He knows the truth, says woman at centre of Prince Andrew sex scandal

[IAMHERE]

Who forced her to get a passport? Sounds like a tramp that wanted to say she'd been to England and would do anything to get there. Now she's looking for a second payday. 

 

[neeray]

1 hour ago, colinneil said:

Easy have a table at the side of the bed, bite the pizza, put it down, get down to business.

After you have finished, pick up the pizza and eat.

This sounds as gross as the "sweating" thing.

[Credo]

1 hour ago, TopDeadSenter said:

1st, I have no love for the royal family, and no respect for any of them other than the Queen and to a lesser extent William and Kate who do make an effort to play their roles. BUT, this Andrew is accused of shagging 17 year old tarts, not children like Saville and Harris etc. There is a massive distinction here. Andrew should have said straight off, yes I bonked shed loads of tarts, none were younger than 16, and yes it was awesome. End of story. But no, he lies and hides behind the royal institution. Hope he gets extradited to the US and banged up in a supermax with alot of unsavoury chaps. For lying and treating us like fools, not for having sex with social climbing hookers.

I suspect that with the relatively long-term relationship between Epstein and the Prince, this girl is not the only one that Andrew had sex with.   He may well have had sex with an underage girl or two...or more.    Knowing that this might be opening a Pandora's Box, he made a decision to deny it all, without knowing if anyone/anything else will come out.   

 

[cleopatra2]

45 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

she was not, 16 is the age of consent in the UK she was 17 when he banged her, in the USA the allegation she was under age in Florida was dismissed by a judge years ago. People seem to want her to have been under age.

In the UK the current age for commercial sex is 18. It is unlawful to procure a person under the age  18 for sex

 

See sexual offences act

[PremiumLane]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Andrew seems to be not exactly the nice guy.

But what I find interesting in that case and in others: Why did that woman go with him?

Did she love him? No

Was she physically forced to go with him? It seems not.

Could she have walked away? It seems yes.

Was it about money and being together with rich guys? It seems so. That's called prostitution. 

It seems Epstein and Andrew did what lots of guys would do if they would have enough money: Surround themselves with lots of pretty girls and f$#% them whenever they wanted. And I am sure all those girls will have received a nice compensation because otherwise they wouldn't have done it.

try actually reading about the case, the kinds of girls that were targeted and how they felt about it... would help

[brewsterbudgen]

20 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

Not in the UK 

For commercial sex or procuring persons the age of consent is presently 18. At the time of alleged offence the age was 21

see the relevant sections of the sexual offences act

Correct.  Under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which the UK and the US are signatories and which is international law, the legal age for providing commercial sexual services is 18.  It's astonishing how ignorant some are about the law.

[saengd]

2 hours ago, wgdanson said:

I've done it, it is possible. But don't get the pepperonies mixed up.

I confess I tried it years ago but I dripped melted mozzarella on her wobbly bits, she was not best pleased. Even years later she still gets nervous when I call Pizza Hut for a home delivery.

[Orton Rd]

21 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

In the UK the current age for commercial sex is 18. It is unlawful to procure a person under the age  18 for sex

 

See sexual offences act

It was not commercial sex, nobody has claimed he paid her for it, the claim of traffiking will go nowhere regarding him and she said he said about being forced to go with him relates to other people. If she was so disgusted and used why ask for a photo with him to show her mum? He was and is and idiot and a liar, but she is not much better.

[sammieuk1]

To see the Cayman club squirming is very very amusing get rid of the lot and slap 300m a year extra to the NHS on a bus????  

[SteveK]

31 minutes ago, Credo said:

I suspect that with the relatively long-term relationship between Epstein and the Prince, this girl is not the only one that Andrew had sex with.   He may well have had sex with an underage girl or two...or more.    Knowing that this might be opening a Pandora's Box, he made a decision to deny it all, without knowing if anyone/anything else will come out.   

