Even a hooker can be assaulted and abused, and if she can't choose her clients she's being trafficked. For part of her time Giuffre was on Epstein's private island, completely dependent on him and unable to leave on her own. That's hardly consensual.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Split Thread Virginia Guiffre v Duke of York
- Thread starter Vixen
- Start date
Even a hooker can be assaulted and abused, and if she can't choose her clients she's being trafficked. For part of her time Giuffre was on Epstein's private island, completely dependent on him and unable to leave on her own. That's hardly consensual.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
Very well put
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
Even in this situation, she was seventeen & in a foreign country, did she have the resources for accommodation & return flights if she'd been kicked out? Was Epstein holding her passport? She was still in a position of dependence on them.
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 36,762
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Kaboooom!!! Superbly put!
There is a certain member here whom I wish we could get to understand this; that just because girls are sex workers does not mean it is something fell into willingly - especially the younger/under age ones
Last edited:
Sadly we are only - as a society - starting to understand the perniciousness of “grooming” people, it feels as if we are on the cusp of a sea-change. Akin to when reasonable people started to realise that a rape victim wasn’t “asking for it” because they were wearing a miniskirt with a crop top.
And it isn’t something that only effects sex-workers or even only young people.
junkshop
Otto's Favourite
Prince Andrew denies being co-conspirator of Jeffrey Epstein
Now he 'demands' a trial, after all of his attempts to wriggle out of a trial have been denied. How very brave and principled.
the Guardian said:
Now he 'demands' a trial, after all of his attempts to wriggle out of a trial have been denied. How very brave and principled.
Last edited:
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
He should be careful what he wishes for!
This is nothing more than posturing as he is desperate, and has run out of options.
Saying he demands a trial is just a bluff; an attempt to influence the judge by giving the impression that if he goes to trial, he expects to win and why would be risk a trial if he wasn't entirely innocent and expected to lose.
In any case, there some things that will go against him.
1. That photograph for a start - it clearly shows him with Giuffre, Maxwell, and Epstein. He has already gone on record that he has no memory of the photo being taken and no memory of ever meeting Giuffre, therefore he has already ruled himself out of any way to deny meeting her. Meanwhile Giuffre remembers it well.
2. Andrew denies going to "Tramp Nightclub" with Giuffre, but there is a (who is willing to testify) that she saw Andrew in "Tramp Nightclub" with a teenage girl who was almost certainly Giuffre.
This is nothing more than posturing as he is desperate, and has run out of options.
Saying he demands a trial is just a bluff; an attempt to influence the judge by giving the impression that if he goes to trial, he expects to win and why would be risk a trial if he wasn't entirely innocent and expected to lose.
In any case, there some things that will go against him.
1. That photograph for a start - it clearly shows him with Giuffre, Maxwell, and Epstein. He has already gone on record that he has no memory of the photo being taken and no memory of ever meeting Giuffre, therefore he has already ruled himself out of any way to deny meeting her. Meanwhile Giuffre remembers it well.
2. Andrew denies going to "Tramp Nightclub" with Giuffre, but there is a (who is willing to testify) that she saw Andrew in "Tramp Nightclub" with a teenage girl who was almost certainly Giuffre.
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,454
It's what people working in UK tabloid newspapers colourfully refer to as a "reverse ferret" - reversing your prior stance on an issue (usually either because new information has come to light contradicting/negating that prior stance, or because you have been mandated to abandon that prior stance), in an effort to dupe people into thinking that your new, contrary stance was always your preferred position.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
It fits, because the ferret is related to the weasel. It's polecats all the way down!
junkshop
Otto's Favourite
Come on, now, that's unfair. While these beasties are undeniably predators, none of them are parasites.
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 7,686
There is no smiley face, so I'm not sure if you are joking. If not, he is not demanding a trial. He is demanding that the trial be by jury rather than by judge.
junkshop
Otto's Favourite
I'm not joking, but I am ridiculing his blatant volte face. His failed arguments (particularly the most recent) weren't about the form a trial should take, but rather that he shouldn't be facing trial at all.
Now that the trial is an inevitability the entitled* little **** is trying to make out that that's what he wanted all along.
*and titled, and ennobled (for now, at least)
Last edited:
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 7,686
I'm not joking, but I am ridiculing his blatant volte face. His failed arguments (particularly the most recent) weren't about the form a trial should take, but rather that he shouldn't be facing trial at all.
Now that the trial is an inevitability the entitled* little **** is trying to make out that that's what he wanted all along.
*and titled, and ennobled (for now, at least)
The defendant gets to choose whether the trial will be decided by a jury or by a judge. The defendant files a demand by trial of one or the other. What you quoted is standard language to say you choose a jury rather than a judge. The article in the link doesn't say anything about him wanting a trial all along. Nor can I find any other such documented statements.
I think you are misinterpreting the legal use of the terms and language. It is rather improbable that he or his attorneys would demand a trial when the court has already ordered a trial. What you quoted is certainly not a demand for a trial and the article link also makes no suggestion and I find no evidence supporting such a rather unlikely position.
junkshop
Otto's Favourite
I am trying to get to grips with this case. Does Giuffre allege that Windsor forced himself upon her? I realise this question is likely inflammatory, but it seems to me to be pivotal.
Did she "boast" having sex with a prince?
Did she "boast" having sex with a prince?
Last edited:
timhau
NWO Litter Technician
Her claim is that she was manipulated and trafficked by skilled predators. Andrew didn't have to "force himself" on her to take advantage of her vulnerability as a 17-year-old.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/12/worl...-hearing-explainer-update-cmd-intl/index.html
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
In terms of "physical force", no, but "physical force" is not the only force that counts.
To relate this in terms you might better understand, on an unrelated case in this section of the forum, do you think the NZ Police "forced" Guy Wallace to change his statement about the ketch?
Note: Not wishing to go off topic, just using an example I know Samson will understand.
Last edited:
To stay on topic, I do have a propensity to look for mitigation where human frailty is apparent.
I think the Wallace question is interesting, but not germaine here.
(As an aside, lets get the Sounds thread running as we await the appeal.)