Epstein / Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor / Maxwell

  • Thread starter Thread starter mat
  • Start date Start date
marco said:
trouble for him is anyone accused of this type of stuff would want to clear their name, i certainly would, so he's going to be guilty if he does not turn up and he's going to be gulty in the public eye if he pays her off 'why make a pay off if your innocent', the only way is to defend himself thats if he wants to walk around with his head held up
Click to expand...
Ask CR7 it doesn't seem to have affected his status paying off an alleged sex crime victim.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
Fair point, but also given the seriousness of the offence, I don't think it's too much to expect someone to make reasonable efforts to ascertain the age of someone before having sex with them when they look like they might be underage. And obviously I don't know what the girl looked like in this case, but what I will say is that while I've seen 13 year-olds who look older than they are before, I've never seen one who looks so old as to leave in no doubt that she's over the age of 16. So if you're a middle-aged businessman looking to prey on young teenagers, I think you should be expected to put the extra work in rather than just having sex with them knowing that there'll be some plausible deniability for your no doubt very highly-paid lawyer to take advantage of if it goes to court.
Click to expand...

Despite using the word nonce earlier, I don't think for one minute he is a paedophile or deliberately targeted underage girls. Although he was careless in putting himself in situation where he was likely to be commiting a crime.

He really shouldn't have met a woman who claimed to be 17 when the platform was for adults over 18.

Whenever I have come across someone on a digital platform for adults who reveals themselves to be under 18, I desisted from anything adult in conversation, make the point to them that they shouldn't be on the platform and report them as underage.

Obviously there was some deception involved from the younger girl, but I'd be doubtful that he hadn't actually noticed that she was significantly different from the self description. Even if she was were wearing heels or platforms you would notice that 4 inches disparity and question why she had lied.


Richard said that the site “drew” women who were at least 18 and “mostly in their 20s.”
In chats, the alleged victim had told him she was a 17-year-old college student who was 5ft 4ins tall and weighed seven stone.
But the court heard she was only just over five foot tall and weighed less than six stone.
Click to expand...



www.standard.co.uk

Doug Richard 'wanted 50 Shades of Grey experience'

The former Dragons' Den star accused of having sex with a 13-year-old girl today told the Old Bailey about his secret addiction to “dominance and submission” sex play.
www.standard.co.uk www.standard.co.uk
 
marco said:
trouble for him is anyone accused of this type of stuff would want to clear their name, i certainly would, so he's going to be guilty if he does not turn up and he's going to be gulty in the public eye if he pays her off 'why make a pay off if your innocent', the only way is to defend himself thats if he wants to walk around with his head held up
Click to expand...

he is guilty already ?
mixing/pictured with epstein and others and the video of him hiding behind the door letting that young girl out
speaks for itself.. then doing that interview to clear his name only to make it 1000 times worst with lying

the whole lot of them are in the same boat ? prince charles being really good friends with jimmy savile says it all really
 
ancoats said:
he is guilty already ?
mixing/pictured with epstein and others and the video of him hiding behind the door letting that young girl out
speaks for itself.. then doing that interview to clear his name only to make it 1000 times worst with lying

the whole lot of them are in the same boat ? prince charles being really good friends with jimmy savile says it all really
Click to expand...
its right accross the board mate from the royals to MI5 and senior police and churches, no investigation about Ted Heaths antics speaks volumes,filthy bastards want stringing up
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It absolutely is. Section 146(4) of the Licensing Act 2003 affords a defence for selling alcohol to a child if the person making the sale reasonably thought they were 18 or over. In contrast, in most States in the US selling alcohol to a minor is a strict liability offence.

I think our system is fairer, especially to shop workers on minimum wage who shouldn’t be penalised and criminalised when they have taken all reasonable precautions.

I would say the same about people who have sex with minors, given the sentences involved. I don’t see how that’s fair if someone reasonably and genuinely believed they were having consensual and legal sex that they should be punished on the basis they they knew.

What is reasonable, as ever, is up to a jury, who have listened to the evidence in order to determine whether they are sure of someone’s guilt; which is the least worst way of deciding these things, rather than via a football forum.
Click to expand...
Didn’t stop my local offie getting prosecuted for selling booze to a 14 year old girl. And getting heavily fined.
The owner pointed her out to me once.
I didn’t know about the case.
He asked me how old I thought she was.
Tarted up to the nines she was.
I honestly thought anything between 18 to mid 20s.
 
denislawsbackheel said:
Didn’t stop my local offie getting prosecuted for selling booze to a 14 year old girl. And getting heavily fined.
The owner pointed her out to me once.
I didn’t know about the case.
He asked me how old I thought she was.
Tarted up to the nines she was.
I honestly thought anything between 18 to mid 20s.
Click to expand...
Depends what precautions he could demonstrate that he took. Did he ask for ID? Did he even ask her how old she was? I suspect not, especially if it was a test purchase (assuming that's what it was) as the participants most operations like that are required not to lie when asked their age. In any event, I think anyone would struggle to convince a court that someone who was 14, reasonably appeared to be 18 or over, irrespective of the truth of her appearance. That's the reality. He was probably advised to plead guilty to reduce his fine by a third.
 
denislawsbackheel said:
Didn’t stop my local offie getting prosecuted for selling booze to a 14 year old girl. And getting heavily fined.
The owner pointed her out to me once.
I didn’t know about the case.
He asked me how old I thought she was.
Tarted up to the nines she was.
I honestly thought anything between 18 to mid 20s.
Click to expand...
Challenge 25 now the only defence is if you have made the challenge and been presented with a blag Id card you are then deemed to have taken reasonable steps.
 