 

This is exactly it. He's obviously a dirty old man and a compulsive liar, and I am sure that the Queen is aware of that already. She's no doubt bricking it that more young girls are going to come forward, because it could result in the downfall of the Royal Family. Let's hope so, because they are not needed in this day and age, they cost the UK taxpayer millions upon millions to keep them in Bentleys, caviar and champagne.

[brewsterbudgen]

11 minutes ago, SteveK said:

This is exactly it. He's obviously a dirty old man and a compulsive liar, and I am sure that the Queen is aware of that already. She's no doubt bricking it that more young girls are going to come forward, because it could result in the downfall of the Royal Family. Let's hope so, because they are not needed in this day and age, they cost the UK taxpayer millions upon millions to keep them in Bentleys, caviar and champagne.

Just wait until Epstein's videos are released!

[mercman24]

funny how they come out of the woodwork, many years later, another yank in my book, seeking her minute of fame, oh he did this, he did that, i could write a book about when i was in the music industry many moons ago, even at the local disco, young girls throwing themselves at the DJ, i am not condoning anything here before the holier than though lot chime up,(who know jack <deleted>)  it was a fact back in the day, 14 year olds dolling themselves up to look 18, to get into a club, it still goes on to this day. we even parked outside the local school once to try and indentify some, but they hid their face and ran away when they saw us

[cleopatra2]

31 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

It was not commercial sex, nobody has claimed he paid her for it, the claim of traffiking will go nowhere regarding him and she said he said about being forced to go with him relates to other people. If she was so disgusted and used why ask for a photo with him to show her mum? He was and is and idiot and a liar, but she is not much better.

The term payment is wide in scope

see section 47 to 51 of the relevant UK act

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/abuse-of-children-through-prostitution-and-pornography

[Old Croc]

41 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Correct.  Under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which the UK and the US are signatories and which is international law, the legal age for providing commercial sexual services is 18.  It's astonishing how ignorant some are about the law.

Firstly, the US, while a signatory, has not ratified it.

Secondly this:

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (commonly abbreviated as the CRC or UNCRC) is a human rights treaty which sets out the civil, political, economic, social, health and cultural rights of children. The Convention defines a child as any human being under the age of eighteen, unless the age of majority is attained earlier under national legislation

[Radar501]

Was it pizza, or was it sex on the night in question.   Either way, Andy can't get the taste of anchovies off his tongue.

[briansbiology]

a lot of hypocrisy here. normal people, many of them TV posters, regularly have these relationships with younger women. The only difference is the pretense that a royal family member is above such activity which just shows how stupid it is to elevate royal families like this.......in England...doesn't apply anywhere else..... where of course they are above reproach...ill stop now.....

[SteveK]

1 minute ago, briansbiology said:

a lot of hypocrisy here. normal people, many of them TV posters, regularly have these relationships with younger women. 

I very much doubt that any of the posters on here have relationships with 17-year old girls!

[briansbiology]

Just now, SteveK said:

I very much doubt that any of the posters on here have relationships with 17-year old girls!

because they ID all the girls? or perhaps you postulate they arent really girls. 

[SteveK]

Just now, briansbiology said:

because they ID all the girls? or perhaps you postulate they arent really girls. 

Because I would postulate that many posters here are in the age range of 50-70. I think they'd be looking for a girl aged 25-35, certainly not 17. Plus not everyone likes younger girls, my wife is 7 years older than me!

[wgdanson]

41 minutes ago, SteveK said:

He's obviously a dirty old man

He wasn't when the alleged sex took place. He was a hot blooded young man.

[briansbiology]

7 minutes ago, SteveK said:

Because I would postulate that many posters here are in the age range of 50-70. I think they'd be looking for a girl aged 25-35, certainly not 17. Plus not everyone likes younger girls, my wife is 7 years older than me!

Perhaps "many" was an onerous description. But TV definately has had some dodgy guys.....

