Prince Andrew 'spent weeks' at Epstein home - witness

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, 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.

 

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.

 

 

Edited January 9 by Chomper Higgot

[johnnybangkok]

5 hours ago, 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.  

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.

 

 

[youreavinalaff]

21 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

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

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.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, 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.

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.

[Chris Daley]

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

[youreavinalaff]

2 minutes ago, 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.

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

 

Please keep up.

[johnnybangkok]

13 minutes ago, 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.

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.

[Chomper Higgot]

13 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

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

 

Please keep up.

Refer to the top of the thread for the subject of discussion, and yes I agree, statutory rape’.

[Chomper Higgot]

14 minutes ago, Chris Daley said:

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

That’s not the legal age wrt prostitution and it’s certainly not the legal age in the U.S. locations the disgraced Prince Andrew is alleged to have committed sex crimes.

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, 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! 

 

 

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

Edited January 9 by ozimoron

[youreavinalaff]

24 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Refer to the top of the thread for the subject of discussion, and yes I agree, statutory rape’.

No need to refer to anything.

 

I quoted a thread that alleged rape. I replied.

 

It's not rape.

[ozimoron]

Just now, youreavinalaff said:

No need to refer to anything.

 

I quoted a thread that alleged rape. I replied.

 

It's not rape.

 

Under 18 sex with incentive = rape.

[youreavinalaff]

Just now, ozimoron said:

 

Under 18 sex with incentive = rape.

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]

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. 

[OneMoreFarang]

27 minutes ago, 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. 

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. 

[Chomper Higgot]

43 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

No need to refer to anything.

 

I quoted a thread that alleged rape. I replied.

 

It's not rape.

Sex with a minor in the U.S. is definitely rape, the disgraced Prince Andrew is credibly alleged to have done just that.

[youreavinalaff]

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Sex with a minor in the U.S. is definitely rape, the disgraced Prince Andrew is credibly alleged to have done just that.

Once again, you are incorrect.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, youreavinalaff said:

Once again, you are incorrect.

You need to read some law.

[youreavinalaff]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You need to read some law.

No, I don't.

 

 

Edited January 9 by youreavinalaff

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, 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.

You really do need to read some law.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, youreavinalaff said:

No, I don't.

 

The court papers recently released prove rape was not committed.

They prove nothing of the sort.

 

The court papers are a record, they are transcripts.

 

 

[youreavinalaff]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

You really do need to read some law.

Those that know far more about law than either you or I have not alleged rape.

 

That's all any of us need to know.

[Nick Carter icp]

[youreavinalaff]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

They prove nothing of the sort.

 

The court papers are a record, they are transcripts.

 

 

That's a change of heart. A twist, a turn. 

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Those that know far more about law than either you or I have not alleged rape.

 

That's all any of us need to know.

 

You challenged the proposition that prince charming committed rape. That much we do know.

[proton]

2 hours ago, Chris Daley said:

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

 

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!

Edited January 9 by proton

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

That's a change of heart. A twist, a turn. 

Not unless courts of law no longer pass judgement it isn’t.

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, 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?

 

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.

 

 

Edited January 9 by ozimoron

[youreavinalaff]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Not unless courts of law no longer pass judgement it isn’t.

They have. No charges of rape. 

 

 

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

They have. No charges of rape.

 

Lets just say that I'd bet the farm he never goes to the US again.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/met-police-prince-andrew-epstein-b2474192.html