Osipi
Member - in Memoriam
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2008
- Messages
- 17,268
- City
- On the west side of North up from Back
- Country
- United States
Osipi, I missed this announcement from MPS, and it would be very helpful in the context of this thread. Would you be able to provide it please?
Thanks to Dman who originally posted this and with the information provided by Iluvbertie, its pretty evident that the MPS deemed the allegations submitted to them not enough to open a full investigation.
Also, this article posted by Madame Verseau explains more
https://www.channel4.com/news/exclu...ex-trafficking-of-girl-in-prince-andrew-photo
Without a case to prosecute in a UK court, Andrew remains "accused" with "allegations". These do not constitute evidence of wrongdoings.
By co-conspirator I simply mean named as one of her abusers/someone who Epstein procured girls for. Its also worth pointing out that an additional woman also named Andrew. That was revealed in the latest court documents that were unsealed, although she was in her early 20s.
In addition, ignorance of the law is not a defense in any system. Andrew cannot claim that because laws around consent are different in the UK, his alleged US crimes/abuse is thus ok. He would still be liable. AFAIK, Virginia's claims are about his actions in the US and US territories, not just in London.
And MPS did not clear Andrew of anything. They simply said that no investigation was underway as no crime report had been filed in their jurisdiction to investigate.
The least thing anyone is concerned about is whether or not Andrew cheated or was single.
And again, Andrew was NOT just a name in a contact book. Epstein and Andrew spent substantial time together. Epstein was invited to the private homes of the royals, threw parties for Andrew, and was considered a close friend. Almost every other contact Epstein had stopped associating with him after his conviction. Andrew did not, and in fact his ex-wife (who he still lives with and is close to) took money from him. In addition, not every Epstein contact has been named as an abuser. But Andrew has.
I am perplexed that people really continue to chose this hill to die on. And please save us all the grand speeches on innocence and all that. That pertains to the courts, not to public opinion. Who you are friends with and what people credibly accuse you of should and will have an impact on your social standing.
I'm just one person looking at all this from the outside and do not claim to actually know exactly what Andrew's involvement with Epstein included and I'm most certainly not in any position to deem what Andrew should or shouldn't do right now or join the firing squad aimed at him. Perhaps more real, concrete evidence will amass as these girls take their stories and cases to court against Epstein's estate and we'll have more credible information on Andrew's actual involvement in things. Until then, I'm not going to pass judgment on the man. The big word to me and remains the big word is "credible".
Last edited: