It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Prince Andrew named in Pedophile case....Royal Family becoming EXPOSED!!!

page: 16
71
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

You do not address your question at me

My point being that threats and bribery do occur




posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

I can name a case right now, it involved my cousin from England.

She was advised to waive her rights, because there was an ongoing investigation.

Were you looking for a famous case, though?



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 05:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: artistpoet
a reply to: Tangerine

You do not address your question at me

My point being that threats and bribery do occur


You're right, daftpink, not you made the claim. I apologize.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

No problem
I can see how my post could be confused



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   
The real tragedy of false accusations is that it highjacks the reality of sexual exploitation that DOES exist. "JaneDoe#3" has done damage to every woman who has suffered abuse.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: WarminIndy
a reply to: Tangerine

I can name a case right now, it involved my cousin from England.

She was advised to waive her rights, because there was an ongoing investigation.

Were you looking for a famous case, though?


That's not naming a case in which a lawyer waved his/her rights. In fact, it's not naming a case at all. "My cousin from England" is not a case. It's a vague, unsubtantiated claim. The topic is prominent attorney Alan Dershowitz waiving HIS rights. I asked the person who claimed that it's a strategy that has been used before to name a lawyer who has done this previously. I do not anticipate the poster being able to back up the claim.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 06:07 PM
link   
If anyones interested I have a specific question regarding Prince andrew here

thread



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: nonspecific
If anyones interested I have a specific question regarding Prince andrew here

thread


Why don't you ask the question here rather than expect us to go to another thread and read through it?



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Leonidas
You cant consent to rape, regardless of age.


this

once again it is about slavery

sigh
edit on 073131p://bSunday2015 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Atempting to stop random thread derailing as it would have gone a little off topic from the standard question.

Not to worry please continue.

a reply to: Tangerine



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

originally posted by: Leonidas
You cant consent to rape, regardless of age.


this

once again it is about slavery

sigh

Is there any indication Prince Andrew was involved in rape?

If the man forced her to have sex with Andrew, then for all Andrew knew the girl was 100% consenting. It's very possible this is rape, and sex slavery, but from what little information I have seen the man who committed the crime was her "pimp", not Prince Andrew. Maybe I missed something.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

originally posted by: Leonidas
You cant consent to rape, regardless of age.


this

once again it is about slavery

sigh

Is there any indication Prince Andrew was involved in rape?

If the man forced her to have sex with Andrew, then for all Andrew knew the girl was 100% consenting. It's very possible this is rape, and sex slavery, but from what little information I have seen the man who committed the crime was her "pimp", not Prince Andrew. Maybe I missed something.


The only thing you missed was jumping into the hysteria pit with the people who can't distinguish accusations from evidence and believe that everyone accused of anything is guilty and no accuser ever lies. You're correct. There is no indication that Prince Andrew was involved in rape and he is not charged with any crime and is not being sued by the woman in question.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 07:34 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Virginia Roberts the girl concerned was 17 years of age and as

paedophiles are only interested in prepubescent children below

12 years old I think the "paedophile" tag needs to be dropped.


When she met Jeffry Epstein at 15 years she told him >>>>

# She'd been a runaway

# She'd lived on the streets

# She'd taken ecstasy

# And she wasn't a virgin

She claimed she was paid $15,000 (just under £10,000) by the

58 year old Epstein as a reward for sleeping with Andrew.

# She was not prepubescent

# She was not held down

# She was not under lock and key

# She was paid for her services

Now how is that a "sex slave" where I come from its a job called

prostitution !!!!



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Andrew and the under-age 'sex slave': Duke denies claim in court papers that teen was picked to sleep with him by Robert Maxwell's daughter

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... xzz3NuHvxXLz
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 07:53 PM
link   
What!! How can you you use your own opinion and a link to another of your own opinions on this same same site as a link?

I don't know how to respond or even if I should??

My ?? key will wear out at this rate this is simply nonsense??

a reply to: eletheia


edit on 12015108pAmerica/Chicago2015-01-04T19:54:08-06:0054f54 by nonspecific because: (no reason given)

edit on 12015105pAmerica/Chicago2015-01-04T19:55:05-06:0055f55 by nonspecific because: Incredulance at the post I responded to caused me to invent words!!



