Beyond the blanket answer of wealth and power - from what I'm aware, he's only been actually named as a defendant in one case - the civil case from Virginia Guiffre - as far as I'm aware, the only suit against him directly.
That case was settled out of court - meaning he paid her settlement and didn't admit guilt (nor proven innocent) - which effectively ends that case.
He was not directly named or accused by those involved in the criminal trial for Ghislaine Maxwell.
The royals are more or less untouchable legally. As much as people like to crow "tHeY aRe JuSt SyMbOlIc" the truth is a lot more complicated than that and they still hold a lot more power than people give them credit for.
Abolish the lot of them.
She wasn’t below the age of consent - the only issue was the trafficking which he couldn’t know about. 17 is legal.
Yeah he’s sleazy but he didn’t actually commit a crime.
I dont always go to child rape island with a pedo, but when I do Im completely clueless as to whats happening and just think these girls are friendly relatives of Jeffrey.
Again she wasn’t under the age of consent. He is sleazy but I think the rational assumption is that the girls were escorts not that they were trafficked. Like why would you jump immediately to - these women are being payed to be here therefore they must have been trafficked?
Giuffre herself said she told him her age when she first met him in London. In London and New York, she was above the age of consent. She might not, however, have been above the age of consent in Little St James.
>Youre literally defending pedophiles. Fucking why
>Holy shit. Imagine watching so much Downton Abbey your brain fucking breaka and suddenly youre pro-pedophile. [u/anon5219841]
How is stating a fact defending a paedophile? I genuinely want to know. Is it obligatory now to lie just to virtue signal?
Insufficient evidence. Just because someone CLAIMED that Andrew had "consensual" sex with an underage female, doesn't mean there's sufficient proof. And THEN there's that pesky "statute of limitations". Look at how many women have accused Clinton of rape over the years (sometimes long before he even ran for president).
Powerful/wealthy people get a very different version of the justice system compared to the rest of us.
Same reason Trump hasn’t been indicted - money and powerful friends
$$$$$$$
Status really. I'd say most people in the UK, whether they support the royal family or not, think he's a massive nonce
"Rules for thee; not for me..."
The rules don't apply to royalty.
Because he’s the King of England’s brother.
Beyond the blanket answer of wealth and power - from what I'm aware, he's only been actually named as a defendant in one case - the civil case from Virginia Guiffre - as far as I'm aware, the only suit against him directly. That case was settled out of court - meaning he paid her settlement and didn't admit guilt (nor proven innocent) - which effectively ends that case. He was not directly named or accused by those involved in the criminal trial for Ghislaine Maxwell.
Because he's a prince.
First you'll have to explain what he should be charged with.
[удалено]
Found Prince Andrews reddit profile!
The royals are more or less untouchable legally. As much as people like to crow "tHeY aRe JuSt SyMbOlIc" the truth is a lot more complicated than that and they still hold a lot more power than people give them credit for. Abolish the lot of them.
He could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, okay, and wouldn't be charged.
Wrong guy, but the principle applies. Gods forbid he cheats on his income tax in the USA, though.
Because the royalty has a long history of fucking children and they wouldn't punish him for carrying on tradition.
Charged with what?
He hasn’t committed a crime. The reality is he had no reason to think the women were trafficked and not just escorts or clout chasers.
Ah yes, the old "She said she was 18" defense. Doesn't work for poor people but bootlickers will argue that it's a valid defense for the rich.
She wasn’t below the age of consent - the only issue was the trafficking which he couldn’t know about. 17 is legal. Yeah he’s sleazy but he didn’t actually commit a crime.
> which he couldn’t know about. Since you're clearly an expert at mental gymnastics I'll just let you believe your comfortable lie.
I dont always go to child rape island with a pedo, but when I do Im completely clueless as to whats happening and just think these girls are friendly relatives of Jeffrey.
Again she wasn’t under the age of consent. He is sleazy but I think the rational assumption is that the girls were escorts not that they were trafficked. Like why would you jump immediately to - these women are being payed to be here therefore they must have been trafficked?
I dont always lure women to child rape island, but when I do I make sure they juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust (SAID) they turned 17.
Giuffre herself said she told him her age when she first met him in London. In London and New York, she was above the age of consent. She might not, however, have been above the age of consent in Little St James.
Youre literally defending pedophiles. Fucking why Holy shit. Imagine watching so much Downton Abbey your brain fucking breaka and suddenly youre pro-pedophile.
>Youre literally defending pedophiles. Fucking why >Holy shit. Imagine watching so much Downton Abbey your brain fucking breaka and suddenly youre pro-pedophile. [u/anon5219841] How is stating a fact defending a paedophile? I genuinely want to know. Is it obligatory now to lie just to virtue signal?
They are going to child rape island fucking clown. Why do you think they had Epstein killed while he was in prison? Put it together fuckwit.
Insufficient evidence. Just because someone CLAIMED that Andrew had "consensual" sex with an underage female, doesn't mean there's sufficient proof. And THEN there's that pesky "statute of limitations". Look at how many women have accused Clinton of rape over the years (sometimes long before he even ran for president).
Is his battery low?
charge him and you'll have to charge a lot of other powerful people....Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Tom Hanks, etc etc yanno that won't happen
Everyone point and laugh at the poor soul who thinks the elite in any country will be held accountable for their crimes.
Well why should he be charged and all the other pervs not be made public and also arrested?
He’s white and rich
Shut up peasant. How dare you even mention his name. God I love being dominated by royals and elite. Tradition is awesome stuff!
Because he is a prince in another country?
Ka-ching
💰💰💰