My wife was also older. I cannot understand anyone who wants the company of girls younger than 25. given i have two two daughters 23 and 17 it makes me shudder. wonder if Andrew knew her age? also I know a few guys who found out the hard way that they had procured a 17 year old masquerading as 18 in the bar. sometimes its used to extort money.  doubt any TV posters would admit it but I am sure SOME have been duped or willingly went with 17 year olds. 

 

My original post was in relation to procurement of younger girls. Seems 18 is quite acceptable to many here and the difference between 17 and 18 is marginal and relative...

[Orton Rd]

39 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

The term payment is wide in scope

see section 47 to 51 of the relevant UK act

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/abuse-of-children-through-prostitution-and-pornography

Most women are prostitutes then, it's official.

[Orton Rd]

40 minutes ago, SteveK said:

I very much doubt that any of the posters on here have relationships with 17-year old girls!

One well known one posted recently he met his Mrs and went out with her when she was a schoolgirl. Pretty sure many more never bothered to check a bar girls ID for her age, it's not a club for sanctimonious saints, even though it may appear so at times when anything of a sexual nature is discussed.

[bendejo]

Give the man a break, will you?

Like he said he wants nothing, he wants nothing, he wants no quid pro quo!

 

Whoops!  I'm getting my scoundrels mixed up.

 

 

 

[yogi100]

2 hours ago, mercman24 said:

funny how they come out of the woodwork, many years later, another yank in my book, seeking her minute of fame, oh he did this, he did that, i could write a book about when i was in the music industry many moons ago, even at the local disco, young girls throwing themselves at the DJ, i am not condoning anything here before the holier than though lot chime up,(who know jack <deleted>)  it was a fact back in the day, 14 year olds dolling themselves up to look 18, to get into a club, it still goes on to this day. we even parked outside the local school once to try and indentify some, but they hid their face and ran away when they saw us

It's strange how these tarts wait till they're over the hill to come out with these stories.

 

And just as strange how they never recall having had sex with Joe Bloggs the postman or one of his pals from the pub or the local disco.

 

All about money.

[metempsychotic]

5 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Andrew seems to be not exactly the nice guy.

But what I find interesting in that case and in others: Why did that woman go with him?

Did she love him? No

Was she physically forced to go with him? It seems not.

Could she have walked away? It seems yes.

Was it about money and being together with rich guys? It seems so. That's called prostitution. 

It seems Epstein and Andrew did what lots of guys would do if they would have enough money: Surround themselves with lots of pretty girls and f$#% them whenever they wanted. And I am sure all those girls will have received a nice compensation because otherwise they wouldn't have done it.

She was 17. 

[observer90210]

So the Dukeness has a penchant for young, fresh but underage bunga-Bunga ?!....right,...the average Somchai or Tom-Dick and Harry cound have got away....but when one is a Duke, financed by the taxpayers, nothing is forgiven by the revered Daily Mail or The Sun !...so is it only the underaged girlies or would there be some underaged boys too who could come up in the investigations ?

[metempsychotic]

2 hours ago, SteveK said:

I very much doubt that any of the posters on here have relationships with 17-year old girls!

I am beginning to think they would were the opportunity to present itself. 

 

Certainly responses to  a number of threads on here in the past have suggested that opinions on underage sex are quite flexible. 

[Jane Dough]

Ooh...I wish I could fast forward to episode 61 of The Crown. 

 

Rooster 

[brewsterbudgen]

3 hours ago, Old Croc said:

Firstly, the US, while a signatory, has not ratified it.

Secondly this:

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (commonly abbreviated as the CRC or UNCRC) is a human rights treaty which sets out the civil, political, economic, social, health and cultural rights of children. The Convention defines a child as any human being under the age of eighteen, unless the age of majority is attained earlier under national legislation

The United States has ratified two of the optional protocols to the Convention, the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, and the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

 

The reason the US has not ratified the whole convention as it insists on being able to execute juveniles.