• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Jeffrey Epstein arrested for child sex trafficking

That all may be, but it doesn't really involve what I was talking about, a semi-digression in basic agreement with Delphic Oracle's "what would being an ex call girl have to do with it?"
Let's recall that was all under the heading of "if we're taking her word for it" but here even under that caveat (that was explicitly stated this thought construct was to operate under) there is hurling slander for her profession (that she probably didn't enter into without coercion) and referring to what would be entirely valid civil claims in those circumstances for damages as "blackmail."

It's almost like there was no intention of discussing it with an open mind.

"Almost."
 
Last edited:
Apparently the Queen has now fired Andrew. And there's a possibility he will be subpoenaed by US authorities. It may be time for him to visit Ecuador. Or at least their embassy.
 
Also, I want to point out a flaw in the "sex with a 17 year old" and "sex with a prostitute" are not illegal part.

Well, the problem is trying to reconcile those two simultaneously rather than separately.

Can a 17 year old enter into a contract for sex work?

That's without even going down the rabbit hole of an agreement resulting from coerced consent being considered void.
 
Also, I want to point out a flaw in the "sex with a 17 year old" and "sex with a prostitute" are not illegal part.

Well, the problem is trying to reconcile those two simultaneously rather than separately.

Can a 17 year old enter into a contract for sex work?

Nope. Prostitution is illegal for under 18 in the UK.
 
.....
Sure Maxwell and Epstein are despicable but it is also despicable for a prostitute to use blackmail over her client as a bargaining tool for compensation. That is the sole reason she has dragged Prince Andrew's name into it. Cashing in on the #metoo victimhood.


Underage girls can't be prostitutes because they can't give consent. There is no doubt that Epstein manipulated and abused numerous young girls who were emotionally and financially vulnerable. That's rape.

Here's the guy you're defending:
Jeffrey Epstein once had three 12-year-old girls from poor families flown in from France as a sick birthday present for himself, according to newly unearthed court documents.

Virginia Giuffre — who has claimed Epstein and his gal pal Ghislaine Maxwell coerced her into being a “sex slave” when she was 15 — said in court papers that the girls who were flown in were molested by the financier and returned to France the following day.

“The worst one that I heard from his own mouth was this pretty 12 year old girls he had flown in for his birthday,” she said, according to the document.

“It was a surprise birthday gift from one of his friends and they were from France. I did see them, I did meet them,” she said.
https://nypost.com/2019/08/19/jeffr...ee-12-year-old-french-girls-as-birthday-gift/

If he had gotten what he deserved when he was first prosecuted, he would never have gotten out of prison, and a lot of victims would have been spared.
 
It's interesting to come across this passage from World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War by Max Brooks, after what's been going on with Prince Andrew this week:

"The highest of distinctions is service to others." [He clears his throat, his upper lip quivers for a second.] Her father had said that; it was the reason he had refused to run to Canada during the Second World War, the reason her mother had spent the blitz visiting civilians huddled in the tube stations beneath London, the same reason, to this day, we remain a United Kingdom. Their task, their mandate, is to personify all that is great in our national spirit. They must forever be an example to the rest of us, the strongest, and bravest, and absolute best of us. In a sense, it is they who are ruled by us, instead of the other way around, and they must sacrifice everything, everything, to shoulder the weight of this godlike burden. Otherwise what's the flipping point? Just scrap the whole damn tradition, roll out the bloody guillotine, and be done with it altogether. They were viewed very much like castles, I suppose: as crumbling, obsolete relics, with no real modern function other than as tourist attractions. But when the skies darkened and the nation called, both reawoke to the meaning of their existence. One shielded our bodies, the other, our souls.

How hard he has failed in that duty.
 
Underage girls can't be prostitutes because they can't give consent. There is no doubt that Epstein manipulated and abused numerous young girls who were emotionally and financially vulnerable. That's rape.

Here's the guy you're defending:

https://nypost.com/2019/08/19/jeffr...ee-12-year-old-french-girls-as-birthday-gift/

If he had gotten what he deserved when he was first prosecuted, he would never have gotten out of prison, and a lot of victims would have been spared.
I think you are missing a key part of Vixen's argument.

But no-one died. Lots of sex and fun was had by all.
Who cares if 12 year olds are raped. It is sex and must be fun right? He only raped the girls and had fun with them before they became teenagers. It is not like he killed them or anything bad.
 
