topic Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl' in Community Spirit

'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

icyfroth — Sat, 03 Jan 2015 23:58:09 GMT

Prince Andrew tonight issued a dramatic and unprecedented denial that he slept with the woman at the centre of the extraordinary under-age ‘sex slave’ scandal.

For the first time, Buckingham Palace made a robust rebuttal of the allegations by Virginia Roberts that she was forced to have sex with the Duke of York in London, New York and the Caribbean, starting when she was only 17.

Entire Article Here

I reckon he did, Those Royals are an oversexed bunch IMO.

I don't reckon she was "forced" though. Not physically anyway. Maybe by financial considerations.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

horizon1907 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 00:01:13 GMT

More to the point, who gives a flying f ?

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

channys_mum — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 00:08:36 GMT

How many 17 year olds in the business of sax look 17 anyway

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

cmcoins2000 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 00:11:39 GMT

@horizon1907 wrote:
More to the point, who gives a flying f ?

Interesting how much one of those would cost.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

gleee58 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 00:19:13 GMT

@icyfroth wrote:
Prince Andrew tonight issued a dramatic and unprecedented denial that he slept with the woman at the centre of the extraordinary under-age ‘sex slave’ scandal.
For the first time, Buckingham Palace made a robust rebuttal of the allegations by Virginia Roberts that she was forced to have sex with the Duke of York in London, New York and the Caribbean, starting when she was only 17.

Entire Article Here

I reckon he did, Those Royals are an oversexed bunch IMO.
I don't reckon she was "forced" though. Not physically anyway. Maybe by financial considerations.

Well he didn't deny have sex with her, just that he didn't sleep or force 😄 so you could be right about that.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

aps1080 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 00:26:54 GMT

More to the point, who gives a flying f ?

Prince Andrew could have accommodated that wish.

In fact, like most Pilots he probably has already done it LOL

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

horizon1907 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 00:39:27 GMT

aps you mean "A forced landing " hahahaha

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

goldenjet16 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 01:40:25 GMT

"horizon1907 wrote
More to the point, who gives a flying f ?

"Interesting how much one of those would cost."

That was good Helen..... 🙂 Come to think of it, now I'm wondering the same thing. Sounds expensive though. 😉

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

cmcoins2000 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 01:41:17 GMT

@goldenjet16 wrote:
"horizon1907 wrote
More to the point, who gives a flying f ?

"Interesting how much one of those would cost."

That was good Helen..... 🙂 Come to think of it, now I'm wondering the same thing. Sounds expensive though. 😉

Perhaps one could 'lay-by' it.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

goldenjet16 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 01:49:30 GMT

Lol.... Your on roll..... 🙂

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

cmcoins2000 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 01:59:40 GMT

@goldenjet16 wrote:
Lol.... Your on roll..... 🙂

Now whatever you do - do not mention hay.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

cherry*135 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 02:02:30 GMT

Apart from who gives a flying fig, replies are a bit dubious/suss especially considering the topic/allegation of under age sex.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

icyfroth — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 02:08:42 GMT

@am*3 wrote:
Apart from who gives a flying fig, replies are a bit dubious/suss especially considering the topic/allegation of under age sex.

I agree.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

polksaladallie — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 02:18:58 GMT

Not under age in London or New York, and depends where in the Carribean.

Creepy because he is old enough to be her grandfather.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

dwilke33 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 02:22:00 GMT

@horizon1907 wrote:
More to the point, who gives a flying f ?

It's all dumb. Who wants to respond? Kinda silly I say.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

cherry*135 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 02:35:34 GMT

By Rajini Vaidyanathan, BBC Washington correspondent

While accusations are levelled against Prince Andrew, it's important to note that he is not party to the proceedings.

Instead he is named as part of evidence relating to a wider case of an alleged sex trafficking scheme, involving US businessman Jeffrey Epstein, who spent time in jail in 2008-9 for a sex offence with a minor.

Two women (known as Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2) are suing the US government, saying it failed to protect their rights when it entered into a plea deal with Epstein.

Now, two further women (Jane Doe #3 and #4) want to join this case, and it's Jane Doe #3 who has made claims against the Duke of York, as part of this.

The prince strongly denies the allegations. This is the first time they have surfaced publicly, and no legal case has been made against him on this matter.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

cherry*135 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 02:39:49 GMT

"The woman known as Jane Doe 3 – said to be 30-year-old Virginia Roberts – claims she was held as a sex slave and forced to sleep with the Duke of York in London, New York and the US Virgin Islands.

She says she was 17 at the time – under the age of consent in Florida.

There is no suggestion that Prince Andrew knew Roberts was being held as a sex slave by the tycoon and she claims she first met the royal when the financier took her to Europe and North Africa in 2001.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

lind9650 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 03:27:33 GMT

What is a 17 year old doing, travelling from London, New York and the Carribeans, supposedly employed as a Massage Therapist?

13 years ago one would not find a 17 year old to be so naive.

At that age she would have no qualifications in any kind of health service. And why has it taken her 13 years to start complaining?

Erica

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

gleee58 — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 03:43:32 GMT

@lind9650 wrote:
What is a 17 year old doing, travelling from London, New York and the Carribeans, supposedly employed as a Massage Therapist?
13 years ago one would not find a 17 year old to be so naive.
At that age she would have no qualifications in any kind of health service. And why has it taken her 13 years to start complaining?

Erica

On the contrary, some 17 year old girls would be easily seduced by the prospect of "working" for and travelling with an obviously wealthy and sophisticated man who just happens to need a new massage therapist and offers up free "training". On first thoughts it sounds like such a good offer.

Re: 'No, I Did Not Have Secks With That Girl'

bluecat*dancing — Sun, 04 Jan 2015 03:46:55 GMT

If she is telling the truth, there are plenty of reasons why she waited so long. It can take almost a whole lifetime for the victims to reach a point in which they are mentally able to publicly state what had happened to them. Naivety is not genearation specific.