Prince Andrew has settled his sex case with an alleged pay-out of 12 million pounds whilst not admitting guilt, I imagine he was encouraged to settle by the Royal Family rather than fight the case as it is the Queen’s Jubilee and this unfortunate case hanging around would not have looked good for the Queen.
The other option would have been to fight the case which would have drawn on for years and cost considerably more than settling, which I imagine may have been the main reason for settling, this is a shame as everyone now thinks he is guilty even though he has not admitted any guilt nor been found guilty of any wrong doing in a court of law.
I have to say I feel rather sorry for the chap but I expect most people will not be viewing the facts of this case in this manner.
I am a retired actor, although to be honest I only retired because I wasn't getting any work due to losing my agent when I became a full time carer to my mother who had dementia. and the option of becoming an unemployed actor/waiter at my age was ludicrous, especially as my waiting skills are non-existent.
Having said I’m retired, I don’t think there really is such a thing as a retired actor for I am still available for work, I just don’t have an agent or any connections with regards to obtaining any worthwhile work.
I have over the years done student films when there is nothing else available, always low paid (if at all) the only incentive was always the promised copy of the finished film for your show reel which nine times out of ten always failed to materialise.
I spent many years looking after my aged mother and shortly after her death I was lucky enough to run into an ex-girlfriend of many years ago and our romance blossomed once again, resulting in us getting married in 2013.
My move to the countryside inspired me to write The Diary of a Country Bumpkin which tells of my continuing dilemmas in dealing with the rigors of the countryside from the unexpectedly large number of pollens, fungal moulds and hay products waiting to attack the unsuspecting townie.
I enjoy writing, see my play Dulce Et Decorum Est Pro Patria Mori on The Wireless Theatre Company, The Plays Wot I Wrote and The Battle of Barking Creek both available on Amazon.co.uk and am very fond of classic cars so my ideal occupation would be acting in a film I had written set in the 1930s/40s, we live in hopes.
I am delighted to say that since venturing to the countryside where space is not quite the premium it is in town, I have due to the availability of two double garages acquired more classic cars to form a small collection the pride of which are a 1947 Bentley Mk VI and a 2000 Bentley Arnage.
My various blogs and websites are continually evolving and I’m sure that by following the appropriate links you will find something which will edify or amuse.
I have written a number of different books all available on Amazon, so don't be shy should you feel the urge to purchase. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mr-Joe-Wells/e/B06XKWFQHT/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1
Innocent people don’t pay £12 million to somebody they say they have never met. The evidence of the Telecoms engineer (in the Netflix documentary) was damning, and would have been available in the US Court. I have zero sympathy for him, but plenty for his mother. Neil
I think innocent people do choose this route when the alternative is going to cost considerably more and with modern juries there is no guarantee of being found innocent.
I’m afraid I have to politely disagree Neil.
Innocent people do settle out of court, especially if, as Joe pointed out the cost of defending oneself would be substantially higher.
The woman previously settled out of court the last time for Epstein, and that begs the question, was the prospect of an out of court financial settlement her goal along?
I don’t expect anyone from abroad to understand this, but Joe was correct, whether true or false the case was damaging to our Royal family and had to be shut down,
I have no idea whether Prince Andrew had sex with this woman or not, but just because she was underage in one particular country and/or state does not make her any less responsible for her appalling choice to work as a prostitute and allow herself to be passed around by Maxwell and Epstein.
I agree with your reasoning completely, Joe.
I have questions – why did this woman wait so many years before making her complaint?
At seventeen years old, surely she was old enough to know that working as party candy (prostitute) for Epstein was a bad idea? Seventeen-year-olds know right from wrong; she chose her lifestyle.
How many men actually bother to ask the age of a young woman at a party, especially one who appears to be there for sex?
She settled earlier with Epstein and that indicates that she entertained plenty of other men.
True or not – the woman saw a financial opportunity and grabbed it.
Yes, the woman was party candy for Epstein
Yes, she settled with Epstein and was paid off
Yes, she is an opportunist
Yes her lawyers cut a good deal
And yes, she probably didn’t tell Andrew she was 17
BUT
He had sex with an underage girl
He didn’t ask her how old she was
He was wealthy, entitled and a freeloader
He lied afterwards about meeting her
He lied afterwards about having sex with her
So overall, both sides have come out of this sorry affair rather better than either of them deserve
AND
I still have zero sympathy for him, but some for her because she was only 17 at the time
The part that everyone seems to be missing is that he has not been proved to have had sex with the girl and he has not been found guilty of having sex with her therefore in British law we have to assume innocence until he is proven guilty.