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:13 PM
link   
What a disgusting topic title. First off..isn't someone innocent until proven guilty? Oh, but you hate the royal family, so it's OK to lump them in with paedophiles...Second, 17 is hardly paedophilia. That one year less than a girl can be in porn films and a year older than the age of consent in the UK.



liteonit6969, you should be ashamed of yourself. This site makes me cringe sometimes.
edit on 4-1-2015 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
What a disgusting topic title. First off..isn't someone innocent until proven guilty? Oh, but you hate the royal family, so it's OK to lump them in with paedophiles...Second, 17 is hardly paedophilia. That one year less than a girl can be in porn films and a year older than the age of consent in the UK.



liteonit6969, you should be ashamed of yourself. This site makes me cringe sometimes.


So now I'm a bit confused....granted this thread has ran in various directions but the title hasn't really changed. When I looked at it before and even now, it's my understanding that this revelation stemmed from the Epstein paedophile case. Named as in direct ties to said pervert with a woman making bold claims. True or not remains to be seen and yes, it sucks to be drug in the mud by another persons transgressions but you know how it goes.....show me your friends and I'll tell you the type of man you are.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:43 PM
link   
It has nothing to do with the age that a woman can be in a porn movie and everything to do with the situation she was supposedly placed in, a quick re read of the thread should give you all the info you need to form an opinion.

a reply to: 3danimator2014



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

First of all i didnt say Prince Andrew was a pedophile, i said he is NAMED in a pedophile and sex slave case. You say she was only 17 and just below the age to make porn??????????? are you serious??????????

Id love to hear that excuse in court. ha.

Pedophile is the correct definition.--------having sexual feelings towards children.

Child definition-------a young person below the age of majority.

The age of majority in this case is 18.

This is a case of a Pedophile, sex slave etc.

Now you should be ashamed of yourself instead of making excuses and focusing on a headline you should be looking at the issue here, how a young girl not only is allowed to be in the position she was, but how she was taken advantage of and yes raped and treated as a slave. Disgusting but to be honest im not surprised that these people in high places conduct themselves like this.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

I have to agree with your comment. Right now there is a moral/social panic concerning underage sexuality. It's actually pretty insane and ridiculous. This is on par with tabloid gossip mill and dim-witted townspeople with torches and pitchforks type stuff.

I can understand if there are political machinations designed to keep certain power players blackmailed, and if Prince Andrew somehow betrayed trust to some organization, then that is different. I'd rather stay away from the high-level stuff, because there is not much that regular citizens can do about that. It's none of my business.

However, it seems to be a fad now for teenage prostitutes of the past, 1970s/80s etc, to decide to come out of the woodwork decades later when they feel they can get a good enough lawyer to make a huge amount of cash from their old sugar daddies. If that is the case, they are that much more the prostitutes now.

Pedophilia means men/women who are sexually attracted to preteens. There are other categories that are quite distinct from that, like hebephelia, which is attraction to teenagers. And I hate to say it, but judging from famous movies like American Beauty and countless songs about "sweet sixteen" year old girls etc, it seems fairly common for men to be attracted to teenage girls. Acting on it may be a different story.

But with all of the legal issues facing, not only so-called pedophile men, but also teenagers who are experimenting with their sexuality themselves, namely with webcams and cell phones, our society needs to readdress the whole controversy surrounding 'legal age of consent'. And it needs to be addressed worldwide, not just in one country. Heck, with all the priests and their little boy issues, the Pope should come out and talk about it.

Get all of the best psychologists of the world together to vote on a worldwide legal age of consent for in-person and online sexuality and straighten out the laws concerning recorded/digitized imagery i.e. pornography. Adolescent sexuality cannot be made illegal - that's like making biological life illegal. Widespread proliferation of downloadable content should be decriminalized and legal focus centered on more pressing concerns.

As for 'a suitable age' and legal age of consent: 14... maybe 15? I think the world could at least agree on 16.



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join