The Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein Controversy 2010-2023

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Dman

Why would he step away when it’s alleged he enjoyed the participation of the sex trafficking?

Who is alleging that besides some posters here and the Daily Mail?

I think, Andrew, like many other people, enjoyed the money and high powered friends of Epstein.

Andrew seems to be kind of a jerk, but I do not believe he is a pedophile.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Dman

Why would he step away when it’s alleged he enjoyed the participation of the sex trafficking?

He has denied ever sleeping with the one woman who has made allegations against him.

His word against hers.

He has been cleared by the Metropolitan Police who have already investigated Ms Roberts claims.

I therefore assume you are a believer in trial by media and guilty until proven innocent rather than trial by jury and innocent until proven guilty.

Why believe Ms Roberts rather than Andrew?

I have no idea which one is telling the truth but only one of them can be and until one admits they are lying or there is conclusive evidence to prove which one is lying why not give Andrew the same rights you would expect for yourself? As assumption of innocence until proven guilty.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Dman

Why would he step away when it’s alleged he enjoyed the participation of the sex trafficking?

This sentence you wrote is very differently worded than what Andrew was actually alleged to have done.

To participate in "sex trafficking", Andrew would have had to be out and about (perhaps in London on his various events) and scouring the people around him for a woman that would appeal to Epstein, somehow convince her that he knew a good place and a good friend that could "help her get ahead in the world", and actually, perhaps, deliver her to Epstein or even Maxwell and then decide just where this woman would go and what this woman would do. He would be her "handler". That is sex trafficking.

As Iluvbertie has said, the only woman accusing Andrew of having sexual relations with her is Ms. Roberts. Ms. Roberts was procured, groomed and controlled by both Maxwell and Epstein and brought by *them* to London and Ms. Maxwell's residence. Andrew was one person Roberts was told at the time to "service".

So what we have is Andrew is alleged to have had a sexual relationship with Ms. Roberts as ordered by the Epstein/Maxwell handlers. Andrew was cleared by the Met Police because of the fact that, at the time, Roberts was of legal age of consent in London. No where, ever, has it been accused that Andrew participated in "sex trafficking".

Just like in the Florida sentence of 2008 and the charges against Epstein in 2019 are different. In Florida, Epstein was found guilty of charges dealing with prostitution. In SDNY last summer, Epstein was facing charges of sex trafficking. Two totally different colors of crayons from the box.

[Iluvbertie]

We don't know why Andrew was cleared by the Met - whether it was because of Ms Roberts age or whether she was unable to substantiate her claim they even had sex with Andrew denying that they ever did.

[Dman]

Okay. I guess you all didn’t pay any attention to me saying Andrew “allegedly” participated in the sex trafficking. He’s been accused of having sex with Mrs. Guiffre.

Andrew could be innocent. Andrew could be guilty. Virginia could be telling the truth. Virginia could be lying. The only way for this ‘she said, he said’ to end is through some legal channels. Somebody has got to confess.

Now, let’s not forget that Andrew not only knew Epstein for years, but he also brought Jeffery and Ghislaine around The Queen and members of the royal family. These folks vacationed on the royal estates. Even after Epstein was convicted as a paedophile, Andrew continued his friendship with these two and there’s video evidence of Andrew at Epstein’s residence after his conviction. So, excuse me for being a little suspicious of Andrew and not so quick to jump on the bandwagon of saying Andrew only remained friends with Epstein out of loyalty and money.

All this stuff stinks to high heaven.

[rmay286]

Originally Posted by Dman

Why would he step away when it’s alleged he enjoyed the participation of the sex trafficking?

I think there needs to be a distinction between what I think you're saying, 'participation of the sex trafficking,' meaning he possibly had sex with Virginia Roberts, who was a victim of Epstein...and 'participating in the sex trafficking,' which would mean Andrew actually procured girls for Epstein. No one said he has done the latter thing and we aren't sure if the former thing happened.

But even if he did have sex with Virginia, there is no proof that he knew she was a victim of sex trafficking at the time, or that he knew she was underage, or that he knew what the age of consent was in the U.S. (She was 17 when this incident is alleged to have taken place, and the age of consent is 16 in England.)

