Prince Andrew settles out of court.

[OneMoreFarang]

18 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

The public reach decisions based upon what they see and the individuals action.

Andrew now infamous interview alongside his running around castles avoiding the summons. In addition to the failed attempt to have the case dismissed and ultimately paying a settlement to avoid giving evidence . Is not the actions that would make the public believe he is not guilty.

And the public mostly sees what the media and social media present them.

Even in normally not so biased media Andrew was shown as if he is guilty.

I guess one of the problems is that by now basically no media outlet dares anymore to question anything which comes out of the mouth of people who some people call survivors. Obviously all those women who want millions from men would never ever not tell the whole truth... It's sad that media sunk to that level.

[Liverpool Lou]

23 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The duke also pledged to "demonstrate his regret for his association" with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein by supporting the "fight against the evils of sex trafficking, and by supporting its victims".

You're back?

[OneMoreFarang]

23 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The duke also pledged to "demonstrate his regret for his association" with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein by supporting the "fight against the evils of sex trafficking, and by supporting its victims".

That statement is similar to: I want world peace.

Yeah, sure, and it means nothing.

He didn't admit any personal wrongdoing. 

[OneMoreFarang]

25 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

There is no age of consent for rape.

Who was accused of rape?

[Liverpool Lou]

24 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

29 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Well, obviously, she was in the country when it happened.  And she was over the age of consent for sex. that's seventeen, in the UK and New York.

There is no age of consent for rape.

Was there a court case that proved that she was raped?    Didn't think so, she decided against taking the stand in a trial and took much less risky route of accepting money.

[OneMoreFarang]

16 minutes ago, puck2 said:

The logic tells me: why would he (.... hm ...) pay 12 million when nothing happened, but being afraid that Giuffre's details would go to the public.

You and many others still think about 12 million like it is a lot of money.

For Andrew and his family it is a number somewhere on a sheet. 12 million or double that amount won't change his lifestyle one bit. He will still live in luxury.

So what did that payment mean: Pay x and don't have that headache anymore. 

[Liverpool Lou]

29 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

32 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No, you did not get that response from me, get your facts right!

? I did not say you did. You just need to check a page or 2 back to the poster who did though. Please stop making false claims

So why did you direct the comment to me! 

 

This comment of yours, addressed to me suggested that you thought that I did!...

"I even provided a link then got a response that it was boring and there were better things to do with life"

 

Do not make false claims that I am making false claims, maybe make your comments to me clearer.

[cleopatra2]

8 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

And the public mostly sees what the media and social media present them.

Even in normally not so biased media Andrew was shown as if he is guilty.

I guess one of the problems is that by now basically no media outlet dares anymore to question anything which comes out of the mouth of people who some people call survivors. Obviously all those women who want millions from men would never ever not tell the whole truth... It's sad that media sunk to that level.

Andrew had the opportunity to test the accusations in a court of law. The results of which would have been public record that no bias media could alter . Andrew for whatever reason declined. Instead agreeing a settlement reportedly twice as much as Guiffre requested and 20 times the 500,000 Epstien settlement.

[cleopatra2]

10 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Who was accused of rape?

Prince Andrew

[Bkk Brian]

5 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

So why did you direct the comment to me! 

 

This comment of yours, addressed to me suggested that you thought that I did!...

"I even provided a link then got a response that it was boring and there were better things to do with life"

 

Do not make false claims that I am making false claims, maybe make your comments to me clearer.

I give up, think whatever you want............I really don't care, on ignore, adios

Edited February 19, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[Chomper Higgot]

46 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Yes, she's one of two board members according to her site.

Not at all surprising if she started the charity.

 

Unlike her respondent who is being thrown out of charities by the score:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9584227/Prince-Andrew-removed-50-patronages-charities-rush-distance-him.html

 

 

 

 

[cmarshall]

9 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

And the public mostly sees what the media and social media present them.

Even in normally not so biased media Andrew was shown as if he is guilty.

I guess one of the problems is that by now basically no media outlet dares anymore to question anything which comes out of the mouth of people who some people call survivors. Obviously all those women who want millions from men would never ever not tell the whole truth... It's sad that media sunk to that level.

What's interesting is that without any evidence at all you start from an assumption that false accusations of sexual violence by women are likely or common or a big problem.  But, in fact, that question has been studied.  For example, 

 

The evidence on false allegations fails to support public anxiety that untrue reporting is common. While the statistics on false allegations vary – and refer most often to rape and sexual assault – they are invariably and consistently low. Research for the Home Office suggests that only 4 per cent of cases of sexual violence reported to the UK police are found or suspected to be false. Studies carried out in Europe and in the US indicate rates of between 2 per cent and 6 per cent.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/false-sexual-violence-assault-rape-allegations-truth-rare-international-day-for-the-elimination-of-violence-against-women-16-days-a8077876.html

 

So, if we used these statistics to establish prior expectations in an exercise of Bayesian reasoning (look it up) we have to decide out of hand at the start of our inquiry that we overwhelmingly expect that Giuffre's accusation against the Windsor lad is very, very likely true.  At that point we could apply additional facts as known to modify our expectations and could consider possible incentives to lie, etc.  

