Oh and as always Epstein was not the most despicable "friend" the royal family has and has had in recent times.
I disagree, partly. It is for his behaviour, though as much for being found out as for what he did. And while the punishment may not matter to the man in the street, I'm certain it matters an awful lot to him.This has nothing to do with punishing the Duke of York for his past behaviour with friends such as Epstein. And note he is STILL the Duke of York, he just won't "use" that title. This is to do with the jealousy of one brother for another. This is a "punishment" which only means anything to their family and sycophants, sorry friends. This is about who has to bow to whom when first meeting, who gets announced first, who gets to sit where at the table, who gets mentioned in the CofE prayers and so on. It reminds me of that glorious moment in my lifetime when we might have have become a republic and it was floated that the old Queen could restore "HRH" to the King's first wife after she had died as a means of pacifying the population as the royal family couldn't see what all the fuss was about that someone without a HRH had died, as if that meant anything to anyone but their dysfunctional family. The royal family only does what they want, when they want for their own motives, if that can be spun and framed as if it is a noble duty it will be.
I disagree, partly. It is for his behaviour, though as much for being found out as for what he did. And while the punishment may not matter to the man in the street, I'm certain it matters an awful lot to him.
Fixed that for you. It's like Philip's mistresses and many other women over the years; it's the lower classes that aren't to know.In the upper classes, being found out by the lower classes is the only crime.
Where did that £12 million come from? And why would you pay that much if you hadn't done anything? And how is he paying for his residence?
![]()
York MP calls on royal family to explain source of £12m Virginia Giuffre payment
Rachael Maskell says ‘a lot of clarity’ needed over how Prince Andrew funded settlement of sexual abuse casewww.theguardian.com
Paying people off to go away has always been the way. We the taxpayers funded Prince Andrew's £12m. Prince Charles himself was a close friend of Jimmy Savile and Rev. Ball. He likely can't see what the fuss is about. They are all degenerate incl. the ghastly Sarah Ferguson. William has his eye on the crown so has to be super proper and discreet.Where did that £12 million come from? And why would you pay that much if you hadn't done anything? And how is he paying for his residence?
![]()
York MP calls on royal family to explain source of £12m Virginia Giuffre payment
Rachael Maskell says ‘a lot of clarity’ needed over how Prince Andrew funded settlement of sexual abuse casewww.theguardian.com
So you're denying the abuse took place?Plus perfect timing on that lawsuit.
Alan Dershowitz wasn't budging. The window for the New York Child Victim's Act was about to close. Time to drag Andrew through the mud as hard as possible months before the Queen's Platinum Jubilee. Apparently he wanted to fight it but he didn't have much of a say.
Quite a lot actually, mostly educational.By the way what did Virginia's "anti-sex trafficking" charity actually do?
I’m skeptical they ever had sex. Abuse? Was she even presented to him as a “sex slave” as she later styled herself? She was legal in the U.K. Given reports about Andrew’s personal life I’m not discounting that the encounter took place. But I struggle to accept it given her and her lawyers’ history of flipflopping and fabrications.So you're denying the abuse took place?
Of course.Quite a lot actually, mostly educational.
Andrew should sue his lawyer for that amount there should be a NDA.
I may have missed something, but I am missing what Andrew did that was scandalous. He had entirely legal sex (allegedly) with a younger woman. This is nothing new*. He didn't pay her, force her etc. There is no evidence that he knew that she was forced, paid, etc. to do so. She then extorted money from him, (and many others). It seems entirely reasonable that he should alert his protection officer he was being blackmailed.Andrew dragged himself through the mud. Others just showed how dirty he was.
I’m skeptical they ever had sex. Abuse? Was she even presented to him as a “sex slave” as she later styled herself? She was legal in the U.K. Given reports about Andrew’s personal life I’m not discounting that the encounter took place. But I struggle to accept it given her and her lawyers’ history of flipflopping and fabrications.
To this day we still have no original of that photo. She claimed in a draft of her memoir that she had sex with Andrew a fourth time in New Mexico (p. 105), then retracted it in her Nov 2016 deposition, claiming Sharon Churcher mistakenly put the story in her article. The memoir deserve a thread of its own. Her lawyers eventually admitted her "memoirs" were a work of fiction she wrote "as an act of empowerment" (doc 281, p. 60) even though she had been actively trying profit off of it for years. On top off all of that, emails between Virginia and Churcher seem to suggest Churcher coached her on how to present the Andrew allegations (p. 8). I am wondering what Churcher revealed in her 2021 deposition that they were so desperate to keep a secret.
Of course.