because of the accusations against him, PA is always going to be a target, so will need security. Someone has to pay for it, and I'd rather it were the king than the taxpayer.

But it happens. Ask any sexual abuse survivor the reactions of people they told. Ask them how they have been treated like they are dirty or broken or damaged goods. Ask them how society sees them.

I see daughters and grandaughters.

It's not a silly question at all

If you wouldn't be happy for your daughter or granddaughter to be in the position she was in, it's not OK for anyone.

There aren't any special humans and there aren't any substandard humans deserving of being sex trafficked

There are just daughters and granddaughters

Violet Sky sorry but a silly question, Andrew born 1950,
Guffrie born 1983, you ask if I would be happy with a daughter or granddaughter dating a man ,any man, 33 years older than her

So you'd be happy for your daughter or granddaughter to be alone with him if they were 16?

Violet Sky wanting a person to be tried in a court of law and
found guilty does not mean the person is guilty. I didn’t believe
Guffrie but she has not been charged with any crime

A witness in the Maxwell Trial gives completely different repeat of events to the relationship between Giuffrie and Andrew that night

I think he is gross and guilty of funding people trafficking

And I don't agree it matters that the age of consent is different in the UK if it is illegal elsewhere.

And yes men are responsible for where their penis goes and should be asking questions... or just not attending this sort of party if they care about their public image in any way at all.

Disgusting old man

He can come after me for slander of he chooses but you have no power over me

a good summary MOnica.
you have made the point that i gave up trying to make, and did it more clearly.

Andrew explained his behaviour in that TV interview so we do know something about him from the horse's mouth, as it were. I have no idea what he could now do to earn a living and pay for his keep. Wasn't he some kind of trade ambassador at one time? Is Sarah still writing her childrens' books? Perhaps she is bringing in a wage.