Ma’am. Did you just say she was 17?! As in seventeen?! GOD in Heaven. Someone once said, the saving grace Britain or is it England, has where the godly missionaries that came from there. But grace DOES run out.
I was once seventeen and I knew right from wrong. My four daughters were once seventeen, they also knew right from wrong.
I have a sixteen year old granddaughter and there is no way she would choose that lifestyle.
The woman’s previous lifestyle is not in dispute, she was paid to please the men, she was not an innocent, but what we do NOT know is whether her accusations are true.
We all have her own opinions of whether the accusations are true of false, but we shouldn’t voice them because none of us were there.
Thank you, Ade.
I am going to lunch at Lady Colin Campbell’s Goring Castle with the Bentley Drivers Club this weekend so have done a little research and it’s very interesting listening to her views on the Prince Andrew settlement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0kAmmFDsZM
We most certainly should voice our opinion. Women are not properties or instruments of pleasure.
I know it’s most convenient to conclude or assume that a girl, yes GIRL, of 17, knows what is right.
But so does the society. So do the men. So does the law and the government. All the men that have carnal knowledge of teenagers should be in jail. No exceptions. It doesn’t matter what the GIRL chose. The discussion is what and who the society have chosen.
You and your girls have a CHOICE AND FREEDOM of practicing what you know to be right.
How can you be certain the girl had a choice? What if she was never taught or raised to know better?
Thousands of girls are trafficked across EUROPE. That is not effectively and decisively fought against in Europe, like other issues.
Of course, if some high profile men are “customers” to these “willingly” trafficked or bought girls and women, it’s glaring why sex slavery and trading is still thriving in Europe.
With that said, there are horrible realities in people’s lives that your news media will NOT tell you.
So of course, you will think it’s just a matter of knowing right from wrong, and no one can blackmail you or hold you hostage, to do wrong.
Empathy is something we need to learn as women, because we can hurt girls and other women more than any bad man can.
You decided to state your opinion about the girl though. So I think it’s rather too late to hold back.
Prostitution, sex work, pornography are not as simple as, “it’s their choice”, “they know better”. Most times, they are held against their will and told what to say, or else.
Some don’t even know better, because they were groomed.
Very few actually choose of their free will to get in, but even when they want to get out, they find they can’t, easily.
The chains are invisible, so you can’t see them unless you reach out in your intuition and conscience.
If you doubt me, do your research online. Listen to those who are out of the sex industry. Ask social workers, police officers, anonymously of course.
Don’t take for granted that every girl child had or has the choice, knowledge and freedom to do better.
If they did, this conversation would not come up at all.
What’s the rational behind arresting a sex worker but not her clients, for instance?
Why are men still treated as some sacred cow, while ONLY the woman faces the brunt of “fine” society?
A woman caught in adultery, but the man isn’t dragged with her. The man was nowhere to be found. Did she commit adultery by herself?
Where’s the evidence a girl is “not” innocent if we cannot see or talk about the men who took or “accepted” her innocence?
I know horrid women exist, but if we’re to learn anything from men, they will make excuses for one another, until a female relative is involved — like a daughter.
Then reality dawns.
Can we just look beyond our righteous achievements to see beyond our personal reality into other people’s reality?
We won’t get “stained”.
We would just get enlightened, to stand up for the truth, no matter how hard or painful it is to admit.
Joe, I apologise that my initial disagreement has led to even more.
Ade, I appreciate your strong feelings, but I cannot reply to your comments on the behaviour of men in general because it is a separate issue.
Firstly, In Europe, sex trafficking of young women (usually from Eastern Europe) involves kidnapping and forced labour.
Epstein and Maxwell used the lure of glamour and financial gain.
Prince Andrew showed poor judgement and a lack of character when he attended Epstein’s parties but did he have sex with Virginia Giuffre? Are her allegations true? None of us knows the answer.
Unless Virginia Giuffre was kidnapped and forced against her will to become a sex worker, then yes, despite her age and unfortunate background, she had a choice.
Being an underage girl from a poor background does not make her an innocent, any more than the teenage car thief or the knife/gun-wielding teens from equally poor backgrounds. They all had a choice.
As with so many similar cases the only winners here are the legal teams who do not care who is right and who is wrong, or whose names are sullied, only that they make yet more huge sums of money.