And I am not sure how anyone would be able to prove all these things in a court or why anyone would bother with charging Andrew, who is one of many men alleged to have slept with Epstein's girls. The main person they need to be questioning is Ghislaine Maxwell.

I do think Andrew seems guilty of some very bad judgment, but even IF he did sleep with Virginia as she alleges, this is not necessarily a crime. It's only a crime IF he knew she was underage and a victim of sex trafficking and was having sex with him under duress.

However, like I said, it seems very unlikely that anyone will be able to prove any of this even in court, so it will be Virginia's word against Andrew's into the foreseeable future.

[rmay286]

Originally Posted by Dman

Andrew could be innocent. Andrew could be guilty. Virginia could be telling the truth. Virginia could be lying. The only way for this ‘she said, he said’ to end is through some legal channels. Somebody has got to confess.

No, nobody has got to confess. There are all kinds of court cases where the perpetrator never admits to a crime but they are convicted anyway on the evidence, but there's no actual way to prove Andrew is innocent, that I can see. Only that he is guilty. It sounds like a conspiracy theory. Conspiracies can't be disproven.

Like iluvbertie said, Andrew was cleared by the Met, which may mean they didn't have enough evidence to convict him. The only evidence that could prove that he is guilty would be some sort of video of him having sex with Virginia, or some sort of audio or video in which he tells someone he knows Virginia is underage or some such thing. If that kind of evidence doesn't exist, then even if Andrew is 'guilty,' he won't be found guilty. You're asking basically for someone to confess so there can be some 'proof' that he is guilty but that proof may not exist. It doesn't mean he's innocent and it doesn't mean he's guilty, it just means that only Andrew and Victoria really know the truth.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by rmay286

No, nobody has got to confess. There are all kinds of court cases where the perpetrator never admits to a crime but they are convicted anyway on the evidence, but there's no actual way to prove Andrew is innocent, that I can see. Only that he is guilty. So you're asking basically for someone to confess so there can be some 'proof' that he is guilty. It sounds like a conspiracy theory. Conspiracies can't be disproven.

Like iluvbertie said, Andrew was cleared by the Met, which may mean they didn't have enough evidence to convict him.

I’m saying: something has got to give, here. There needs to be a proper investigation of this matter.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Dman

Okay. I guess you all didn’t pay any attention to me saying Andrew “allegedly” participated in the sex trafficking. He’s been accused of having sex with Mrs. Guiffre.

Being accused of having sex with someone that is underage is totally different than being accused of sex trafficking. Two very different accusations. There have been *no* allegations or accusations of Andrew being involved in sex trafficking.

The FBI is investigating the sex trafficking crimes that Epstein was indicted for in SDNY. As we know with the accusations against Andrew (and the picture), one of Epstein/Maxwell's "charges" were ordered to have sex with Andrew in London which actually makes for criminal *international* sex trafficking.

Perhaps you meant to say that Andrew enjoyed reaping the benefits of Epstein/Maxwell's sex trafficking ring? Just like a "john" at a brothel enjoys the activities there but its the "madam" or the "pimp" that holds the keys to the girl's "working life".

For example. A pimp in NYC could have 15 girls of any age working for him. Its local. If that pimp was to solicit girls from Europe (for example) and then open up his business in Chicago, Detroit and Parumph and move his girls between locations, it would be transporting these girls across state and international lines and henceforth be a criminal sex trafficker.

Epstein's convictions in Florida were on a state level (local) and the convictions dealt with prostitution. In SDNY, he was being indicted on criminal sex trafficking crimes on a state and international level. He killed himself and the investigation is going forward to determine just who actually aided and abetted Epstein in trafficking these girls. Maxwell is prime suspected sex trafficker that helped Epstein.

Its not about who slept with whom. Those cases are not part and parcel of the sex trafficking allegations but those that *were* trafficked and that those that are alleged to have participated with those girls can perhaps aid the investigation to determine who, besides Epstein, actually committed criminal sex trafficking deeds and could be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

With the operation that Epstein obviously had and the multitude of women that have come forward, its not hard to believe that Epstein didn't run all of this by himself without people aiding and abetting him. This is what the FBI is looking into.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Dman

I’m saying: something has got to give, here. There needs to be a proper investigation of this matter.

