Opening the post Alegrias? Of course but insurers insisted that the opening of post was supervised by a partner. I wasn’t above helping out. Nobody was.
Gransnet forums
Chat
Prince Andrew Can't Sweat
(1001 Posts)Doing wrong is not black and white even in law.
My own father who of course had never heard of Prince Andrew, could not sweat. My mother , who had never heard of Prince Andrew, told me this when I was was girl . My mother did not explain about the adrenaline thing as she had no medical knowledge, but after Andrew's admission about not sweating . I can understand how hormones are affected by some severe life events. My father was at the Eastern Front during the Great War.
Also in support of Prince Andrew, he probably did not even know that it was illegal or even immoral to shag an unknown and poor seventeen year old girl. Very rich people have odd childhoods, and it takes special efforts by parents and teachers to teach them what real life is.
Germanshepherdsmum
Commercial work wwm, and private client work for high net worth clients. No criminal or family work.
Because no one is every accused of being a white collar criminal.
Your horse is exceptionally high lately.
All professions have their unsung Heroes.
I’m off for the evening . I hope this thread can get back to basics rather than being about the legal profession and my part in it.
Germanshepherdsmum
What you don’t know about Alegrias, and I’m not about to tell you, is how much pro bono work I and colleagues did, helping people with tenancy problems and other matters within our respective fields albeit that our paying clients were big companies and wealthy individuals. Not something the legal profession makes a big song and dance about but without the likes of us who don’t do criminal work inner city law centres would quickly cease to exist.
Are we meant to be impressed and grateful now GSM?
Actually, I don't care. You lost any credibility with me when you said you look down on other people in your profession.
The irony of some here complaining about how others post as though they are the only virtuous ones here is laughable. As though they are always kind.
Germanshepherdsmum
It’s you who is rude lavendermine and you clearly have no idea of the difference between a solicitor and a barrister. Yes as a partner in a law firm I took my turn at supervising the opening of post, a standard insurance requirement. You display a singular lack of familiarity with actual legal practice so I suspect you didn’t do much with that law degree.
Oh dear. We are constantly reminded by GNers that it is bad manners to correct spellings; can I add to that, that it is in bad taste to try to belittle people because you think you have attained a better education/job. In my opinion, looking down on people is not something to be proud of - quite the reverse.
Please don’t destroy the validity of your arguments in the VG vPA civil case by descending into petty bickering .
Actually Gsm your attitude to criminal proceedings and your attitude to the abused girls are absolutely in sync. People with money are worth working for, people without don't matter. Rich people don't commit crimes only poor people do. If you have money you can buy good legal advice, young girls, anything. No wonder men like Epstein get away with it.
Ffs trisher. How many times do I have to say that I draw a distinction between girls caught up in the vicious Rochdale scandal and VG? My professional attitude to solicitors who choose to do very low paid criminal defence work is irrelevant. My choice of legal specialisation is irrelevant. The fees I charged are irrelevant. The fact that I and my colleagues also did pro bono civil work for people unable to afford private advice may be relevant. What is most relevant is that I do not believe VG. The reasons why I and others don’t believe her have been well rehearsed here. My professional life and choices are totally irrelevant to whether people like Epstein get away with anything. I trust you are not suggesting that I would be involved in any capacity with anything illegal.
ButGsm you appear to belive that it was OK for Giuffre to be brought to this country by Epstein purely for the purpose of having sex with the people he chose. That prostitution for her was a life style choice at 17, that the man she lived with at 14, although convicted of prostution crimes, was her boyfriend. So not only was she not telling the truth, the criminality surrounding her abuse apparently is irrelevant. In fact that only poor men abuse poor girls which pretty much tallies with your opinion of solicitors that only poor ones do criminal work.
I refuse to waste my time further on this pointless argument trisher. Men and women from all walks of life use one another for their own purposes, always have, always will. And lie, always have, always will.
"I refuse to waste my time further on this pointless argument trisher. Men and women from all walks of life use one another for their own purposes, always have, always will. And lie, always have, always will."
That is true. The main thrust of this entire conversation is that it's okay to use people in a fair market but it's immoral to bully people. To prostitute girls is to bully them.
It should never be legal to sell someone else for sex. Pimps, and that is what Epstein was, should face serious consequences. They aren't even protecting these girls as they aren't present during. They often get girls hooked on drugs and reliant on them or they get them hooked on lifestyle and reliant on them.
It's not acceptable.
Using paid sex workers without knowing their age or being mindful of the laws where you are is also not acceptable.
It's just not acceptable. I have seen 0 arguments that justify this happening.
Sex work as a positive career or job choice is a myth
Most sex workers were sexualised as children. The majority are drug dependent.
The myth of the happy hooker needs demolishing
Iam64
Sex work as a positive career or job choice is a myth
Most sex workers were sexualised as children. The majority are drug dependent.
The myth of the happy hooker needs demolishing
Actually, in today's age of sites like Only Fans, Admire Me and similar, there are many women who would now be classed as 'sex workers' but who don't fall into those categories.
Blondiescot how do you know that? Is there any evidence that doing things a different way changes what leads people there?
The figures about drug use and history of child sex abuse with relation to prostitution are very clear. The idea that only fans is empowering for women is just nonsense.
I mean certainly some of the high profile celebs on only fans have an obvious history of damage.
Galaxy
The figures about drug use and history of child sex abuse with relation to prostitution are very clear. The idea that only fans is empowering for women is just nonsense.
I didn't claim it was 'empowering'. But content producers on sites like Only Fans and Admire Me are, in the main, doing it for themselves, whatever their reasons may be. I'm sure there will be plenty on those sites who do have a troubled history in one way or another - but there are also many who don't. I personally know one girl who has earned a small fortune that way - and she comes from a perfectly normal family background with no history or abuse or drug use. I'm in no way endorsing those kind of sites, but I suppose it could be argued that in some ways, it's a 'safer' kind of sex work? Anyway, it's not really relevant to this particular thread, so I apologise for digressing.
Just wondering what these posts have to do with Prince Andrew and his victim? Why would he be stripped of his honorary posts if the RF thought he was innocent? More like they would fight tooth and nail to back him . To my mind he is much,much worse than we are being told. A lot of victim blaming is going on. I think anyone taking him on in court is extremely brave knowing that he will have the very best of legal representation. I hope she wins and wins big, she deserves it.
nanna8
Just wondering what these posts have to do with Prince Andrew and his victim? Why would he be stripped of his honorary posts if the RF thought he was innocent? More like they would fight tooth and nail to back him . To my mind he is much,much worse than we are being told. A lot of victim blaming is going on. I think anyone taking him on in court is extremely brave knowing that he will have the very best of legal representation. I hope she wins and wins big, she deserves it.
From what I’m understanding, it’s not victim blaming as they don’t believe her to be a victim.
So she’s fair game to blame.
Funny old world
Quite hateful, I agree it is a funny world and that attitude is what allows people like Maxwell and Epstein to get away with what they did. 17 year olds should be protected not cynically used for some man to get his rocks off.
Interesting .. in The Times Andrew could return to duties if exonerated .
..
This discussion thread has reached a 1000 message limit, and so cannot accept new messages.
Start a new discussion
