Prince Andrew

[AuroraSaab]

I would imagine it was less a case of throwing themselves at him and more a case of 'Go be nice to the gentlemen guests ...' .

Epstein was so rich he could pretty much buy any status and influence he wanted, which allowed him a cover of respectability and philanthropy to carry on as he pleased for a pretty long time. Bet there are still quite a few organisations and individuals sweating about stuff coming to light.

 

[winjim]

I'm not sure the comparison with girls throwing themselves at you are really relevant.There can't be many people who actually believe his lies,his car crash interview with Maitlis,paying off a girl.
He visited Epstein at his place in New York in 2010...two years after he'd been convicted of child sex offences.Going to a convicted sex offenders house to say your goodbyes surely isn't right.

That's true enough, I wasn't really commenting on the specific situation, more responding to the idea that sexual relationships between men in their forties and seventeen year old girls are fine, and normal, and not weird at all. That's regardless of any concerns around trafficking, coercion, abuse of power etc.

 

[BoldonLad]

I have nothing against your brother in law. I'm sure he's a completely reasonable fella and I'm certainly not accusing him of being a nonce. Prince Andrew on the other hand? Associates with paedos and sex traffickers. Being a nonce is not limited to paedophilia. Where I'm from, the term basically means you're a sex criminal. Which he is.

I lost my virginity at 14. I don't care whether you believe me or not.

I thought you had me on ignore? That was clearly rubbish.

He's a nonce. When I was 17, I was shagging other 17 year olds.

In which jurisdiction were you when aged 14?

Were you shagging (or, being shagged by) 14 year olds when you were 14, or, going for the more experienced person?

Sometimes, throwing stones is not a good idea.

 

[jowwy]

In which jurisdiction were you when aged 14?

Were you shagging (or, being shagged by) 14 year olds when you were 14, or, going for the more experienced person?

Sometimes, throwing stones is not a good idea.

The guy is full of shoot……….

 

[AndyRM]

In which jurisdiction were you when aged 14?

Were you shagging (or, being shagged by) 14 year olds when you were 14, or, going for the more experienced person?

Sometimes, throwing stones is not a good idea.

California, LA to be specific.

I was shagging another 14 year old. It was consensual and thoroughly enjoyable.

Our Welsh correspondent can come up with as many accusations as he'd like, but I know my life and how it's been lived. I also know how grammar and punctuation works.

 

[BoldonLad]

California, LA to be specific.

I was shagging another 14 year old. It was consensual and thoroughly enjoyable.

Our Welsh correspondent can come up with as many accusations as he'd like, but I know my life and how it's been lived. I also know how grammar and punctuation works.

I am sure it was, but, was it legal?

I was a slow starter, compared to your good self, but, even at 15, consensual, and by the shore of a rather cold Loch in Scotland, it was definitely enjoyable.

I am not commenting on "our Welsh correspondent", unlike some, I prefer not to feed him.

 

[PaulB]

I have nothing against your brother in law. I'm sure he's a completely reasonable fella and I'm certainly not accusing him of being a nonce. Prince Andrew on the other hand? Associates with paedos and sex traffickers. Being a nonce is not limited to paedophilia. Where I'm from, the term basically means you're a sex criminal. Which he is.

Talking of sex criminals, it's time to draw the portcullis when anyone appears to take an unhealthy interest in other people's grandchildren.

 

[BoldonLad]

Talking of sex criminals, it's time to draw the portcullis when anyone appears to take an unhealthy interest in other people's grandchildren.

Unhealthy is in the eye of the beholder.

Personally, I think it "unhealthy" to coach children to chant obscenities at a football match (or, anywhere else for that matter), but, some people clearly find it acceptable. Funny old world.

 

[jowwy]

So lets get this right….some clown has just admitted to under age sex with a 14yr old and hes calling Prince Andrew a nonce

You could not make this shoot up

 

[AndyRM]

I am sure it was, but, was it legal?

I was a slow starter, compared to your good self, but, even at 15, consensual, and by the shore of a rather cold Loch in Scotland, it was definitely enjoyable.

I am not commenting on "our Welsh correspondent", unlike some, I prefer not to feed him.

Yup.

At the time anyway.

 

[AndyRM]

So lets get this right….some clown has just admitted to under age sex with a 14yr old and hes calling Prince Andrew a nonce

You could not make this shoot up

A middle aged man has sex with a teenager.

Two 14 year olds have sex.

And I'm the nonce in this scenario? Get a grip.

 

[theclaud]

If we want to get specific and technical, Giuffre was 17 when Andrew is alleged to have been involved with her. This makes Andrew an ephebophile (post pubescent) as opposed to the more popular paedophile (pre-pubescent).

Luckily the handy term 'nonce' makes these technicalities largely redundant.

 

[matticus]

Only one of us is treating sexual abuse seriously here, and it isn't you.

Utter bollox. Please don't put offensive words in my mouth.
Just because I don't toe your party line on every aspect of this case?
Pathetic.

 

[theclaud]

Utter bollox. Please don't put offensive words in my mouth.
Just because I don't toe your party line on every aspect of this case?
Pathetic.

'Two wrongs'.

 

[slowmotion]

As people are affecting to be so interested in the letter of the law (as if it actually applies to royals), it's is a strict liability offence, as I've had occasion to remind @slowmotion before. The cultivated credulousness of several commentators aside, it's not dependent on the punter/rapist knowing that the person supplied by the supplier/pimp has been trafficked (it's ridiculous to believe he didn't know, but we can leave that for the moment). The more likely legal loophole is that didn't pay for it, because he's belongs to the class of people who don't pay for anything.

I'm sorry TC but could you elaborate? Which crime is a strict liability offense? Having paid sex with someone who has been trafficked (whether or not you knew about the trafficking)? If you didn't pay, would the legal position be different, all other conditions being the same?
I'm genuinely confused.