Underage girls can't be prostitutes because they can't give consent. There is no doubt that Epstein manipulated and abused numerous young girls who were emotionally and financially vulnerable. That's rape.

Here's the guy you're defending:
Jeffrey Epstein once had three 12-year-old girls from poor families flown in from France as a sick birthday present for himself, according to newly unearthed court documents.

Virginia Giuffre — who has claimed Epstein and his gal pal Ghislaine Maxwell coerced her into being a “sex slave” when she was 15 — said in court papers that the girls who were flown in were molested by the financier and returned to France the following day.

“The worst one that I heard from his own mouth was this pretty 12 year old girls he had flown in for his birthday,” she said, according to the document.

“It was a surprise birthday gift from one of his friends and they were from France. I did see them, I did meet them,” she said.

https://nypost.com/2019/08/19/jeffr...ee-12-year-old-french-girls-as-birthday-gift/

If he had gotten what he deserved when he was first prosecuted, he would never have gotten out of prison, and a lot of victims would have been spared.

The problem I have with this is, it is third hand. We have someone who is suing Epstein (estate) and thus has a financial interest in making him look bad; who is claiming that he (Epstein) said some 12 year old girls were flown in from France as a birthday gift. It is not clear from what is in the article that any sexual contact was made. It is clear that the interviewee although she says she saw the girl(s) has no direct knowledge of their nationality or ages nor what activities they may have participated in. (I assume the TV episode of SVU was based on this and not vice versa?)

I think we can agree that Epstein was a sexual predator he was convicted as such. I think we need to be careful about accepting 'rumour' as fact.

Whilst I am in a picky mood;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Royal_Air_Force_operations

The RAF still has some active operations going on. Maybe he should sign up for a tour or two, as treatment for that sweat thing.

HRH Andrew Windsor was a Navy flier, there are some things which I think no navy pilot should be forced to endure no matter how great their sins!
 
What I find interesting about this is the mention up thread (I can't find the post to quote at present) that Epstein's mansion had CCTV to record activities, and there are also a number of photos emerging. This has an aura of being a blackmail scam. It appears that Epstein procured underage girls and encouraged them to have sex with famous / rich / powerful men. Now this may have been him just being friendly and a good host and assuming that all men were like him and would find teen age women attractive and want to have sex with them if the opportunity arose. However I suspect it gave Epstein a certain edge in negotiations, a certain ability to fix things. If I was a CT I would wonder if he had connections with any intelligence organisation.
 
The other thing I find interesting is the whole issue of the plea deal being subject to negation. Does this not fall foul of double jeopardy? Does this not threaten a whole lot of other plea deals; are victims necessarily asked to consent? If people feel that their plea deal can be pulled at some future date after they have done their time and be retried will they be less willing to do a deal? How fair a retrial can you get; 'last time you pleaded guilty to sexual assault and accepted the facts; now you plead not guilty when the facts you accepted as true show you committed a rape'?
 
Underage girls can't be prostitutes because they can't give consent. There is no doubt that Epstein manipulated and abused numerous young girls who were emotionally and financially vulnerable. That's rape.

Here's the guy you're defending:

https://nypost.com/2019/08/19/jeffr...ee-12-year-old-french-girls-as-birthday-gift/

If he had gotten what he deserved when he was first prosecuted, he would never have gotten out of prison, and a lot of victims would have been spared.



So says Virginia Guiffre.

Jeffrey Epstein once had three 12-year-old girls from poor families flown in from France as a sick birthday present for himself, according to newly unearthed court documents.

Virginia Giuffre — who has claimed Epstein and his gal pal Ghislaine Maxwell coerced her into being a “sex slave” when she was 15 — said in court papers that the girls who were flown in were molested by the financier and returned to France the following day.

According to other papers, she is documented as being 17 when she left her previous employment so she might be gilding the lily when she now claims she was groomed by Epstein when she was 15. Good luck to her in her attempt to win compo from Epstein and Maxwell. However, I can't help feeling sceptical about her claims she was held as a 'slave'. Really? So when she arrived at Heathrow (presumably well into her early 20's) how come she didn't break free and claim asylum? One suspects she rather enjoyed the glamour of meeting a then handsome prince for a handsome sum of money.

Even if Epstein really was a sexually active paedophile (and the youngest prostitute for whom he was convicted was fourteen so likely not physiologically a real prepubescent child) how does that incriminate Prince Andrew?

