The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #301  
Old 01-02-2015, 08:16 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Durham, United States
Posts: 1,300
I'm sorry but I have not followed this story closely from the beginning. I have a question, in the interest of speed, were these young women detained or kept in some kind situation where they were unable to "walk away"? I am curious ... thanks for any answers that can be quickly given.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #302  
Old 01-02-2015, 08:22 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,381
A picture of the woman the press figures is making the complaint. She was 17 in this pic

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...0236181778.jpg
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #303  
Old 01-02-2015, 08:23 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
So these are civil rather than criminal proceedings? Are the girls after damages? Must be. One of them seems to have filed an affidavit alleging that she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew. Seems to be a material fact in the matter. The best way to meet that allegation and refute it is to file an affidavit by Andrew denying the alleged acts took place. Then it becomes a matter of credit, 'cos you can bet the witnesses will be cross-examined at length. And there's the rub.

Commonsense dictates Andrew would welcome the opportunity to deny the allegations himself ... if they are not true. A statement issued by his Mummy's Palace is not evidence of anything other than the fact The Palace feels under pressure.

__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #304  
Old 01-02-2015, 09:06 PM
Cris M's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Niterói, Brazil
Posts: 847
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
Wow! The only thing missing is here is the "Hanging Judge".

Please correct me if I am wrong but at this point Prince Andrew has been named in a "Civil Suit" in Florida.

He is not the Defendant.

The only substantiated information thus far is that he was a friend of Epstein.

The suit was filed in Florida where the age of consent is 18.

The alledged incidents occured in place where the age of consent is 16.

January is a slow news month.

Andrew has been found guilty by association in the Lower Court of the forum and must be excised from all royal connection, resign his charities and move to an isolated island in exile.

Whatever happened to family loyalty? Are the royal family required to distance themselves from him as a show of public righteousness? He has been accused of nothing and charged with nothing but there seems to be some confusion here as he has been all but named as a paedophile and the speed with which some forum members have grabbed this label and run with it, is downright scarey. Due process anyone? No, here it seems it's guilty until proven innocent.
Marg dear, as always, you're the voice of reason. Thank you very much.
Reply With Quote
  #305  
Old 01-02-2015, 09:12 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
So these are civil rather than criminal proceedings? Are the girls after damages? Must be. One of them seems to have filed an affidavit alleging that she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew. Seems to be a material fact in the matter. The best way to meet that allegation and refute it is to file an affidavit by Andrew denying the alleged acts took place. Then it becomes a matter of credit, 'cos you can bet the witnesses will be cross-examined at length. And there's the rub.

Commonsense dictates Andrew would welcome the opportunity to deny the allegations himself ... if they are not true. A statement issued by his Mummy's Palace is not evidence of anything other than the fact The Palace feels under pressure.

My understanding is that they are not suing Prince Andrew or Jeffrey Epstein, they are suing the prosecutor because Epstein received a fairly light sentence as a result of the plea bargain. It's hard to see that the case will be successful but, who knows.

I'm actually surprised the women are not suing Epstein, Dershowitz, Prince Andrew and any other rich man they allege was involved. I guess that will be next.

I don't know what to think. On the one hand, statutory rape laws in the U.S. can be unfair, especially to foreign visitors. The age of consent varies from state to state. It also doesn't matter if the girl (or boy) claims that s/he is actually older. The adult is expect to confirm the true age.

I also don't think that every 17 year old girl needs legal protection. If it is true these children were forced into sexual slavery, that is a crime in and of itself, regardless of their age.

However, I can't be too sympathetic to Andrew. He should have cut off Epstein after his conviction. Inviting Epstein to Sandringham and then having his photo taken with him wasn't just dumb, it was immoral.
Reply With Quote
  #306  
Old 01-02-2015, 09:23 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I agree about Andrew needing to be proven guilty before everyone assumes the claims made now are true and I actually doubt they are true.

However what has been proven is that Andrew continued to associate with Epstein after Espstein was arrested on charges of soliciting sex (some say he only pleaded guilty to lower the charges from more serious ones) and after Espstein was forced to register as a sex offender. Personally I judge Andrew to be lacking in judgement and intelligence based on this alone.
I don't know the Much about this story, mu knowledge is about .1%
So Andrew was still friends after this man was arrested charged and convicted? But what was his crime, molestation children or having sex with a girl who said she was 20 when she was really 16?
Are peo saying that Andrew should not have been friends with him anymore? Because it looks bad for the RF or because Andrew is guilty by association?
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #307  
Old 01-02-2015, 09:34 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 211
Whether true or not, this will not help his image at all
Reply With Quote
  #308  
Old 01-02-2015, 09:35 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
My understanding is that they are not suing Prince Andrew or Jeffrey Epstein, they are suing the prosecutor because Epstein received a fairly light sentence as a result of the plea bargain. It's hard to see that the case will be successful but, who knows.
Hmm. Interesting cause of action.