 

That works for me.

[cmarshall]

18 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Who was accused of rape?

Sex with a minor is statutory rape.

[BritManToo]

26 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Sex with a minor is statutory rape.

There was never any claim of sex with a minor.

When she was 17 he allegedly banged her in the UK ..... legal.

When she was 18 he allegedly banged her in the USA ....... legal.

[OneMoreFarang]

58 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

What's interesting is that without any evidence at all you start from an assumption that false accusations of sexual violence by women are likely or common or a big problem.  But, in fact, that question has been studied.  For example, 

 

The evidence on false allegations fails to support public anxiety that untrue reporting is common. While the statistics on false allegations vary – and refer most often to rape and sexual assault – they are invariably and consistently low. Research for the Home Office suggests that only 4 per cent of cases of sexual violence reported to the UK police are found or suspected to be false. Studies carried out in Europe and in the US indicate rates of between 2 per cent and 6 per cent.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/false-sexual-violence-assault-rape-allegations-truth-rare-international-day-for-the-elimination-of-violence-against-women-16-days-a8077876.html

 

So, if we used these statistics to establish prior expectations in an exercise of Bayesian reasoning (look it up) we have to decide out of hand at the start of our inquiry that we overwhelmingly expect that Giuffre's accusation against the Windsor lad is very, very likely true.  At that point we could apply additional facts as known to modify our expectations and could consider possible incentives to lie, etc.  

 

That works for me.

Obviously I don't know how accurate the accusations are. Luckily it never happened to me. But then I was never rich any any accusations would not have made the accusers any richer.

But I know about women who told lies about guys which I know/knew. I.e. also in divorce cases. The guys have almost no chance just because of allegations.

 

And lets look at this from another angle: Do you remember all these MeToo accusations? How many of those guys were convicted of the crimes the women accused them of having done? How many guys lost their jobs and reputation because of accusations only? I don't follow all the news but I read about many accusations but I saw only news about very few convictions. 

[cleopatra2]

33 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

There was never any claim of sex with a minor.

When she was 17 he allegedly banged her in the UK ..... legal.

When she was 18 he allegedly banged her in the USA ....... legal.

The allegations were sexuall assault with battery, including 1st and 3rd degree rape under article 130 of NY penal code

[cleopatra2]

3 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Obviously I don't know how accurate the accusations are. Luckily it never happened to me. But then I was never rich any any accusations would not have made the accusers any richer.

But I know about women who told lies about guys which I know/knew. I.e. also in divorce cases. The guys have almost no chance just because of allegations.

 

And lets look at this from another angle: Do you remember all these MeToo accusations? How many of those guys were convicted of the crimes the women accused them of having done? How many guys lost their jobs and reputation because of accusations only? I don't follow all the news but I read about many accusations but I saw only news about very few convictions. 

The only angle we need to look at is . When Andrew was given the opportunity to test the allegations in court . Andrew declined and agreed a settlement.

[cmarshall]

3 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Obviously I don't know how accurate the accusations are. Luckily it never happened to me. But then I was never rich any any accusations would not have made the accusers any richer.

But I know about women who told lies about guys which I know/knew. I.e. also in divorce cases. The guys have almost no chance just because of allegations.

 

And lets look at this from another angle: Do you remember all these MeToo accusations? How many of those guys were convicted of the crimes the women accused them of having done? How many guys lost their jobs and reputation because of accusations only? I don't follow all the news but I read about many accusations but I saw only news about very few convictions. 

You completely ignored the British study that investigated false accusations of sexual violence in favor of your general feeling that some unnamed men somewhere have had their lives ruined by such false accusations.  Is this really the way you think about social problems, i.e. without any reference to known data?

[ozimoron]

2 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

You're back?

sad much?

[ozimoron]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

That statement is similar to: I want world peace.

Yeah, sure, and it means nothing.

He didn't admit any personal wrongdoing. 

The reason it didn't go to court was because of this admission.

[OneMoreFarang]

47 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

You completely ignored the British study that investigated false accusations of sexual violence in favor of your general feeling that some unnamed men somewhere have had their lives ruined by such false accusations.  Is this really the way you think about social problems, i.e. without any reference to known data?

If you have friends (people you actually know, not facebook "friends") who have suffered because of false accusation from women then maybe you would also look differently at this situation.

I know the names of my friends but they are not public people and I have no reason to name them.

 

And about lying women, especially to get money: Thailand and this forum is full of stories of guys who lost huge amounts of money to women who they loved and trusted. The situation, at least in Thailand, is so bad that if any wife/girlfriend/friend comes up with a story which requires money (sick grandmother or sick buffalo or whatever) most of us suspect first that that story is a lie. And often they are lies.

Do western women tell more often the truth? I have my doubts.

