The man formerly known as Prince can fall no further....

I agree with Lady Harman.

“The former prince has a responsibility to testify (in the USA ) to help bring justice to the women who were abused - —- his silence is not neutral - it is an act of collusion”

“We know that at the very least that he was part of the circle around a convicted child abuser treating young women and children as property…………he is either part of sustaining that structure of abuse, or he is going to play a part in giving those women justice”

I suspect that the Queen, given her support of victims of trafficking, sexual violence etc, would voice her support of Harmans statement.

'If you ignore it you condone it, and if you condone it you encourage it.' My Father's wise words.

Just noticed Rina Oh is suing the estate of the late Virginia Giuffre for defamation…. I am sorry that AMW ever fell down this particular rabbit hole. My sorrow is for this country rather than the person.

ronib

Just noticed Rina Oh is suing the estate of the late Virginia Giuffre for defamation…. I am sorry that AMW ever fell down this particular rabbit hole. My sorrow is for this country rather than the person.

Sorrow for the country? What on earth is that supposed to mean?

Any hope of integrity in public office for a start. ViceVersa

As soon as all those others involved are named and called upon publicly to do what Andrew is being asked to do.
Yes

As long as he is allowed to name/identify all those he met in relation to this matter. Yes.

Do I think he should go to the US?

No.
Demanding that Andrew should visit a country run by a convicted felon, (who pardoned himself) with links to the issue, who is not to be trusted and who has ways of making those he distrusts disappear?
No.

NB
Anyone think that all those who are involved and who might be named wouldn’t plead the 5th?

Not just in this case, but for the future, I hope we all remember the new rule of guilty until proven innocent, which is what trial by media and social media actually is.

Whitewavemark2

I agree with Lady Harman.

“The former prince has a responsibility to testify (in the USA ) to help bring justice to the women who were abused - —- his silence is not neutral - it is an act of collusion”

“We know that at the very least that he was part of the circle around a convicted child abuser treating young women and children as property…………he is either part of sustaining that structure of abuse, or he is going to play a part in giving those women justice”

It is quite possible for him to give statements to Us officials in this country.

As other people have said. The US is in the hands of an insane crook. I would not want to see any British (or other nationality) person risking their life and liberty to go to that country to give statements or be tried, since it has now become a country of show trials and politically motivated judgments.

Harriet Harman is the last person to advise 'how to bring justice to women who are abused. Witness the disturbance from transactivists yesterday.

"I stand behind the Gender Recognition Act,” she told Sky News in 2022, “So as far as I’m concerned, women are women who are born women, but women are also women who are trans women.”

I agree with your posts Mollygo. The Epstein files are being withheld and with suggestions that Trump may also have been involved, explains why.

Absolutely not absolving Andrew MW, but think that those asking for him to testify in the States should put their own house in order first.
Once the Democrats have dealt with the Bill Clinton allegations,
and the Republicans with Trump, ask again

This is about abused women and children, not about politics.

For someone who declared himself honourable, there is little honour in his behaviour - refusing to reveal what he knows.

Scoundrels always stick together.

Apparently The Queen, Sophie and Catherine were instrumental in pushing the King to his decisions. They are all, one way or another involved in the fight against sexual violence, abuse, trafficking etc.

They cannot be seen to be in any way involved with WM.

This is about abused women and children, not about politics indeed WW but it's politics that's preventing the Epstein files from being released.

Andrew isn't the only one refusing to reveal what he knows, assuming he knows anything. The US authorities have pages of information in those files, so why aren't they being released?

I agree Maremia. Any information Andrew can give them will of course be useful, but he's not the only source of information they have is he.

Did the King need pushing ?

Good question Annie and is there anything to corroborate that he was?

Absolutely WhiteWave, but the reality could be that all the focus would be on Andrew, while so, so many others will be allowed to lurk in the shadows.
If it's, not political, why are politicians asking?
The danger, in my mind, is that only Andrew would be held to account.

But that's what is happening isn't it Maremia.

Smileless2012

Good question Annie and is there anything to corroborate that he was?

I’m repeating that I have read this morning. The king is known for his indecisiveness.

Frankly I don’t care if WM is the only one held to account. That has no bearing on getting justice for the victims.

As the general pubic have known for decades the nickname for his brother I would hope that the King didn’t need pushing.

To be so uninformed about a member of such a prestigious and wealthy family who have body guards almost attached to them watching their every move. Difficult to imagine that this information was not passed on.

I have no proof of this of course.

But this is not a family that didn’t have the very best of protection from our dedicated and loyal officers.

His brother was putting them all at risk for a long time.

Where is the justice for the victims if Andrew is the only one held to account WW, or are we expected to believe that he had sex with all of the trafficked girls?

Of course not, but the ball will be set rolling. WM can almost certainly name names, and the Epstein files will then of necessity be wide opened to prove WM’s evidence.

Those women have never had an abuser - apart from Epstein in court. Justice must be seen to be done.

Smileless2012
Good question Annie and is there anything to corroborate that he was?

smileless probably unnamed sources close to !

Quote Granniesunite Sun 02-Nov-25 12:33:01
As the general pubic have known for decades the nickname for his brother I would hope that the King didn’t need pushing.

To be so uninformed about a member of such a prestigious and wealthy family who have body guards almost attached to them watching their every move. Difficult to imagine that this information was not passed on.

I have no proof of this of course.

But this is not a family that didn’t have the very best of protection from our dedicated and loyal officers.

His brother was putting them all at risk for a long time.

Really, you are accusing the late Queen of being aware of all Andrew did ?