Quote:
I'm actually surprised the women are not suing Epstein, Dershowitz, Prince Andrew and any other rich man they allege was involved. I guess that will be next.
I'm surprised they aren't suing these men, too. What's the limitation period for such an action?

Quote:
I don't know what to think. On the one hand, statutory rape laws in the U.S. can be unfair, especially to foreign visitors. The age of consent varies from state to state. It also doesn't matter if the girl (or boy) claims that s/he is actually older. The adult is expect to confirm the true age.

I also don't think that every 17 year old girl needs legal protection. If it is true these children were forced into sexual slavery, that is a crime in and of itself, regardless of their age.

However, I can't be too sympathetic to Andrew. He should have cut off Epstein after his conviction. Inviting Epstein to Sandringham and then having his photo taken with him wasn't just dumb, it was immoral.
Stupid move on Andrew's part. Actually lots of stupid moves. And icky, too, for want of a better word. Those girls were only a few years older than his own daughters at the time. ETA They still are, of course, but my point is he would have had an awareness of the extreme youth of the girls.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #309  
Old 01-02-2015, 09:51 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
Hmm. Interesting cause of action.

I'm surprised they aren't suing these men, too. What's the limitation period for such an action?
According to this website, a victim can bring a civil suit within 7 years after turning 18. Since the alleged abuse happened as late as 2002 I think it is too late. State Civil Statutes of Limitations in Child Sexual Abuse Cases

There doesn't seem to be a criminal statute of limitations for sexual battery of a minor, but I am not sure that is the same as statutory rape.
Reply With Quote
  #310  
Old 01-02-2015, 09:54 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
A picture of the woman the press figures is making the complaint. She was 17 in this pic

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/...0236181778.jpg
I remember this picture.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #311  
Old 01-02-2015, 10:08 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,382
This article explains the legal situation. The person (Jane Doe #3) was not part of the original case against Epstein and she, along with #4 have asked to be added to the civil case. This article also gives the really robust rebuttal by Dershowitz. Clearest statement I've read.

Woman who sued convicted billionaire over sex abuse levels claims at his friends - POLITICO.com
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #312  
Old 01-02-2015, 10:15 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 885
Epstein was arrested in 2005 after the stepmother of a 14 yo told the authorities he paid her 14 year old step daughter $200 for a erotic massage after that over 40 more illegally procured girls were identified by prosecutors. Many of these have been settled out of court. The Florida thing is a little confusing surely whatever happened would have to have occurred in Florida where the legal age of consent is 18. If it happened elsewhere how can Florida make charges on it. No one is saying Andrew is guilty what most are saying is he is stupid for remaining in contact and going to parties with a registered sex offender. We may never know if he did or didn't I doubt he will say anything in which case people are going to come to their own conclusions and it won't be a good one. Look at Rolf Harris, Bill Cosby etc all are word of mouth cases no actual physical evidence. At this stage Andrew isn't being sued but this girl could sell her story and that would make her a lot of money. If Andrew took it to court then he would have to prove it wasn't true. Andrew has once again shown terrible judgement in keeping company with such a man and accepting financial help from him. It is a fact that Andrew went to parties and spent time with him after his conviction and of course people are going to think that Andrew might be more involved and there are pictures of Andrew with a young girl who could be the victim. This doesn't bode well for him if he doesn't answer people will say he has something to hide if he does come out and makes it very clear he had nothing to do with it all then it could help unless of course there are pictures. I think this would have been a big story no matter what the month it isn't everyday a Royal get's named in a lawsuit involving this kind of thing.
Reply With Quote
  #313  
Old 01-02-2015, 10:39 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
'I will not be bullied into silence': Woman who claims Prince Andrew abused her while she was billionaire's 'underage sex slave' says she is being 'unjustly victimised'-
Woman who accuses Prince Andrew of abusing her says she will 'not be victimised' | Daily Mail Online
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #314  
Old 01-02-2015, 11:14 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 365
I don't really see how denying an charge qualifies as bullying.
Reply With Quote
  #315  
Old 01-02-2015, 11:30 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
My understanding is that they are not suing Prince Andrew or Jeffrey Epstein, they are suing the prosecutor because Epstein received a fairly light sentence as a result of the plea bargain. It's hard to see that the case will be successful but, who knows.
I have never heard of such a thing - I thought prosecutorial immunity was absolute. The DM indicates its a suit claiming a violation of their civil rights for not being consulted on a generous plea deal. Interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
'I will not be bullied into silence': Woman who claims Prince Andrew abused her while she was billionaire's 'underage sex slave' says she is being 'unjustly victimised'-
Woman who accuses Prince Andrew of abusing her says she will 'not be victimised' | Daily Mail Online
Oh. My. God. Hey, I don't know what to think at this point, but I'm afraid that true or not, Prince Andrew is damaged. Period.

