Prince Andrew

Londongranny Im quite surprised to hear that. It certainly wasnt the way it was portrayed in the Media. I do believe you though as Im getting to the stage nothing would surprise me now. I also find it strange the attitude to the women who are making the allegations re Epstein/PA, and they wonder why women are reluctant to report rape. Regarding CL , I wouldn't think she would be the most reliable. I also know alot of Kurt Cobain fans who think she has not been exactly truthful about some things. To be fair, it is very difficult to know what actually happened, but I think CL would be more than a match for any man.

I agree Chewie big problem for Buck House, if he was pensioned off it would be claimed he is guilty, if he continues
with official duties the press will be there.

A lot of family members were in the Forces & I know someone who was in the Falklands with PA. I won't repeat the word generally used to describe him by officers and rank & file other than it starts with c (not coward, a shorter, punchier word than that) but he was deeply unpopular with other servicemen because of his arrogance and breathtaking sense that he was only person that mattered and sod everyone else. I didn't have a view one way or the other about him before some of the accounts I heard but since then it's been antipathy. I'm not anti-Royal but I'm anti PA.

But it doesn't look as though Virginia Giuffre is going to back quietly away and keep her head down any time soon, Annie.

It won’t go away. Doubt the truth will ever be known

This isn't going away is it?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49774539

gilly I do not defend wrong doing by anyone, neither do I accuse anyone until there is proof they did wrong.

I have said I have no respect for Andrew , he knew what Epstein had served a sentence for. I do not know if the 35 year old claiming they had sex when she was 17 is speaking the truth, I don’t know if his denial is true.

I don’t trust the woman who claims when she was 36 he went to her home wanting sex, he was 40, they had met, had there been flirting ? If he did wrong why didn’t she speak out not wait years before writing it in her book.

There was no sex so he didn’t force himself on her in anyway , had she given him her address and he thought he was on a promise ? Why did she invite him into her home at 1.00 in the morning.

This is not a defence, there was no crime committed

I know you would defend the rf to the ends if the earth Annie but why spilt hairs? I personally did not read CL’s book of 10 years ago. Is assume not that many people did . However following recent events “people” such as CL are possibly now coming forward to question his integrity .

So yes it has “just come to light” as far as the general public are concerned .

Doodledog

No need for a tin hat. If you believe what you are saying then it is your point of view; but you can't really attempt to diffuse any comeback by implying that people who disagree are unreasonably 'outraged'

Fair point

If it was claimed in a book over 10 years ago gilly you say it has just come to light.

As long as stories keep coming to light, the press will print them.

Nothing surprises me anymore . Not the mail and certainly not the antics of some of the rf .

Surprised that even the mail printed it . And it’s damaging to
women who make serious allegations.

No one has an opinion on a 36 year old pop star allegedly being visited by a 40 year old man , disgusting enough to be in the daily mail !

No, not really. What is your opinion on that one?

You mean that “air miles” allegedly turned up at someone’s house uninvited with a protection officer at 1am looking for sex ? (As you do ) It’s not even new, news it was published in her book over 10 years ago .

No one has an opinion on a 36 year old pop star allegedly being visited by a 40 year old man , disgusting enough to be in the daily mail !

No need for a tin hat. If you believe what you are saying then it is your point of view; but you can't really attempt to diffuse any comeback by implying that people who disagree are unreasonably 'outraged'

Why do you think that the problem is women 'bleating', getting on the 'me too gravy train' etc? And how do you know that the sex was consensual?

We don't know the detail of this case, and given the protagonists,I doubt we ever will; but I am very uncomfortable with the assumption that women making charges of assault are 'bleating' and on the make - particularly when these accusations are made by other women.

I’m not a fan of the Royal family - would like to get rid of the lot.
However, the girl was 17, and he was a handsome young prince, the sex was consensual. For this woman to suddenly start bleating after all these years is just attention seeking and money grabbing - jumping on the Weinstein gravy-train.
I’ll just pop my tin-hat on now as the outraged brigade take aim.

If true, she was 36 at the time

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7465609/Courtney-Love-claims-Prince-Andrew-turned-house-1am-looking-sex.html

Oh dear, poor old airmiles, I’m not sure this is all going to go away any time soon .

Well put Annibach

Are they detached from the normal world ? I live in a small
Welsh market town , what I know of life in the inner cities is what I read and hear on tv.

Drugs and drink seem to be in all sections of society and procuring .

Surely he didn’t need special branch to advise him that mixing with Epstein after his jail sentence was stupid.

Thanks Bradfordlass, a very interesting piece & opinion, but
It also has be to do with one’s own personality otherwise all of the Queens children would be behave the same way, which clearly they don’t.

What surprised me, and I'd be happy to be enlightened by people who know more than I - is that all members of the royal family used to have Special Branch teams who 'vetted' the people they associate with in order to avoid just such a scandal as this.

Royals are very much detatched from the normal world and have learned very false social skills, like actors learning a part, rather than learning, as we lesser mortals do, by associating with people and observing how they work.

It is easy in such circumstance to take people at face value and get into trouble, which is exactly why Special Branch (used to) see this as part of the Protection Protocol.

Doesn't this happen now?
Did Special Branch warn him and he ignored them?

He's 60 years old and moves in circles where there are many Epsteins. Cocaine, drink and procuring is rife.

They don't need to observe any social rules (being polite, thoughtful, moral) because money makes them immune from such trivia.

It's part of the normal lifestyle of the "rich and famous" and Prince Andrew has lived like this most of his adult life.

I feel deeply sorry for his mother, she is too old to take this lightly. He's disgraced her and his daughters.
He is, unfortunately, 'a dirty old man'.

And yes, I AM being judgemental.

Here's an interesting Guardian article.

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/19/billionaires-wealth-richest-income-inequality

A possible explanation is not an excuse