Jump to content
This Topic

Prince Andrew 'spent weeks' at Epstein home - witness

CharlieH

By CharlieH
in World News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Chomper Higgot Star Member

Chomper Higgot

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 8:31 AM, BritManToo said:

Well if we're talking relevant, then none of the posts on this thread are relevant as the Royal family are not subject to the laws of the UK, and can't be extradited.

Expand  

 

That might be true of the monarch himself, it is not true of any other member of the royal family.

 

Like I said, the disgraced Prince Andrew will not be visiting NY again or indeed the US.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Replies 370
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

JonnyF
JonnyF

I wonder how many people posting on these anti-royalist threads have also had [cough] "massages" with Thai "bargirls" who were above the legal age of consent.   There is zero evidence any la

BritManToo
BritManToo

Lots of my pals have daily massages, as far as I know, only against the law in some Arab countries if mixed sex. Perfectly legal in the UK and the USA.

JonnyF
JonnyF

There is nothing credible about the accusation.    Maybe your sympathy should lie with the victims of Guifree, the children that she herself admitted to acquiring for Epstein. Now THAT is a

Posted Images

  • Popular Post
johnnybangkok Gold Member

johnnybangkok

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 2:17 AM, JonnyF said:

 

Well if she was 17 and he paid her for sex then it's illegal so it matters in a legal sense.

 

From a moral standpoint, she was clearly acting of her own free will, nobody was forcing her to do anything. She simply revised history at a later date to portray herself as a victim and get a big payout. A decent hustle which paid off nicely. Only a fool would believe she was forced into anything. Even the people arguing her case on this thread don't really believe that -  it's just a stick to beat the Royals with.  

Expand  

You keep going on about 'bashing/beating The Royals' when that's just not happening.

No one is 'bashing' The Royals as everything regarding this matter is solely aimed at Prince Andrew and that's generally because when given the chance to exhonerate himself, firstly with the FBI and then in court, he decided paying off his accuser to the tune of $12 million was the way to go. 

We all understand this isn't an admission of guilt but it certainly didn't take the target off his back and THATS the point many here are making - if you're so innocent why not face your accusser head on and have your day in court? He seemed to want to do that with his ill conceived interview with Emily Maitlis (the highly believable 'I have a medical condition that prevented me from sweating" one), when he insisted he hadn't even met Giuffre nevermind had sex with her and at the time of the accusation he was at Pizza Express in Woking have dinner with his kids. You would think all of these things would be quite easy to prove but rather than do so, he thought a $12 million payment was the better option. 

He may very well be innocent but his actions thereafter made it look otherwise and that's why he's being rightfully bashed.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
youreavinalaff Ruby Member

youreavinalaff

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 8:13 AM, pacovl46 said:

Yes, it is. Even if an underage person consents, it's still legally considered to the statutory rape. 

Expand  

No, it isn't.

 

It's sex with a minor, which the named female was not.

 

Rape is unconsensuel sex. Sex when one of those involved has said NO. I don't recall seeing anything about the female in question saying NO.

  • Like 1
Chomper Higgot Star Member

Chomper Higgot

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 8:37 AM, youreavinalaff said:

No, it isn't.

 

It's sex with a minor, which the named female was not.

 

Rape is unconsensuel sex. Sex when one of those involved has said NO. I don't recall seeing anything about the female in question saying NO.

Expand  

Not applicable to the crimes alleged to have occurred in the U.S.

 

And within the U.K. sex with a prostitute under the age of 18 is a crime, additionally so if they have been trafficked for the purposes of sex.

 

Refer Sexual Offenses Act 2003.

youreavinalaff Ruby Member

youreavinalaff

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 8:41 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Not applicable to the crimes alleged to have occurred in the U.S.

 

And within the U.K. sex with a prostitute under the age of 18 is a crime, additionally so if they have been trafficked for the purposes of sex.

 

Refer Sexual Offenses Act 2003.

Expand  

The conversation I'm having with another poster is regarding rape. 

