Epstein / Prince Andrew / Maxwell

gordondaviesmoustache said:
What’s his age today got to do with it?
Click to expand...
I'd say that when your son is 61 years old your responsibilities to them and any parenting you can do to guide and assist them is pretty much done. I don't think the idea of "cutting them off" holds quite the same weight and especially not when they've made the choice to befriend and associate with convicted sex offenders and invited them to stay over at your house.

And again, he didn't just sleep with a 17 year old. He slept with a 17 year old who had been groomed, trafficked and coerced to do so.
 
Mon Autre said:
I'd say that when your son is 61 years old your responsibilities to them and any parenting you can do to guide and assist them is pretty much done. I don't think the idea of "cutting them off" holds quite the same weight and especially not when they've made the choice to befriend and associate with convicted sex offenders and invited them to stay over at your house.

And again, he didn't just sleep with a 17 year old. He slept with a 17 year old who had been groomed, trafficked and coerced to do so.
Click to expand...
I’m not talking about any parenting, I was responding to a criticism (and I’m no royalist btw) that the Queen was still engaging with him.

The extent of the last line is open to interpretation and you can’t claim to know otherwise. No one can. At least no one on this board. It simply hasn’t been evidentially tested.

What I think any reasonable person can be sure of is that he had sex with her which was (legally speaking) consensual. That is what I am basing my view on, because I am certain that it happened, which for me marks it down as highly inappropriate, reprehensible and an abuse of power, but does not warrant someone being cut off from their family. People do far worse and their families stand by them (without condoning what they’ve done).
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I’m not talking about any parenting, I was responding to a criticism (and I’m no royalist btw) that the Queen was still engaging with him.

The extent of the last line is open to interpretation and you can’t claim to know otherwise. No one can. At least no one on this board. It simply hasn’t been evidentially tested.

What I think any reasonable person can be sure of is that he had sex with her which was (legally speaking) consensual. That is what I am basing my view on, because I am certain that it happened, which for me marks it down as highly inappropriate, reprehensible and an abuse of power, but does not warrant someone being cut off from their family. People do far worse and their families stand by them (without condoning what they’ve done).
Click to expand...

I'd say Epstein and Maxwell's involvement in grooming and trafficking has been evidentially tested.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I’m not talking about any parenting, I was responding to a criticism (and I’m no royalist btw) that the Queen was still engaging with him.

The extent of the last line is open to interpretation and you can’t claim to know otherwise. No one can. At least no one on this board. It simply hasn’t been evidentially tested.

What I think any reasonable person can be sure of is that he had sex with her which was (legally speaking) consensual. That is what I am basing my view on, because I am certain that it happened, which for me marks it down as highly inappropriate, reprehensible and an abuse of power, but does not warrant someone being cut off from their family. People do far worse and their families stand by them (without condoning what they’ve done).
Click to expand...

She has alleged it happened on 3 occasions in 3 different jurisdictions.

London, New York, and the US Virgin Islands.

In the USVI the age of consent is 18, some exceptions to this rule when the age difference is less than 5 years.

So no it isn't, legally speaking consensual.
 
Fode N The Hole said:
She has alleged it happened on 3 occasions in 3 different jurisdictions.

London, New York, and the US Virgin Islands.

In the USVI the age of consent is 18, some exceptions to this rule when the age difference is less than 5 years.

So no it isn't, legally speaking consensual.
Click to expand...
The lower age is actually 13 but unspecific as to the actual allowable age difference between consenting parties. I was under the impression that the law was that the older party wasn't permitted to be an individual in a position of authority over the younger party (either by occupation or age)? Given that the unrestricted age of consent is 18, then you could assume it's 5 years, but this is unclear and it might actually be less.

Either way this definitely means sweaty palms may have broken the law. We may never know.
 
Last edited:
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.