I very much doubt the British Taxpayer or the Royal Family will cough up to pay Andy's legal bills or the out of court settlement if that's where all this is leading to? He has his own assets and will be required to use them. He'll be due for a state pension so he can live on that in the future like the rest of us.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt

True, but I wonder where that originally came from? If it's from profits gained by his association with Epstein then that is irony at it's most perverse.

Edited by Slimey Toad (07 Jan 2022 10.10am)

Again, read the story

Giuffre did not raise a case initially. There was a truly awful botched FBI case, leading to Giuffre the following year taking a civil case.

Lead police detective Joseph Recarey asserted that the state prosecutors were at first eager to pursue criminal action against Epstein, but that "everything took a turn" when lawyer Alan Dershowitz got involved.[39] Krischer then decided to take the unusual action of turning Epstein's case over to a grand jury, and then presented testimony from only one girl. Epstein's legal team aggressively sought concessions and prolonged the process when negotiating a plea deal with Alex Acosta.[40] Acosta, who described the tactics of Epstein's lawyers as a "year-long assault on the prosecution and prosecutors", eventually agreed to sign a controversial non-prosecution agreement in 2008, which was done without informing the victims,[40] later determined to be in violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act.[41]

This lady appears to have been very brave after what appears to have been a year from hell

The traffickers and abusers deserve whatever is coming to them

Regarding UK sex rings, nobody on here said they shouldn’t be pursued with vigour. Only that anyone attempting to take the law into their own hands is likely to lead to justice not being done by perverting its course.

'They took photographs of the items, but left them at the residence as they did not have the warrant to remove them.'

How stunningly incompetent is that?

You turn up without a warrant for removal....bother to use a saw to open a safe....and then leave them unsecured....I'm speechless.

Are they raiding the US equivalence of Poundland for special agents nowadays?

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Jan 2022 3.45pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Even aside from how suspect that is, it sounds like there was a staggering amount of categorised 'content' throughout the property, with clear indications of what some of it related to.

And I wonder what it means that some items were 'already' sealed with evidence tape. Possibly either from his 2005 arrest? (in which case why was it sealed, had it not been looked at), or perhaps something of a sick joke from Epstein himself to use 'evidence tape' on compromising material that he had on others.

Edited by BlueJay (07 Jan 2022 5.56pm)

Also shows a staggering amount of hubris that he kept this material at his own property.

I think it comes down to how much Andrew knew about in terms of the situation he was in....As in these girls were trafficked and did he know Epistein dealt in underage girls....Even if he knew I should think plausible deniability provides him with wiggle room.

But certainly Andrew being interested in shagging young and attractive girls attracted to his celebrity and money is about as surprising as fat people liking cake. Above age and willing it just becomes an embarrassing personal matter for him if we all find out.

It smells worse than last week's leftovers....Because Andrew is surrounded by advisers who must have looked into Epstein.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Jan 2022 7.25pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

He was around Epstein enough that it makes me wonder what else went on. As you say though we can only go on what is known (and as others add, what that means legally might rely on a few factors).

I tend to think that he's a little bit unlucky to have become the sole focus of this. The interview he did was disastrous, and just intensified the spotlight on him. It also, in my view, increased the likelihood of him becoming the convenient fall guy for all of the other rich and powerful types that no doubt did worse by several magnitudes. It created the perception that something is being done as result of Epstein's depravity, when really I suspect the worst of the worst have got away with it.

Mmmm....a bit disappointing.

You don't seem to understand the difference between a general point and an individualised one.

I would have thought the words, 'a girl' would have made that plain.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Jan 2022 8.01pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

So no 14 or 15 year old girls or boys ever had sex.
Not every under the age of consent person is forced to.
This reads from many that they never got the urge until they were 27.