But Epstein was convicted of sex trafficking and was awaiting another trial, as is Ghislaine Maxwell yet we haven't heard from any of those girls either. I wonder if they have been called as witnesses or something so can't speak out until after her trial? Could be because they are still in the US and she is in Australia. I do worry that VG s jeopardising GM's trial, and she'll get off because her lawyers say she can't get a fair trial because of the VG allegations and the publicity.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
It blows mind that people on this thread still defend him or place blame on the girls for what happened
I think Andrew was fully aware of where these girls came from but didn't give 2 shits because his ego is that big and he thought nothing would ever happen to him, and he's being proven right on that front.
Juat FYI the conviction rate for sex crimes against women is disgustingly low, especially when there's a power imbalance involved and some of the comments on here are the reason why victims never come forward. I said it before - I completely believe Virginia's account of what happened to her and she is brave to go on public record to bring her claims forward.
I think Andrew was fully aware of where these girls came from but didn't give 2 shits because his ego is that big and he thought nothing would ever happen to him, and he's being proven right on that front.
Juat FYI the conviction rate for sex crimes against women is disgustingly low, especially when there's a power imbalance involved and some of the comments on here are the reason why victims never come forward. I said it before - I completely believe Virginia's account of what happened to her and she is brave to go on public record to bring her claims forward.
Last edited:
You raise a very good point about the witness aspect!
And yes, the PA situation could impact the fairness of the trial given it plays out in the public.
I didn't see anyone defending PA? And also not putting blame on the girls?
We can only speculate how aware PA was regarding the trafficking and just because I believe he might have been naive and didn't know the full nature of the situation doesn't mean I am defending him.
I think he embarrassed the UK and his family as well.
I am not defending him, i too believe her.
The 90's and 00's were a funny time when people didn't believe white girls could be trafficked and coerced. Which is another reason the Rotherham scandal was able to happen.
Police weren't interested in sex crimes then, I am sure it was only around that time marital rape become a crime. It was the time of "asking for it" and sympathy only for the dragged down an alley and raped.
I believe her. I don't think Andrew ever for a moment wondered why all these pretty young girls were floating around offering all sorts - or if he did he thought it was because either they thought he and other powerful men were irresistible ( 
) or that the girls were "no better than they should be" - remember that phrase?? - and therefore worthless.
) or that the girls were "no better than they should be" - remember that phrase?? - and therefore worthless.Nobody is defending Prince Andrew, even it seems his own nephew Prince William has disowned him judging by the weekend press. Andrew was at minimum guilty of a major error of judgement.
However it seems a bit strange that VG went straight for a member of a foreign royal family while completing ignoring the association of former US President Bill Clinton with Epstein or US billionaire Bill Gates with Epstein? Now both Clinton and Gates may be completely innocent of any wrongdoing and simply went to Epstein's private island or Florida estate and New York mansion or flew on his private plane merely for social dinners and business discussions (as indeed may Andrew) but it does seem a bit odd
Last edited:
Maybe she didn't say anything about bill Gates or bill Clinton because theyre not the ones she was trafficed to have sex with?! I can't
Placing blame on the victim or making up excuses for why he wouldn't realise something fishy was going on is by default relieving the blame on Andrew.
But surely Andrew wasn't the only person she had to have sex with, and it seems that all of the people that were invited by Epstein were well-known enough to be identified.
We don't know what happened to her during that time and in most sex trafficking cases the likely hood is she was made to have sex with others but that doesn't make her story about Andrew less believable.
So very many other influential & rich people, not discussed or held to account.. so far.
Andrew is an arrogant pompous liability to the RF, he ignored sound advice about many matters including Epstein & should he have broken any criminal law or be found guilty in a civil case, then he is to be held accountable for that. The process of the law grinds slowly & surely, & must be seen to be observed. No matter how much of a sleezy git Andrew seems to be, & any charges against him are to be based upon sound law, tried in court & he is innocent until proven guilty.
He is also a very convenient distraction, a smokin’ mirror, & useful dupe for the very many who are deeply entrenched in the stinking mire of paedophilia, people trafficking & guilty of worse than hanging out with Epstein - all looking to get out of this with squeaky clean reputations & fortunes intact.
Andrew is a distraction.
I agree. He simply didn't care enough to think about it. I suspect he still doesn't care- only in as much as its ruining his chances of getting back in as a working Royal. His first thought on his father's death was to get a uniform made up and stick his face in front of the cameras.I believe her. I don't think Andrew ever for a moment wondered why all these pretty young girls were floating around offering all sorts - or if he did he thought it was because either they thought he and other powerful men were irresistible (
I didn't say it made the story with PA less believable, I just said it is odd that she only named him.
Maybe its the only one she can prove she has been around because of the picture? I've never thought about that aspect before of him being the only person she's named, but that could be why.
I suspect one of the reasons he has been highlighted on this is that he is unbelieveably stupid whereas the others mentioned are rich and powerful because they have more than 2 braincells to rub together and have pulled strings to keep their noses clean. He is also a pretty unpleasant person by all accounts. Not only has he pissed off anyone who could possibly defend or protect him (apart from his equally shady ex wife) but his only ' friends' are people who only were using him for access to the RF and they have now disappeared. No one who has had any dealings with him, including his staff are going out of their way to defend him. As an hereditary monarch, HM has a duty to at least try and ensure her children are decent human beings, as she expects to inflict them on us without question. She and Philip have singularly failed with Andrew and arguably, Charles.
You named two famous people who I hope she didn't name because she wasn't trafficked to. Well never know why she hasn't named people - they could be dead or she possibly did a deal with authorities.
Assuming she's naming Andrew for attention is undermining her story and again my earlier point of defending him by the way
Yes, I thought that this could be a possibility.
This photo is very strange. Why take a photo like this? It is almost as if Maxwell wanted to have something to be able to incriminate him (and possibly others).
I more cynical thought is that she might have approached other people involved privately and they paid her.
I dont think you can hold the parents accountable for everything their children do.
Both Andrew and Charles were old enough to think for themselves when they displayed questionable behaviour
True but she has managed to bring up an extremely spoilt son. He has all the hallmarks of someone who has never ever been pulled up on his behaviour.
Completely agree. I really think the Queen was a terrible parent and I don't get why people are so funny about criticising her. Her parenting failures are inflicted on the rest of us. However dumb we think the likes of Brooklyn Beckham are, nobody is making them head of state (or a better comparison might be putting him in Manchester United first team).
In more entertaining (pretend) Royal news have you seen the pictures of Elizabeth Debicki and Dominic West in The Crown? She looks spot on, but West looks like a smug git, which, for all Charles' faults, Im not sure he was/is!
Chas and Di
Chas and Di
He's too chubby fot Charles in face
- Status