Oops! The Prince formerly known as Duke drops another clanger!

As far as the outside world is concerned, this is a scandal involving the Royal Family.

It involves the son of a monarch.

It involves a late monarch because it has been mooted that she paid at least some of the massive settlement to Giuffre as well as being instrumental in the "banishment" of Andrew following the Newsnight interview.

It involves our current King and the Prince of Wales as they are seen as being the drivers of any sanctions handed out to Prince Andrew.

It involves 2 royal princesses, daughters of a royal prince, who may well have to face some financial scrutiny.

It involves the ex-wife of Prince Andrew, mother to 2 royal princesses.

Sadly, by implication and association, it is a scandal involving the Royal Family.

ferry, you say “contender for scandal involving the royal family” , yes Andrew but his sister, his brothers, his in-laws, nieces and nephews are involved ?

Iam when you say “many abused children do you mean the majority of abused children?

Doodledog - for me, the "Entitled" book gave a well researched outline if you like, to the big bubble in which the York family exist. And added well researched details to things I already knew about.

However, if these revelations about the Yorks keep coming, it puts the British monarchy in a very tenuous position. Many are solid evidence backed claims and allegations. Because of the exceptional distastefulness of the whole sordid Epstein affair, this has to be up there as being a contender for the worst scandal involving the Royal Family in modern days. It puts the abdication and it's implications into the shade.

Yes, my reading was that the father of a friend was involved, rather than Prince Phillip. I’ve posted previously, my impression that there’s little difference between the families portrayed in Shameless, Celebs and the extremely wealthy and privileged

Many survivors of sexual abuse, neglect, physical abuse go on to be determined not to repeat those behaviours. They succeed in building stable, fulfilling lives and relationships. It doesn’t mean ‘closure’ it mean integrating experiences and not allowing abuse to define them

Not gossip, so much as discussing what we know, or think we know, which will remain partial as long as there is a cover-up. IMO it doesn’t matter who introduced children to a sex worker - it was abuse, and they should face the consequences if possible.

In any case it doesn’t excuse what happened on Epstein’s island.

I haven’t read the books - either Entitled or Nobody’s Girl. I am not a real fan of (auto)biography, and knowing the subject matter I would probably feel uncomfortable reading them anyway. But we shouldn’t have to rely on reading books like that to learn about criminal cases. There should be prosecutions and the transcripts should be in the public domain regardless of how powerful the accused might be. ‘Gossip’ might stop if people had the facts.

yes the father of a friend, far more juicy gossip if his own father,
If Andrew and Giselle Maxwell were sexually abused when children ? No excuse !

The source for that story is in Lownie's book. It is nothing to do with Prince Philip, but alleged to have been the father of a school friend who took both boys.
I would suggest that it might be a good idea to read the book.

imaround

If it is true that Price Philip took anyone to visit a sex worker, who I assume he paid for Andrew to have sex with, that is horrible. Here in the US, if a parent did that, they would be investigated for child abuse.

It would also go a long way to explain why Andrew thinks it is ok to have sex with underaged girls in my opinion.

That may or may not have been true.

As regards what happened on Epstein's island, however, it is matterless. If it happened, it should have been investigated and prosecuted at the time. I would be surprised of many of the historical RF would escape prosecution if they were judged by today's standards, but they lived in times when cover-ups were easy and in any case it did not make it ok,

If it happened it was horrible, and could possibly explain Andrew's entitlement and attitude to women, if he is guilty of the accusations against him. But it would not excuse them.

Adults are responsible for their behaviour unless they are congenitally incapable of such. Andrew may or may not be what has been called 'very bright', but AFAIK he is not congenitally incapable of understanding that women are people, and as such should have agency over who has sex with them.

I am actually struggling to use acceptable language here, as what he reportedly did to VG would be better described in Anglo Saxon terms, rather than those used to describe more usual sexual encounters. He did not 'sleep' with her. He did't even 'have sex' with her as most of us know it. He f*cked her, and she was 17 when he was 41.

Andrew is supposedly capable of having a loving relationship with his ex-wife and his daughters, so he is capable of seeing women as people - how did he fail to see VG as a human being?

