Settling out of court is an admission of guilt

Iam64

*accepting hush money has, in effect, given the green light for these types of men to use and abuse women caught up in these rings*
The settlement accepts that VGiuffrei was trafficked, abused and has been subjected to public criticism.
Are you putting more blame on this victim?

No, I am not. VG had said she would not accept a settlement. I would have preferred that she had taken PA to court. At this very moment there must be countless women around the world being sexually used by men. Having such a high profile court case would have shone a bright light on this seedy, sordid world and given a voice to these poor women. For me accepting the money takes that away from women who are still being abused and letting some men think they can get away with it providing they can pay. No 'blame' is being attached to VG. Good for her for sticking with it. Just wished she had gone to court, that's all.

No that is not quite right.

Her lawyers always said that she would not settle out if court unless the payment reflected the harm done both to her and her reputation.

Boris refused to say whether any public money would be used for the settlement. I hope not.

Thanks for clarifying Sarnia . Apologies if I sounded snippy.
My work meant I saw far too many children and some adults give evidence only to have a not guilty finding. It’s devastating of course.
One of the many shocking things about Andrew’s defence, is the level of abuse they directed to VG. You’ll have seen many posters here suggesting she made choices, was old enough, wasn’t a victim and is now only after money.
Little wonder so few cases get to court.

Ummm it’s a fine line isn’t it, can money be a compensation in all situations?

No I don’t believe it can Bridgeit. Nothing fully repairs the damage abuse causes.

But money is an acknowledgment that harm has been done that cannot be repaired and the money represents this recognition.

M0nica

But money is an acknowledgment that harm has been done that cannot be repaired and the money represents this recognition.

That was the condition of the payout, PA had to acknowledge she had been damaged, that was the price of ending it all.
The price of being a fool

Blondiescot

Anniebach

There has been no harm to the reputation of his family

Oh, I think it's done immeasurable damage to the Royal Family. The repercussions from this could be immense.

How awful to be known in history as Randy Andy and an alleged paedophile, what shame he’s brought on his and the Royal, family.
And I bet he’s still claiming he’s innocent.
Obnoxious and sickening man.

Yes it’s important to remember the payment included Andrew acknowledging Virginia had been trafficked, exploited and harmed.

Who's paying the £12 million tax payers?

Johnson refused to answer this question in an interview.
Undemocratic
Don't talk about the Royals apparently

There is no suggestion, whatsoever, that "the tax payer" is paying.

It is not Johnson's place to comment on the finances of an individual, who happens to have and extremely wealthy parent. Andrew is not now a working Royal.

I thought the sum of money was kept private, have you a link
grany stating it’s £12 million ?

The first guess by the papers was £5 million. I think people believe what they want to believe.

I believe I don't know and probably never will as it's really none of my business.

Entirely tabloid speculation, maybe £12m, 10, or 5 if he is very lucky indeed.
It still hurts.

Thought so, thank you

Settling out of court is cheaper in all respects. It's rather like car accident claims: the public rhetoric is about court and blame but the closed door discussions are about money. We don't know the full terms of their agreement.

Grany

Who's paying the £12 million tax payers?

Johnson refused to answer this question in an interview.
Undemocratic
Don't talk about the Royals apparently

I said that earlier about the settlement but got no response. He also said on the Sunday morning programme, it is not the done thing to talk about the Royals! Why not, they're no different to the rest of us.
I sincerely hope the taxpayer does not contribute. And I also have heard £12m quoted on TV.

If they said £12 m they were "quoting" someone elses guess. Andrew is dealing with this on a personal basis. How many times does it need saying?

nadeturbe would you want your private life and finances generally discussed and analysed, by people who have no idea about what happens in your private life.

Indeed you get cases where people are taken to court for revealing peoples private affairs on social media and all sorts of organisations will quote client/customer/patient confidentiality when refusing to discuss an individuals affairs.

I see no reason why the same rules shouldn't apply to members of the royal family when the event is a private family affair and all the money needed is coming from family resources. As you say they are no different to the rest of us

One of the reasons I find some of the very unpleasant anti H and M posts harsh and angry is because, as Has been said ‘they are no different than the rest of us’.
I’m disgusted by Andrew’s friendship with Maxwell and Epstein. By the way his legal team attempted to trash Virginia Giuffre then did an about turn when it became clear,even to them, that he had no room left to slither.
If the money for Ms Giuffrei is coming from the RF wealth, then fine. It’s not my business. Families bail out family members who need help all the time. It’s private

God save the Queen

No I wouldn't Monica but my life isn't funded by the taxpayer.
And it was said in a way that suggested they are special in some way, which they aren't. Although they like being treated as if they are.

We are entitled to be reassured that taxpayers money will not be used.
You and I obviously have very different views on the monarchy.

.

Money, it’s always about the money.

It's about what is right