 

Please keep up.

johnnybangkok Gold Member

johnnybangkok

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 8:31 AM, BritManToo said:

Well if we're talking relevant, then none of the posts on this thread are relevant as the Royal family are not subject to the laws of the UK, and can't be extradited.

Expand  

Not true. It's only the King that is exempt from UK law and although other Royals enjoy exemption from some laws, they are subject to most.

  • Thumbs Up 1
ozimoron Star Member

ozimoron

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 7:56 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

How long will they report the same story?

Imagine you are a prince, you are of course rich, and you have rich friends. And lots of women and girls want to be with you.

Of course, they want to be with you. Many women, young and old, want to be with powerful rich men.

Do all of these women do this because you are so handsome and have a sexy body? No. And who cares?

 

Personally, I also like Thai massage. And if the person who does the massage is a pretty young girl, that's great. And as far as I know it is not illegal to be massaged once a day or even more often.

 

Is there any clear evidence that Andrew forced anybody to have sex with him?

Did any women, of any age, ran out of a room and cried "rape" and showed her bruises to the police?

 

So maybe Andrew had sex with a 17 year old girl, and maybe she received money for that. And maybe that happened x decades ago. Is that really so important now that it is headline news all over the world for months or years? Really? Get a life! 

 

Expand  

 

Yes, the clear evidence is that prince charming refused to take the stand to protest his innocence and paid up instead. It's a simple truism that some here aren't grasping. In a civil case that's prima facie.

 

In common law jurisdictions, a reference to prima facie evidence denotes evidence that, unless rebutted, would be sufficient to prove a particular proposition or fact

youreavinalaff Ruby Member

youreavinalaff

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 9:25 AM, ozimoron said:

 

Under 18 sex with incentive = rape.

Expand  

Incentives? I once bought my girlfriend,I was 18 she was 17, a few drinks. Then we had sex. I don't recall getting accused of rape.

 

Not rape. Unless consent was not given.

 

You're making things up. The papers have been released. The MET have said no information that suggests an arrest is necessary. 

OneMoreFarang Star Member

OneMoreFarang

Posted
Posted

Next in the news: Millions of 16 and 17 year old girls all over the world had sex just this week. Some of them, probably thousands of them, thought in the hindsight they shouldn't have had sex with that guy at that moment.

Consequences: None.

Further situation: They got over it and didn't pretend decades later that it was a major issue. 

  • Like 1
OneMoreFarang Star Member

OneMoreFarang

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 9:30 AM, youreavinalaff said:

Incentives? I once bought my girlfriend,I was 18 she was 17, a few drinks. Then we had sex. I don't recall getting accused of rape.

 

Not rape. Unless consent was not given.

 

You're making things up. The papers have been released. The MET have said no information that suggests an arrest is necessary. 

Expand  

But then, you are no multimillionaire now, and famous and in the news.

Otherwise, she might think again that now, decades later, she somehow thinks that was wrong. Or maybe she only thinks she should get a couple of your millions.

 

I am happy that I am no multimillionaire and not famous. 

  • Agree 1
proton Star Member

proton

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 8:44 AM, Chris Daley said:

The legal age is 16 in England.  What did he do wrong?

Expand  

 

Orgies with under aged kiddies on the island where the age of consent was over 16? or having sex with a trafficked 17 year old sex slave in London? Not to mention continuing a friendship with a convicted pedophile!

  • Thumbs Up 1
ozimoron Star Member

ozimoron

Posted
Posted
  On 1/9/2024 at 10:40 AM, proton said:

 

Orgies with under aged kiddies on the island where the age of consent was over 16? or having sex with a trafficked 17 year old sex slave in London?

Expand  

 

Transporting a girl under 18 to that island for the purpose of having sex for money would in itself be a crime, to wit: human trafficking. Giving her money for sex at 17 is illegal anywhere in the US.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


ASEANNOW

ASEANNOW (formerly Thai Visa) Thailand's oldest and most popular forum for expats and foreigners.

Sign up today and have your say

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US

219/59 Asoke Towers, 15th Floor, Soi Sukhumvit 21, Watthana, Bangkok 10110
(+66) 99 196 1100
support@aseannow.com

×
×
  • Create New...
↑