So if Andrew had sex with various young ladies and none were underage in the jurisprudence it took place and he was unaware they were paid prostitutes, then this might be titillating for the prurient interests of the tabloid readership and sell papers by the salacious headlines of 'SEX - shouldn't be allowed - READ ALL ABOUT' a la News of the World ('No sex, please, we're British) but really what has he done wrong other than get his bollocks down as a single footloose and fancy free male?
 
I think you are missing a key part of Vixen's argument.


Who cares if 12 year olds are raped. It is sex and must be fun right? He only raped the girls and had fun with them before they became teenagers. It is not like he killed them or anything bad.

Any evidence there were 12-year-old girls other than claims by Virginia Roberts/Guiffre?

There is zero evidence Prince Andrew frolicked with 12-yr-old girls or knew Epstein did.
 
The problem I have with this is, it is third hand. We have someone who is suing Epstein (estate) and thus has a financial interest in making him look bad; who is claiming that he (Epstein) said some 12 year old girls were flown in from France as a birthday gift. It is not clear from what is in the article that any sexual contact was made. It is clear that the interviewee although she says she saw the girl(s) has no direct knowledge of their nationality or ages nor what activities they may have participated in. (I assume the TV episode of SVU was based on this and not vice versa?)

People should be very careful about accepting the claims made in civil lawsuits without any proof at all, especially since they are suing someone who is dead. Even in the best of times his estate is a worse position to defend him than he would be himself.

Again, one of the plaintiffs lawyers described him as "the most prolific pedophile in history" which is obviously not true. Yet such statements are made to the media and published without any kind of proof, as if the claims made by his alleged victims and their lawyers are to treated as inherintly trustworthy and reliable even-though they have an obvious incentive to grossly exaggerate his conduct without much risk.
 
Last edited:
Nope. Prostitution is illegal for under 18 in the UK.

Clearly whoever paid her to have sex with someone else committed a crime, (and I think this would be a crime in England whatever the age of the prostitute), but if the client had no knowledge that she was paid to consent, and she was over 16 and consented to sex I am not sure the sex act itself was criminal.

Now I am not a man so I cannot be sure how men think when it comes to sex; but I suspect most people would not believe that some young and pretty teenager would fly over to London just to jump into bed with an elderly prince. Americans who do that sort of thing go for younger and more marriageable princes. So Andrew should have had a sense of something being odd if it happened.
 
I'm trying to remember the last time I stayed at a convicted criminal's house for four days just to honourably break off our friendship.

Most of us hear "billionaire paedophile" but some people hear "billionaire paedophile" Andy apparently falls into the latter group.

And anyway, who gets to be that rich without the odd skeleton in the closet? If one starts making such judgements what next? Does one have to stop hanging around with a billionaire because they've made their fortune from sweat shop child labour? Or because their grandfather sold weapons to Nazis? Who'd be left to wine and dine one?
 
Most of us hear "billionaire paedophile" but some people hear "billionaire paedophile" Andy apparently falls into the latter group.

And anyway, who gets to be that rich without the odd skeleton in the closet? If one starts making such judgements what next? Does one have to stop hanging around with a billionaire because they've made their fortune from sweat shop child labour? Or because their grandfather sold weapons to Nazis? Who'd be left to wine and dine one?

Lawyers hear only: "billionaire"
 
That would suggest he had the job between 2003 and 2012. How would he know about events in the early 1990s other than by hearsay?

It seems reasonable that the Prince's social contacts would be documented to some degree by his Private Secretaries, part of their job would be to distinguish between contact from someone who randomly met their employer at a social gathering and a friend of a decade's standing inorder to prioritise access. They would also have been involved in assessing the PR impact of the original case, it seems highly unlikely that a review of Andrew and Epstein's friendship wouldn't have been carried out.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting to come across this passage from World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War by Max Brooks, after what's been going on with Prince Andrew this week:







How hard he has failed in that duty.
Yeah but that was really a summary of the propaganda during the war rather than ever being the truth.

The royals are exactly as you would expect, pampered, spoiled and do what they want when they want.
 
I think you are missing a key part of Vixen's argument.


Who cares if 12 year olds are raped. It is sex and must be fun right? He only raped the girls and had fun with them before they became teenagers. It is not like he killed them or anything bad.


This. Anyone who describes sex trafficking, whoever high class, as "Lots of sex and fun was had by all" needs some serious self examination time.
 

Back
Top Bottom