I was shocked at the settlement. The legal age of consent is sixteen in the UK. Whilst I do think this is too young for full intercourse as the human body is far from grown, it is the law. So, this settlement is basically admitting some form of wrong doing, which begs the question, for me, as to what is the wrong doing? Should our laws be changed to rise the age of consent?
The settlement does not admit to any wrong doing, far from it there is a stipulation in the payment which says there is no admission of guild, further more as you would know in the UK a person is considered innocent until found guilty. Andrew has neither been tried nor found guilty of any offence, the only reason for the settlement is the cost, had he fought it, the case would have gone on for years and cost considerably more than the pay-out which I have on good authority was nowhere near as much as stated in the press. As for raising the age of consent, I personally think sixteen is about right and I’m certain there are considerable numbers of young people who are having sex at a much younger age already. I suppose if you want the definitive answer to should the age of consent be raised, I think you would have to ask the young people for their opinion.
The Diary of a Country Bumpkin 
Innocent people don’t pay £12 million to somebody they say they have never met. The evidence of the Telecoms engineer (in the Netflix documentary) was damning, and would have been available in the US Court. I have zero sympathy for him, but plenty for his mother. Neil
Sent from my iPhone
>
I think innocent people do choose this route when the alternative is going to cost considerably more and with modern juries there is no guarantee of being found innocent.
I’m afraid I have to politely disagree Neil.
Innocent people do settle out of court, especially if, as Joe pointed out the cost of defending oneself would be substantially higher.
The woman previously settled out of court the last time for Epstein, and that begs the question, was the prospect of an out of court financial settlement her goal along?
I don’t expect anyone from abroad to understand this, but Joe was correct, whether true or false the case was damaging to our Royal family and had to be shut down,
I have no idea whether Prince Andrew had sex with this woman or not, but just because she was underage in one particular country and/or state does not make her any less responsible for her appalling choice to work as a prostitute and allow herself to be passed around by Maxwell and Epstein.
That pretty much sums it up!
If she’s a teenager, then there’s no excuse. The truth shouldn’t be stretched for anyone.
I agree with your reasoning completely, Joe.
I have questions – why did this woman wait so many years before making her complaint?
At seventeen years old, surely she was old enough to know that working as party candy (prostitute) for Epstein was a bad idea? Seventeen-year-olds know right from wrong; she chose her lifestyle.
How many men actually bother to ask the age of a young woman at a party, especially one who appears to be there for sex?
She settled earlier with Epstein and that indicates that she entertained plenty of other men.
True or not – the woman saw a financial opportunity and grabbed it.
Yes, I think you’re right.
Yes, the woman was party candy for Epstein
Yes, she settled with Epstein and was paid off
Yes, she is an opportunist
Yes her lawyers cut a good deal
And yes, she probably didn’t tell Andrew she was 17
BUT
He had sex with an underage girl
He didn’t ask her how old she was
He was wealthy, entitled and a freeloader
He lied afterwards about meeting her
He lied afterwards about having sex with her
So overall, both sides have come out of this sorry affair rather better than either of them deserve
AND
I still have zero sympathy for him, but some for her because she was only 17 at the time
The part that everyone seems to be missing is that he has not been proved to have had sex with the girl and he has not been found guilty of having sex with her therefore in British law we have to assume innocence until he is proven guilty.
Ma’am. Did you just say she was 17?! As in seventeen?! GOD in Heaven. Someone once said, the saving grace Britain or is it England, has where the godly missionaries that came from there. But grace DOES run out.
Yes Ade,
I did say seventeen.
I was once seventeen and I knew right from wrong. My four daughters were once seventeen, they also knew right from wrong.
I have a sixteen year old granddaughter and there is no way she would choose that lifestyle.
The woman’s previous lifestyle is not in dispute, she was paid to please the men, she was not an innocent, but what we do NOT know is whether her accusations are true.
We all have her own opinions of whether the accusations are true of false, but we shouldn’t voice them because none of us were there.
Thank you, Ade.
I am going to lunch at Lady Colin Campbell’s Goring Castle with the Bentley Drivers Club this weekend so have done a little research and it’s very interesting listening to her views on the Prince Andrew settlement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0kAmmFDsZM
Thank you, Joe for the YouTube link. I enjoyed listening to her views, very interesting.
We most certainly should voice our opinion. Women are not properties or instruments of pleasure.