[FritsSikkink]

2 hours ago, CharlieH said:

Incorrect, London was sighted in the allegation.

On 30 December 2014, a Florida court filing by lawyers ... alleged that Prince Andrew was one of several prominent figures to have participated in sexual activities with a minor later identified as Virginia Giuffre,^[8] who was allegedly trafficked for sex by Epstein.^[9] Giuffre ... asserted that she had sex with Andrew on three occasions, including a trip to London in 2001 when she was 17,^[10] and later in New York and on Little Saint James, U.S. Virgin Islands.^[11] She alleged Epstein paid her $15,000 to have sex with the Duke in London.^[10]    Prince Andrew & the Epstein Scandal - Wikipedia

Edited February 19, 2022 by FritsSikkink

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

There was never any claim of sex with a minor.

When she was 17 he allegedly banged her in the UK ..... legal.

When she was 18 he allegedly banged her in the USA ....... legal.

At last we are getting somewhere:

 

She was trafficked to the UK at age 17 for purposes of sex.

 

As you agree Prince Andrew had sex with her at that time in the UK.

 

She’s an American citizen and therefore trafficking her to the UK at age 17 was a federal crime.

 

She’s a US citizen and therefore not legally competent to consent to paid sex - paid sex with her at that time was therefore by definition statutory rape - a Federal crime (regardless of who it was who paid). 
 

The jurisdiction of the US justice system for both the crime of human trafficking and rape Federal extend globally.

 

Regardless of whether or not Andrew was indicted or prosecuted, paid sex with Giuffre when she was age 17 was a Federal crime no matter where it occurred and no matter who paid.

 

 

Edited February 19, 2022 by Chomper Higgot

[Rimmer]

A couple of off topic posts trying to hijack the topic have been removed

 

[FritsSikkink]

10 hours ago, BritManToo said:

There was never any claim of sex with a minor.

When she was 17 he allegedly banged her in the UK ..... legal.

When she was 18 he allegedly banged her in the USA ....... legal.

She was 17 when she was used as a prostitute ..... illegal.

[it is what it is]

4 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

She was 17 when she was used as a prostitute ..... illegal.

 

10 hours ago, BritManToo said:

There was never any claim of sex with a minor.

When she was 17 he allegedly banged her in the UK ..... legal.

When she was 18 he allegedly banged her in the USA ....... legal.

 

she was trafficked for the purposes of sex, that is illegal, as is engaging in sex with a sex trafficked person

 

 

[RJRS1301]

16 hours ago, giddyup said:

All I can say is that time has not treated her kindly since the photo with Andrew (supposedly) was taken.

I am guessing of course your natural charm and physical beauty remains the same as when you were 17?

[RJRS1301]

13 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

At last we are getting somewhere:

 

She was trafficked to the UK at age 17 for purposes of sex.

 

As you agree Prince Andrew had sex with her at that time in the UK.

 

She’s an American citizen and therefore trafficking her to the UK at age 17 was a federal crime.

 

She’s a US citizen and therefore not legally competent to consent to paid sex - paid sex with her at that time was therefore by definition statutory rape - a Federal crime (regardless of who it was who paid). 
 

The jurisdiction of the US justice system for both the crime of human trafficking and rape Federal extend globally.

 

Regardless of whether or not Andrew was indicted or prosecuted, paid sex with Giuffre when she was age 17 was a Federal crime no matter where it occurred and no matter who paid.

 

 

However he was never charged with criminal offence anywhere, so gulity does not come into it , in a legal sense. The allegation he had sex with her anywhere is immaterial since there never was any criminal offence charges, and civil cases only find for or against a plaintiff, they do adjudicate on guilt in a criminal sense, as that is not part of the civil process.  

 

[RJRS1301]

Jeffrey Epstein’s mate Jean-Luc Brunel found dead in prison

Jeffrey Epstein’s friend Jean-Luc Brunel, who is alleged to have also abused Prince Andrew “sex slave” Virginia Giuffre, has been found dead in prison.

 

https://www.news.com.au/?utm_source=SEM&utm_medium=PPC_SEM&utm_campaign={campaign}&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIr-GSkayB9gIV6ZpmAh1PWwELEAAYASAAEgJpXPD_BwE

[ChaiyaTH]

10 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Jeffrey Epstein’s mate Jean-Luc Brunel found dead in prison

Jeffrey Epstein’s friend Jean-Luc Brunel, who is alleged to have also abused Prince Andrew “sex slave” Virginia Giuffre, has been found dead in prison.

 

https://www.news.com.au/?utm_source=SEM&utm_medium=PPC_SEM&utm_campaign={campaign}&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIr-GSkayB9gIV6ZpmAh1PWwELEAAYASAAEgJpXPD_BwE

There we go, perfect timing, lining up with what I previous said. So who is next? Bill Clinton also went in the plane of Epstein 20 times. Michael Jackson visited him often too, but he died already.

Edited February 19, 2022 by ChaiyaTH