Epstein / Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor / Maxwell

  • Thread starter Thread starter mat
  • Start date Start date
It’s not just in the States where the vast majority of large claims settle.

A bird in the hand and avoiding the unpredictability and emotional turmoil of a contested hearing are enticing for even the most indignant and wounded of litigants, especially if they are being leaned on by those who advise them.
 
Those great issues of the monarchy and "paedo's", ones to always produce strong reactions.

I have to say that the way this has ended has left a sour taste in the mouth. Money winning over truth, justice and transparency.

I think everyone sees Andrew as cossetted and not really aware of the real world. Status and money giving him the right to do as he pleased and have people fawning over him. Who gives a toss about his friends and acquaintances as long as they get him nice holidays and access to women.

I have little doubt that he has enjoyed the benefits of being friendly with Epstein and therefore had "liaisons" with many women...BUT... None have accused him (as far as I am aware) of forcing them to engage in any acts. Surely if that was true then there would have been a criminal prosecution?

The fact that Giuffre was of legal age and has never claimed that she was underage when any act took place, the fact that (unless Ghislaine spills the beans) it is unlikely that there would be any categoric proof that he actually had any sexual relationship with her, does beg the question (IMO) as to what the civil action was actually out for.

Giuffre, or at least her lawyers, had said that this was all about the truth, about Andrew admitting his involvement and/or knowledge of the "trafficking", that it wasn't about the money. That seems a little hollow now.

I really would have liked to have seen him squirming under questioning.

His mum must be so proud of him!

Certainly makes Thomas Paine's argument though;
"We have heard the Rights of Man called a levelling system; but the only system to which the word levelling is truly applicable, is the hereditary monarchical system. It is a system of mental levelling. It indiscriminately admits every species of character to the same authority. Vice and virtue, ignorance and wisdom, in short, every quality, good or bad, is put on the same level. Kings succeed each other, not as rationals, but as animals. It signifies not what their mental or moral characters are. Can we then be surprised at the abject state of the human mind in monarchical countries, when the government itself is formed on such an abject levelling system?—It has no fixed character. To-day it is one thing; to-morrow it is something else. It changes with the temper of every succeeding individual, and is subject to all the varieties of each. It is government through the medium of passions and accidents. It appears under all the various characters of childhood, decrepitude, dotage, a thing at nurse, in leading-strings, or in crutches. It reverses the wholesome order of nature. It occasionally puts children over men, and the conceits of non-age over wisdom and experience. In short, we cannot conceive a more ridiculous figure of government, than hereditary succession, in all its cases, presents".
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
Giuffre gets further millions to add to the millions she has already received without the ball ache of having to answer some potentially very damaging questions about both her credibility and actions when ‘working’ for Epstein. Why wouldn’t she settle?
Click to expand...
She recieved £300.000 from epstein , not millions and you are victim blaming
 
Last edited:
MillionMilesAway said:
It's not news that Charles was overheard saying he couldn't bear him about 15-20 years ago.

In this case, it's a partial quote of a greater whole. Witchell was pretty clear that Andrew is still out in the cold and he can't see how he comes back in, but for the rest of the family having the matter done is important.

I don't see how that statement is a problem, as it's not as though the Royal Family have forgiven Andrew. It's possible to be relieved and angry still.
Click to expand...
The legal case may have gone away, but the stigma remains. He certainly isn't in the clear and he will never be seen as innocent of any wrongdoing. He has essentially lied, bullsh*tted and paid his way out of trouble. He needs to just go away quietly and keep his head down for the rest of his days.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
You think a mother should cut off her son for shagging a seventeen year old?

I don’t think I know a single mother who would do that.
Click to expand...
Raping a seventeen year old , trafficked by his close pals and continuing his friendship with a convicted sex offender and child abuser , if that was me , my parents wouldn’t speak to me ever again. Obviously the morals of the monarchy fall way below mine or my families.
 
Uncle Wally One Ball said:
not sure that is accurate
Click to expand...

What is the actual accusation?

I don't believe rape was something that he has been accused off. Just that at the time she was under age.

As an FYI sleeping with someone who is over 14, but under 18 now is considered a misdemeanor in most US states.

The bloke is obviously a cretin, but I don't put him in the same basket as people sleeping with 7 year olds for instance.
 
carlosthejackal said:
Raping a seventeen year old , trafficked by his close pals and continuing his friendship with a convicted sex offender and child abuser , if that was me , my parents wouldn’t speak to me ever again. Obviously the morals of the monarchy fall way below mine or my families.
Click to expand...
Based on what you’ve posted I’m not sure you understand what rape is.
 
Just when Mr Windsor thinks that everything has calmed down then Miss Maxwell decides to reveal her memoirs..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top