I can't see the monarchy surviving if he gets away with this. People have had enough of seeing the 'elite' get away with whatever they like.

Here in the US, if a parent did that, they would be investigated for child abuse.

I well remember the reports that a girl was dropped off at one of those parties. I suppose they were investigated?

If it is true that Price Philip took anyone to visit a sex worker, who I assume he paid for Andrew to have sex with, that is horrible. Here in the US, if a parent did that, they would be investigated for child abuse.

It would also go a long way to explain why Andrew thinks it is ok to have sex with underaged girls in my opinion.

lemsip

ronib

Some comment on the internet suggests Prince Andrew was sexually active from 11 years of age…. I don’t know if that’s remotely true.

'Some comment on the internet' what?

of course you don't know if it's true!! plenty of of comments about all sorts on the internet! why post it!

As long as powerful people are keeping the truth of all of this from the rest of the world there will be speculation. Of course there will. This is one of the reasons why it is important that regardless of the status of those concerned the whole thing is brought into the open, names named and justice served.

As horrible as the sex allegations are (and they are extremely grim) the terrifying thing is the fact that there are people who have the power to silence the whole world's media. Just thinking about that is chilling.

ronib

Some comment on the internet suggests Prince Andrew was sexually active from 11 years of age…. I don’t know if that’s remotely true.

'Some comment on the internet' what?

of course you don't know if it's true!! plenty of of comments about all sorts on the internet! why post it!

Allira, I did also wonder if Maxwell had been an abused child. She was apparently her father's favourite.
Not and never could be an excuse for her own actions, but could explain their origin.

To clarify - when I ask if it matters, I mean 'does it matter to the case in question?' Of course it matters if an 11 year old is taken to a sex worker.

ronib

Some comment on the internet suggests Prince Andrew was sexually active from 11 years of age…. I don’t know if that’s remotely true.

Does it matter?

If he was (as I have seen suggested) the case that his father took him to a sex worker at a young age then he was also a victim.
Who knows whether the other male royals had the same treatment (if it was true of Andrew, which obviously I am not saying is the case).

If so, it may explain some of his behaviour, but it does not excuse it. Many victims of SA go on to abuse others and are punished for it. Many others do not, and it can never be an excuse. Often these things have a trail of generational horrors behind them, but they have to be stopped somewhere.

There are a lot of royalistbapologists on here.
Very disappointing

Allira

Doodledog

www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/ghislaine-maxwell-sentenced-20-years-prison-conspiring-jeffrey-epstein-sexually-abuse

Thanks. I thought I remembered that she was involved, but didn't want to say so without being certain.

As I say, sex, status, whatever is not the issue here - it is the power imbalance. How anyone can argue otherwise is beyond me.

Apologies, theworriedwell - I misunderstood your post. I know you usually talk sense, so was surprised at what I thought you were saying .

Some comment on the internet suggests Prince Andrew was sexually active from 11 years of age…. I don’t know if that’s remotely true.

Yes, the evidence presented to the court state that she did and she was found guilty.

Maxwell, 62, was found guilty of helping disgraced financier Jeffery Epstein sexually abuse young girls.

She was sentenced to 20 years in prison in June 2022.

In the 2 films on Netflix ( Jeffrey Epstein filthy rich & Ghislaine Maxwell filthy rich) the young women claim that Ghislaine Maxwell did abuse them.

Yes.

I do wonder if she was an abused child? Her father was very controlling.

Allira

Doodledog

www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/ghislaine-maxwell-sentenced-20-years-prison-conspiring-jeffrey-epstein-sexually-abuse

And it’s said she actively sexually abused girls herself, sometimes alongside Epstein

Doodlefog, if you look at the first post I made about this I was replying to someone, sorry can't remember who it was, said if women did these things there would be a drug to stop them. My point, which you agree with, is that women do these horrific things. No one seems to have made a drug to control it.

Doodledog

www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/ghislaine-maxwell-sentenced-20-years-prison-conspiring-jeffrey-epstein-sexually-abuse