I know it’s most convenient to conclude or assume that a girl, yes GIRL, of 17, knows what is right.
But so does the society. So do the men. So does the law and the government. All the men that have carnal knowledge of teenagers should be in jail. No exceptions. It doesn’t matter what the GIRL chose. The discussion is what and who the society have chosen.
You and your girls have a CHOICE AND FREEDOM of practicing what you know to be right.
How can you be certain the girl had a choice? What if she was never taught or raised to know better?
Thousands of girls are trafficked across EUROPE. That is not effectively and decisively fought against in Europe, like other issues.
Of course, if some high profile men are “customers” to these “willingly” trafficked or bought girls and women, it’s glaring why sex slavery and trading is still thriving in Europe.
With that said, there are horrible realities in people’s lives that your news media will NOT tell you.
So of course, you will think it’s just a matter of knowing right from wrong, and no one can blackmail you or hold you hostage, to do wrong.
Empathy is something we need to learn as women, because we can hurt girls and other women more than any bad man can.
You decided to state your opinion about the girl though. So I think it’s rather too late to hold back.
Prostitution, sex work, pornography are not as simple as, “it’s their choice”, “they know better”. Most times, they are held against their will and told what to say, or else.
Some don’t even know better, because they were groomed.
Very few actually choose of their free will to get in, but even when they want to get out, they find they can’t, easily.
The chains are invisible, so you can’t see them unless you reach out in your intuition and conscience.
If you doubt me, do your research online. Listen to those who are out of the sex industry. Ask social workers, police officers, anonymously of course.
Don’t take for granted that every girl child had or has the choice, knowledge and freedom to do better.
If they did, this conversation would not come up at all.
What’s the rational behind arresting a sex worker but not her clients, for instance?
Why are men still treated as some sacred cow, while ONLY the woman faces the brunt of “fine” society?
A woman caught in adultery, but the man isn’t dragged with her. The man was nowhere to be found. Did she commit adultery by herself?
Where’s the evidence a girl is “not” innocent if we cannot see or talk about the men who took or “accepted” her innocence?
I know horrid women exist, but if we’re to learn anything from men, they will make excuses for one another, until a female relative is involved — like a daughter.
Then reality dawns.
Can we just look beyond our righteous achievements to see beyond our personal reality into other people’s reality?
We won’t get “stained”.
We would just get enlightened, to stand up for the truth, no matter how hard or painful it is to admit.
Thank you, madam.
Ade, thank you for your reply to my comment.
Joe, I apologise that my initial disagreement has led to even more.
Ade, I appreciate your strong feelings, but I cannot reply to your comments on the behaviour of men in general because it is a separate issue.
Firstly, In Europe, sex trafficking of young women (usually from Eastern Europe) involves kidnapping and forced labour.
Epstein and Maxwell used the lure of glamour and financial gain.
Prince Andrew showed poor judgement and a lack of character when he attended Epstein’s parties but did he have sex with Virginia Giuffre? Are her allegations true? None of us knows the answer.
Unless Virginia Giuffre was kidnapped and forced against her will to become a sex worker, then yes, despite her age and unfortunate background, she had a choice.
Being an underage girl from a poor background does not make her an innocent, any more than the teenage car thief or the knife/gun-wielding teens from equally poor backgrounds. They all had a choice.
As with so many similar cases the only winners here are the legal teams who do not care who is right and who is wrong, or whose names are sullied, only that they make yet more huge sums of money.
I was shocked at the settlement. The legal age of consent is sixteen in the UK. Whilst I do think this is too young for full intercourse as the human body is far from grown, it is the law. So, this settlement is basically admitting some form of wrong doing, which begs the question, for me, as to what is the wrong doing? Should our laws be changed to rise the age of consent?
The settlement does not admit to any wrong doing, far from it there is a stipulation in the payment which says there is no admission of guild, further more as you would know in the UK a person is considered innocent until found guilty. Andrew has neither been tried nor found guilty of any offence, the only reason for the settlement is the cost, had he fought it, the case would have gone on for years and cost considerably more than the pay-out which I have on good authority was nowhere near as much as stated in the press. As for raising the age of consent, I personally think sixteen is about right and I’m certain there are considerable numbers of young people who are having sex at a much younger age already. I suppose if you want the definitive answer to should the age of consent be raised, I think you would have to ask the young people for their opinion.
The settlement in itself is admission. Young people want to be older people.
I’m sorry but the settlement is not an admission of guilt, please see my previous comment on the matter.