I suspect Andrew thought she "fancied" him. He is fucking thick, and "entitled"enough.
If you read the accounts of him growing up he was a right twat. Even Buck House staff wanted to kick the shit out of him when he was a kid.
He's a horrible shit and always has been. The stories of him and Ghislaine Maxwell first appeared in the tabloids about 20 years ago.
God knows why he has always been the Queens "favourite." Thought she'd have more bleeding sense.
Anyway....whether he is guilty of any wrongdoing here or not....he's a twat, and always has been.
 
Last edited:
mackenzie said:
I suspect Andrew thought she "fancied" him. He is fucking thick, and entitled, enough.
If you read the accounts of him growing up he was a right twat. Even Buck House staff wanted to kick the shit out of him when he was a kid.
He's a horrible shit and always has been. The stories of him and Ghislaine Maxwell first appeared in the tabloids about 20 years ago.
God knows why he has always been the Queens "favourite." Thought she'd have more bleeding sense.
Anyway....whether he is guilty of any wrongdoing here or not....he's a twat, and always has been.
Click to expand...
All those things are true
 
ancoats said:
the whole of them are untouchable always have been always will
even back to the jack the ripper days ? it was said to be a prince in line to the throne and he was well known around them parts and the locals knew
Click to expand...
Albert Victor.
Wasn't him, not by any stretch of the imagination. His whereabouts were well documented at the time, mainly through Court records etc. He was nowhere those poor women at the time of their deaths.
It's a shame really how his name is still slandered to this day, to be honest. Died young and in recent years has been subjected to links with the ripper.
 
mackenzie said:
I suspect Andrew thought she "fancied" him. He is fucking thick, and entitled, enough.
Click to expand...
For me, I 100% believe he had sex with her when she was 17, and he knew that she was 17, but I’m finding it harder to accept that she was an unwilling participant. Not saying I’m sure she wasn’t, but the notion that every victim of Epstein was unwilling at the time simply doesn’t bear objective and logical scrutiny, given the numbers involved. Some will have been legal, willing and fully aware of what they were doing; others will have been underage, unwilling and/or coerced and possibly trafficked. The operation will have been much more nuanced than some people will feel comfortable with.

I don’t think anyone observing this through the media, as we all are, can properly evaluate which broad grouping Guiffre falls into. Anyone looking at it from that viewpoint who says otherwise is talking shit.

Does it make Prince Andrew’s conduct any less reprehensible if she was willing? Marginally, I guess, but it’s still iffy as fuck. At that age, girls aren’t capable of making decisions in the same way as they are a decade or so later - and older men should always been mindful of that, the responsibility they have, and the impact it could subsequently have on the girl’s psyche when she looks back on an older man who has taken advantage of that lack of reasoning.

Whichever way you paint it, even taking it at its ‘highest‘ his conduct was egregiously predatory and exploitative.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
For me, I 100% believe he had sex with her when she was 17, and he knew that she was 17, but I’m finding it harder to accept that she was an unwilling participant. Not saying I’m sure she wasn’t, but the notion that every victim of Epstein was unwilling at the time simply doesn’t bear objective and logical scrutiny, given the numbers involved. Some will have been legal, willing and fully aware of what they were doing; others will have been underage, unwilling and/or coerced and possibly trafficked. The operation will have been much more nuanced than some people will feel comfortable with.

I don’t think anyone observing this through the media, as we all are, can properly evaluate which broad grouping Guiffre falls into. Anyone looking at it from that viewpoint who says otherwise is talking shit.

Does it make Prince Andrew’s conduct any less reprehensible if she was willing? Marginally, I guess , but it’s still iffy as fuck. At that age, girls aren’t capable of making decisions in the same way as they are a decade or so later - and older men should always been mindful of that, the responsibility they have, and the impact it could subsequently have on the girl’s psyche when she looks back on an older man who has taken advantage of that lack of reasoning.

Whichever way you paint it, even taking it at its ‘highest‘ his conduct was egregiously predatory and exploitative.
Click to expand...
I think she was definitely "trafficked. "
However, I agree with your use of "nuanced "

Did Andrew even care as to the wherefores of why she was there? Probably not, no.

Men like him don't think, they just "accept" it as their right. He was always bleeding thick.
 
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