When it comes to Andrew though, he's just a little fish in a very big pond. As the investigation by the FBI at a federal level is trying to get to the bottom of criminal sex trafficking, it seems Andrew is one of a *lot* of men that will be questioned and investigated to find out what he knew.

Remember Andrew was not only friends with Epstein but also Maxwell. If the FBI were sure that only Epstein was involved, they wouldn't still be pursuing this investigation.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Dman

I’m saying: something has got to give, here. There needs to be a proper investigation of this matter.

The Met has already conducted an investigation. Suggesting by saying 'there needs to be a PROPER investigation' implies you don't think the Met did that. That is insulting not only to the Met but to every British person who knows how good the Met is.

The Met - one of the best police investigative forces in the world - has already cleared Andrew of any crime in the UK.

[Osipi]

There is absolutely no reasons either for the FBI or any kind of a federal (if that is what is meant by "proper") investigations into the allegations made by Ms. Giuffre against Andrew. There is no federal crime involved or even a federal allegation.

If it did go to court at all, it would be with Ms. Giuffre filing a case in civil court for personal injury claims and it would be up to her and her lawyers to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Andrew was guilty. Considering that Virginia was "handled" by Epstein/Maxwell, there are most likely plenty of other men that Ms. Giuffre could file a claim against besides Andrew when it comes down to all the men she was forced to have sex with. As I've said, Andrew is a little fish in a big pond here that just happens to have a prominent and recognizable name and position.

Ms. Giuffre already did file a defamation suit against both Epstein and Maxwell but that was settled out of court and privately and the the settlement agreed on has not been made public and those documents remain sealed at this time. Those documents are being sought to be released such as the documents from the Florida case were but it will *not* involve Andrew. They're seeking to know more about the prime players of Epstein and Maxwell. I would wager that even Ms. Maxwell's chauffeur in Florida is of more interest to the federal investigation than Andrew is. The chauffeur probably knows a whole lot more than Andrew did.

Andrew's involvement in all of this actually is a pinpoint hole in a very big tapestry. Andrew isn't even close to being a key player on the matter being investigated. They're trying to go after the "big fishies".

[Osipi]

This is an article linked to TIME and thoroughly explains just what is going on now with the investigations. Its a good read and helps to understand just how far reaching Epstein's web reached. Even in this article, Andrew is mentioned as one of a bunch of little fish in a very big pond.

https://time.com/5651186/jeffrey-eps...-conspirators/

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by Dman

Even after Epstein was convicted as a paedophile, Andrew continued his friendship with these two and there’s video evidence of Andrew at Epstein’s residence after his conviction.

To be precise, Epstein was convicted of soliciting underage prostitutes not paedophilia. Paedophilia is defined as having sex with prepubescent children (generally aged 13 or younger).

[Osipi]

Also referred here in the State as "tender age children". That also seems to be too rampant for my sensibilities from what I've seen and heard.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Also referred here in the State as "tender age children". That also seems to be too rampant for my sensibilities from what I've seen and heard.

I can't even watch "Law and Order: SVU" because so many of the story lines involve the physical/emotional/sexual abuse of children. It's just too depressing for me (even though the perpetrators are always caught and punished).

[HereditaryPrincess]

There was a documentary about the Epstein case on Channel 5 tonight. They only really repeated things we already know about the case, but I thought I'd leave a link here anyway incase some of you would be interested:

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-r...-house-of-york

[ladongas]

This explains everything. He had to break up with his BFF, and there was a going-away party.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...ship-7sdcvrm07

[Ista]

Originally Posted by ladongas

This explains everything. He had to break up with his BFF, and there was a going-away party.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...ship-7sdcvrm07

Uh huh.

I think any friendship ending could have been done over the phone.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by Ista

Uh huh.

I think any friendship ending could have been done over the phone.

Especially *that* one!