And Andrew still hung out with him regularly post conviction….
Prince Andrew not served papers as they were handed to his police security.
- Thread starter Tefal
- Start date
And Andrew still hung out with him regularly post conviction….
That's what makes you say he is complicit in child rape? Dear lord, I hope you don't ever serve on a jury.
But you are treating Prince Andrew and Epstein as if they were the same person... Andrew is not guilty of Epstein's crimes because they were friends, surely?
So everyone that hung out with him post conviction is a child rapist or trafficked in minors?
Legally speaking no, but it paints a pretty damning picture, especialy in a civil case where things are taken on balance of probability rather than the strict proof in a criminal trial !
Permabanned
His father was a good friend of Saville though so it may well run in the family.
Man of Honour
You're projecting. You're the one claiming that a woman is a child, a consensual flight from the USA to the UK is trafficking and consensual sex is rape. You'd be hard pressed to trivialise those things much further than you are doing.
Ignoring the power disparities and referring to a 17 year old as a woman when legally they are still a child is further concerning.
Don
Soldato
Just what I was thinking.
Man of Honour
An adult who is a legal minor is not a child. Some people pretend that's true for political reasons, but it's not.
You're making no distinction between consensual sex with an adult who was visiting from another country and raping children who have been kidnapped and taken to another country. You're "concerned" about people who are able to understand the difference between the two. You should be concerned about your own inability to do so.
Soldato
And "legally" she was above the age of consent in the respective locations at the respective times.
Also, they are not physically a child at that age so the "nonce" tag is incorrect regardless of your own thoughts on sex with a 17 year old.
If you are looking to create a point, it's far more effective to do it calmly and rationally rather than using emotionally charged language to help strengthen it. If you need to do that then perhaps your point is not strong enough to stand on its own merits.
Soldato
I rest my case...
Soldato
I am by far a legal expert in any of this, but could it mean, that instead of suing, the US criminal justice system could still have it within their power to press charges? Given that to me that document outlines a settled case against Andrew.
Should say to the USA that we will give them Andrew if they give us Sacoolas
Stay classy
Soldato
And here is where she set the precedent, and also set a value on the abuse she suffered.
The issue here is the wording says any 'US Legal action', so he could still be tried in the UK, not sure how that would work though, she was 17, which is above the legal age of consent in the UK and shes not British so not sure how the legal side of that would work..
No doubt if she was given a large enough sum she would go quiet though, she's already proven that before..
Soldato
Just me that is thinking she could have taken Epstein for so much more?
Given the abuse and mistreatment she's been through from such an early age, and her potential mental vulnerability beforehand, it doesn't take much to think she's easily manipulated into certain actions - such as accepting the settlement. It is a shame she didn't see it through, as so far she's the only one who has kept the crimes in the public eye.