Groups

# Prince Andrew sex case claim denied

Buckingham Palace has denied "any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors" by Prince Andrew, after he was named in US court papers.

A woman named him in documents she filed in a Florida court over how prosecutors handled a case against financier Jeffrey Epstein.

She claims that between 1999 and 2002 she was forced by Epstein to have sex with the prince when she was a minor.

The palace said it would not comment in detail on the legal proceedings.

But a Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said: "This relates to long-standing and ongoing civil proceedings in the United States, to which the Duke of York is not a party.

"As such we would not comment on the detail. However, for the avoidance of doubt, any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue".

bbc.co.uk/new…629

Really please we are about to set up an enquiry to get to the heart of all these allegations into the higher echelons of society. As we know it will be totally transparent, totally independent and will identify those (if any) are responsible. Bit like the Hutton inquiry!

Anyone can accuse a famous (or non-famous) person, only the evidence should speak. I am yet to be convinced that the Queen would allow this type of carry on

.

Original Poster

davewave

Anyone can accuse a famous (or non-famous) person, only the evidence … Anyone can accuse a famous (or non-famous) person, only the evidence should speak. I am yet to be convinced that the Queen would allow this type of carry on.

Yeah I like the image there ha ha. As I say IF any claims are found to be true BUT remember that we are "innocent until proven guilty" not the other way round unless you read the Daily Mail then well er probably not.

In the words of Larry Grayson...." seems like a nice boy - shut that door"

smoke, fire and all that

How can these women possibly be taken seriously?

Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4?

Seriously, come on.

deeky

How can these women possibly be taken seriously? Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe … How can these women possibly be taken seriously? Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4?Seriously, come on.

Are they related to Homer?

deeky

How can these women possibly be taken seriously? Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe … How can these women possibly be taken seriously? Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4?Seriously, come on.

davewave

I object to that gif after recent developments X)

Original Poster

raptorcigs

smoke, fire and all that

Yeah thats what the police said about Jimmy "the BBC nonce" Saville the first 57 times

This is the problem now, everyone is a cynic. There are so many concerns:

Genuine abuse must still be taken very seriously.
Sexist 1970's behaviour being judged by 2015 moral standards.
The press reporting opinion as if it were fact.
The police briefing the press or TV, hoping this will generate a case.
Some of the alleged perpetrators can not be punished or defend themselves because they are dead, so the book gets thrown at others to make up for it.
The victims can not get justice as there is no adequate recompense for what has been endured.
Edited by: "Henvig" 2nd Jan 2015

Its plain to see he is some sort of deviant, after all you have to have some weird kinks going on to copulate with fergie.

harlzter

Its plain to see he is some sort of deviant, after all you have to have … Its plain to see he is some sort of deviant, after all you have to have some weird kinks going on to copulate with fergie.

I was finding the whole thing a bit hard to believe. Until you pointed that out X)

It's the new whiplash

Original Poster

grooty

It's the new whiplash

haha yeah that could really be the case, Bill Cosby has been paying people for years as did Michael Jackson just to keep rumours out the press.

davewave

deeky

I object to that gif after recent developments X)

It is not the worst "Festive Knit" seen in the last few weeks.

Disgusting!

They should be supporting UK technology.

Oh.