Again, from a cursory glance of the DM, Andrew was only named in connection with a motion to be allowed access to certain documents in the government's possession - his alleged lobbying of the American Government to go easy on Epstein. Yikes.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
Reply With Quote
  #316  
Old 01-03-2015, 12:09 AM
sthreats's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: midwest, United States
Posts: 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I said it about Bill Cosby and I'll say it about Prince Andrew, their innocent until proven guilty.

Buckingham Palace has issued a statement on behalf of Prince Andrew denying he was in any way involved in sexually abusing an under-age girl in the United States. His name has come up in legal documents there, served on a friend of his, Jeffrey Epstein, financier and sex offender:
Video:
PRINCE ANDREW ALLEGATIONS: DICKIE ARBITER INTERVIEW-
http://news.itnsource.com/?SearchTer...ER%20INTERVIEW

Interesting Article-
Woman who sued convicted billionaire over sex abuse levels claims at his friends-
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-...tz-200495.html

But like my Granny said. When you lie down with dogs you wake up with fleas.
P. Andrew did not use good judgement running with this hedonistic crowd.
Bill Cosby May not have drugged these women but he cheated on his wife multiple times with young women and kept them silent with money,jobs, and threats.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #317  
Old 01-03-2015, 12:20 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by sthreats View Post
But like my Granny said. When you lie down with dogs you wake up with fleas.
P. Andrew did not use good judgement running with this hedonistic crowd.
Bill Cosby May not have drugged these women but he cheated on his wife multiple times with young women and kept them silent with money,jobs, and threats.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community

My mother would also use that saying. I do worry about some of William and Harry's friends ( making a porn movie in front of the palace etc) and that saying comes to mind. I think Andrew was very silly to continue this friendship makes me wonder what this man had on Andrew


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #318  
Old 01-03-2015, 12:35 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington, DC, United States
Posts: 129
The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy

If it isn't true, and I'd like to think we all want it not to be because if so then a horrible immoral act occurred, then all it would take for me and perhaps Prince Andrew's image is something a bit more than a statement from the Buckingham Palace.

How about a sit down interview or video message from the Duke of York himself categorically denying the allegations. Look everyone into our eyes and tell us they aren't true, show us your character and how you are against any type of sexual abuse or slavery. Use it as an opportunity to bring up the issue of sex slavery, which I dont believe too political for a member of the royal family. And lastly, a sincere apology for the lack of judgment in befriending man. He should admit wrong, apologize, learn from the situation and move on. If he gives us that much, were good. If just a word from the palace, I'm honestly not sure you take the matter of sexual abuse and slavery seriously enough.

And given the Duke of York's purported social media savvy and online presence, I don't think a video message or interview should be unthinkable. Who's running the palace PR machine these days anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #319  
Old 01-03-2015, 12:54 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
Video:
Prince Andrew sex case claim denied-

BBC News - Prince Andrew sex case claim denied
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #320  
Old 01-03-2015, 01:03 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,192
This story has been going on since 2005. If he hasn't publicly denied it in the last decade why would he think it necessary to do so now?


The only way his name is cleared in this case is through a counter-defamation suit that he wins. Anything less and he will be forever tarnished - and in many people's minds, due to the continuing negative press and the 'Air-Miles Andy' tag etc then he will never recover.


The BRF may think they can ride this out - but I am not so sure. Another bigger scandal may help him now e.g. someone comes up with the definitive proof that George isn't William or Kate's baby - as alleged in many places - with less evidence to support their belief but it is there.


Harry's paternity keeps coming up - despite BP denials - due to his mother's poor judgement in sleeping with a man other than her husband. This will dog Harry and his descendants for generations.


Andrew and his descendants will be dogged by these allegations unless there is a court ruling that says that he is 'Not Guilty' of these claims - but he isn't on trial so not going to happen.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit 2016 catherine middleton style countess of wessex coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events dom duarte duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll felipe vi grand duchess josephine-charlotte grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl gustaf's birthday king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:05 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises