At long last, somebody got to him with god advice:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/15/prince-andrew-and-virginia-giuffre-reach-settlement-in-principle

Was obvious as the case went on that he would settle, especially after he finally paid off the debt he was refusing to honour on his French/Swiss [not quite sure where it was] chalet, which was immediately sold on. 

 

He's nothing but an arrogant stinking hill of faeces.

There's another high profile man who could not keep his deek in his pants, when you're horny, royal or not, means nothing to them... i'm sure that now he's asking himself whether all of this was worth it...

21 minutes ago, ezzra said:

There's another high profile man who could not keep his deek in his pants, when you're horny, royal or not, means nothing to them... i'm sure that now he's asking himself whether all of this was worth it...

He’s in this mess because, despite all the options he undoubtedly had, he chose the illegal one.

 

 

He's an entitled, arrogant,  <deleted>, end of.  Hopefully we won't set eyes on him again. Met him once, and once was enough, no class at all.  

On 2/16/2022 at 11:49 AM, Doctor Tom said:

He's an entitled, arrogant,  <deleted>, end of.

Same for all aristocracy as far as I can see.

Why would you expect any more from them?

Moral of story ... always ask for ID before paying your hooker.

 

Just because they act like a consenting adult, doesn't mean they are, unless that's what you wanting, in which case ... som naa na.

From the link in the OP -

sparing him the humiliation of giving evidence in a trial and protecting the royal family from further reputational damage.

 

Why is this allowed ? Courts should put a stop to this behind the scenes bargaining so a scumbag can remain hidden for the measly sum - to him - of a few million.

 

There is no "Justice" in the criminal justice system. Only $$$

I think the UK and Europe forum is the best place for this topic. Moved

And it was never about the money. ????

1 hour ago, seedy said:

From the link in the OP -

sparing him the humiliation of giving evidence in a trial and protecting the royal family from further reputational damage.

 

Why is this allowed ? Courts should put a stop to this behind the scenes bargaining so a scumbag can remain hidden for the measly sum - to him - of a few million.

 

There is no "Justice" in the criminal justice system. Only $$$

Why, because sometimes the victim also does not want a trial and this way both parties are satisfied. I get your point but this was not a criminal but a civil case.

10 minutes ago, Thailand said:

And it was never about the money. ????

Do you know where the money is going? Guess not

4 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

Do you know where the money is going? Guess not

Where it is most needed I would guess, and some to charity.

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He’s in this mess because, despite all the options he undoubtedly had, he chose the illegal one.

What was illegal about what he had been alleged to have done but was never proven?    Was he charged with anything criminal?  

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Moral of story ... always ask for ID before paying your hooker.

 

Just because they act like a consenting adult, doesn't mean they are, unless that's what you wanting, in which case ... som naa na.

errr.. I believe the woman in question was over the age of consent. Still have absolutely no idea what Andrew(vile individual he is) did wrong in this whole fiasco - other than lie when claiming he never met the woman.

 

 

Too funny cuz UK taxpayer paid 

2 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

errr.. I believe the woman in question was over the age of consent. Still have absolutely no idea what Andrew(vile individual he is) did wrong in this whole fiasco - other than lie when claiming he never met the woman.

 

 

I think that's correct. If they were brought together in Florida she would have been younger than the age of consent. I don't think that has ever been her argument though. She claims to have been coerced and trafficked. Is there an age limit on that? 

59 minutes ago, seedy said:

From the link in the OP -

sparing him the humiliation of giving evidence in a trial and protecting the royal family from further reputational damage.

 

Why is this allowed ? Courts should put a stop to this behind the scenes bargaining so a scumbag can remain hidden for the measly sum - to him - of a few million.

 

There is no "Justice" in the criminal justice system. Only $$$

It is allowed because her legal team agreed to it and this case was not in the criminal justice system.  He was not charged with anything, she was suing him in a civil case.

9 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

errr.. I believe the woman in question was over the age of consent. Still have absolutely no idea what Andrew(vile individual he is) did wrong in this whole fiasco - other than lie when claiming he never met the woman.

 

 

Age of consent, and 'flying to have sex' or 'paying' to have sex with a minor is a felony in many countries.  USA for example, has strict laws against being a tourist for sex with minor, so if busted overseas, and USA gets wind of it, expect to be charged on your return.    Being outside USA territories or airspace doesn't matter, or so I read.

 

Also age of consent, in many countries, is applicable to someone within a few years of same age.  Along with, parental permission to marry.  Sex with a minor may still be a felony, if outside the 'allowed' rules.  Paying for, makes a huge difference also.

 

On other comments, calling her / prostitute, or any of them victims, is a stretch.  Along with why drop the case, if a criminal case ... if nobody to testify, then no case, hence the payment for silence, and surely an NDA.

3 minutes ago, Pravda said:

Too funny cuz UK taxpayer paid 

How do you know that when no one else does as no details of the settlement are being made public?

1 minute ago, KhaoNiaw said:

I think that's correct. If they were brought together in Florida she would have been younger than the age of consent. I don't think that has ever been her argument though. She claims to have been coerced and trafficked. Is there an age limit on that? 

An interesting claim. So she was trafficked/coerced which would mean PA having relations with her was not consensual. This is particularly interesting because it would follow that presumably all of Epstein's young ladies which he kept on his private Caribbean island were in the same situation. So ex-Presidents and big tech bosses that liked to visit the island to play with girls were guilty of the same as PA and should be arrested?

No you say????

4 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

An interesting claim. So she was trafficked/coerced which would mean PA having relations with her was not consensual. This is particularly interesting because it would follow that presumably all of Epstein's young ladies which he kept on his private Caribbean island were in the same situation. So ex-Presidents and big tech bosses that liked to visit the island to play with girls were guilty of the same as PA and should be arrested?

No you say????

You don't think that's a possibility? I really have no idea about the setup. And neither do you. All we can do is speculate.

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

10 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

errr.. I believe the woman in question was over the age of consent. Still have absolutely no idea what Andrew(vile individual he is) did wrong in this whole fiasco - other than lie when claiming he never met the woman.

 

 

Expand  

Age of consent, and 'flying to have sex' or 'paying' to have sex with a minor is a felony in many countries. 

This is about Prince Andrew and the tart suing him, she was not a minor, they were consenting adults, he did not "fly to have sex" nor did he pay her.

12 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

So ex-Presidents and big tech bosses that liked to visit the island to play with girls were guilty of the same as PA and should be arrested?

Prince Andrew was not arrested!  He was not charged with any offences, either.

5 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

This is about Prince Andrew and the tart suing him, she was not a minor, they were consenting adults, he did not "fly to have sex" nor did he pay her.

That's 1 opinion, apparently the prostitute & Andy realize the opposite.

 

"Virginia Giuffre v. Prince Andrew is a civil legal action in which Virginia Giuffre (née Roberts), a woman living in Australia as of January 2022, has sued Prince Andrew, Duke of York, son of Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms alleging that she was forced to have several sexual encounters with the prince in the early 2000s at the age of 17, after being trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein.[1][2] Andrew has denied Giuffre's claims. The two parties reached an out-of-court settlement in February 2022, and the case is set to be closed without going to trial."

 

UK definition of a minor: "In England and Wales and in Northern Ireland a minor is a person under the age of 18"

 

Where that falls within any civil or criminal law, I don't know or care.

3 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Prince Andrew was not arrested!

You are right. Sorry I was getting confused between criminal and civil cases. But  my point stands, why when Andrew is mentioned there are boo hisses yet when Mr Gates and Mr Clinton who are on the plane logs to the depraved island of Mr Epstein, well these great men are not to be boo'ed at they are wonderful philanthropists. 

Its our old friend the double standard again I fear.

13 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

That's 1 opinion, apparently the prostitute & Andy realize the opposite.

 

"Virginia Giuffre v. Prince Andrew is a civil legal action in which Virginia Giuffre (née Roberts), a woman living in Australia as of January 2022, has sued Prince Andrew, Duke of York, son of Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms alleging that she was forced to have several sexual encounters with the prince in the early 2000s at the age of 17, after being trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein.[1][2] Andrew has denied Giuffre's claims. The two parties reached an out-of-court settlement in February 2022, and the case is set to be closed without going to trial."

 

UK definition of a minor: "In England and Wales and in Northern Ireland a minor is a person under the age of 18"

 

Where that falls within any civil or criminal law, I don't know or care.

It's not an opinion, it's a fact.     The age for (sexual) consent in the UK is 16.  She was not under the age of consent when she was whoring around with him.

50 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

In his case she was an adult (a prostitute, to all intents and purposes), she was not under-aged so they were consenting adults.

You need to do some reading up.

 

Don’t be like Andrew.

11 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

It's not an opinion, it's a fact.     The age for (sexual) consent in the UK is 16.  She was not under the age of consent when she was whoring around with him.

She’s a US citizen, she was transported over state lines for sex while under the age of 18.

 

Read up on the law.