I have zero doubt. That’s why he’s hiding under his Mummy’s petticoats.
2 Likes
It’s not a trial Peter, Damages can certainly be awarded without him ever stepping inside a courtroom.
It’s the American way. She’s no chance of any representation unless some shyster lawyer thinks there’s a good chance of damages and he’ll get 40% of them.
1 Like
Here’s the thing: if you are a male in that age group and would happily put your arm around the waist of a female of that age, you are a nonce.
If you think the above is unacceptable, then Andrew Windsor is à nonce.
Simple!
8 Likes
I couldn’t agree more.
3 Likes
Trial by social media it is then!
Prince Andrew was 41 when the alleged incidents took place.
This was worth a quick read.
1 Like
That equates I believe to a ~24 year gap between the two.
I have to say that there was a 20 year gap between my Mother and Father (my Mother being the younger one) and they were totally devoted to each other bringing up 6 kids who have all gone on to be achievers in their lives so, other than the sleazy aspects in the Andrew Windsor case, its wrong to assume per se that an age gap is in some way wrong.
2 Likes
There’d be fewer sharp intakes of breath and less tutting if we were talking about a 54 year old man and a 30 year old women. Or even a 44 year old man and a 20 year old.
It’s never black&white but you’ve got to admit 17 is a bit close to the bone and it would be easy for three adults in their 40’s to manipulate her into thinking she was having a great time while subtly pressuring her into having sex with middle aged men.
2 Likes
I wasn’t there at the time… but if I recall correctly, my Mother was about 18 when she married my Father…
It’s all about circumstances though isn’t it?
We have a convicted sex offender, his female fixer, a divorced but wealthy individual with a title and a reputation for putting it about and an attractive 17 year old who is a long way from home.
We also have a string of unbelievable claims and excuses from Andrew.
Odds that this was kosher - 0% I reckon.
9 Likes
Oh, don’t get me wrong - my comments were not to support this dreadful affair or the various players in any way shape or form but to address the open comment about age difference in context.
The reverse also incurs controversy.
I won’t go into my antics as a young man & the Thursday “Grab-a Granny” evenings at a local night club but a friend did spend an evening with a lady of a certain age who had “Property of the USAF” tattooed on her back. The US air force left the nearby base in 1959.
It does put me in mind of this lovely song which also caused a stir on it’s release - Bobby Goldsboro - Summer (The First Time) - YouTube
2 Likes
Different times, different standards …
The Press used to call him “Randy Andy”; even the BBC took the opportunity presented by one of his relationships to show some of Koo Stark’s racier scenes …
Perhaps some of us remember Samantha Fox at 16. Pictures which would now be considered indecent images of a child, yet the Sun made quite a lot of her age.
Treat sex as a commodity and see the dark places it takes you.
1 Like
Just not good ones.
At 16 it’d be illegal now, probably was exploitation even back then but her parents pushed her into it a bit and Ms Fox was “theatrical” even then.
2 Likes
Yes, and the verdict probably wont be in his favour.
And odd that she won’t go for a criminal conviction if she has been so badly harmed.
Criminal cases are brought by the relevant authorities, not private individuals.
1 Like
So why aren’t they doing so if, as she says crimes have been committed?
Because she is not the one who gets to make that decision!!! There’s an ongoing FBI investigation and we will have Maxwell’s trial at some point. Andrew is not off the hook yet.
3 Likes